Yes but:Romney’s Hispanic problem is serious
miamiherald.com/2012/03/10/2685766/romneys-hispanic-problem-is-serious.html#storylink=cpy#storylink=cpy
I will. President Bush started the spending spree, even if Obama spent more. While I am no friend of entitlements, I do not see them as being so much worse than military offense in an unjust war, from a Catholic perspective, of course. At the end of the day, they both leave our children deeply in debt before they can even vote.You’re right you vote as you decide. However please do not even PRETEND to equate the Republican party’s responsibility for the current debacle. The two parties are NOT equally at fault.
I am not speaking of the relative evil of one government program vis a vis another, but simply the magnitude of the program. People rail about defense, not because it’s such a huge part of our budget, it isn’t and hasn’t been for decades. They simply are against military action and thus project their dislike of the subject matter (military/defense) into the discussion about the budget. Ask yourself what the Constitution calls for…not green energy, not welfare (and don’t go to the “general welfare” clause for that…completely different subject) not healthcare. The federal government has certain enumerated powers. Within the scope of those powers it should remain.I will. President Bush started the spending spree, even if Obama spent more. While I am no friend of entitlements, I do not see them as being so much worse than military offense in an unjust war, from a Catholic perspective, of course. At the end of the day, they both leave our children deeply in debt before they can even vote.
Regarding the “unjust wars” (in pnewton’s opinion) that were started during Bush’s first term - many of those who are disgusted with both parties seem to weigh more importance on foreign policy - wars which they say are unjust - than on domestic policy such as spending. I would argue that the moral gravity of legal abortion which goes on every year, and the importance of stopping that, is the more urgent task before us. Furthermore, there are other things going on which are important such as the HHS mandate and OBama admin’s seeming desire to slowly but surely take over the healthcare decision making of individuals and give the power to bureaucrats like Kathleen Sebelius who are pro-abortion! Also important is the need to prevent Obama from potentially deciding a 3rd and 4th supreme court justice. Those issues in my view are much more urgent than a concern about what a GOP foreign policy would give us. While I believe a GOP approach to Iran would be more aggressive than Obama’s, I don’t think there is any reason to believe we would invade a nation of 80 million. And I should mention that I share many of the same concerns of pnewton with regard to foreign policy and the just war theory. The focus on foreign policy on the part of some here - as a moral justification for not voting for the GOP candidate - is misguided. The GOP is not perfect by a long shot, and there might be genuinely good 3rd party candidates and even decent Democrats at the local level. But what is most important this year is defeating Obama. I notice that the anti-GOP posters on this forum don’t really focus much on how best to stop Obama’s social/domestic policies - preferring to discuss spending and GOP foreign policy instead.LisaCode:As to Bush's spending spree, no kidding. But like one brother saying "well Joey did it too!" it doesn't get Obama off the hook. He took a problem and made it much worse. Supporting Obama, voting a third party, just gives him more rein to runaway spending for another four years.
Like Nixon’s removal of the gold standard, Reagan’s appointment of Greenspan, and Bush’s appointment of Bernanke had nothing to do with printing the money necessary to create the budget deficit in the first place? No money printing and no taxes means less money to spend. But that’s not what is happening.However please do not even PRETEND to equate the Republican party’s responsibility for the current debacle.
It's time that the US tended to its own domestic problems and not race around the world intervening in the affairs of others. Had we not interferred abroad before 9-11, likely t9-11 would not have happened. If 9-11 hadn't happened we wouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, then Iraq. Now there are those pushing us toward war with Iran, intervention in Syria - when will this foolishness stop? Sounds like we're trying to mimic the British and other empires, all of whom gradually failed.
I would like to vote for the GOP, but when I listen to the extreme hawkish rhetoric of three of the four candidates I wonder if I can in good conscience do that. I am not an isolationalist, so Ron Paul isn't my choice, either. And Obama certainly is a disappointment.
It's a quandary. I will never vote for Santorum or Gingrich, and Romney doesn't appeal. either. But he seems much less incendiary than the other two.Well, you certainly raised a lot of issues. And you are right to point out that the costs of war goes beyond just the expenditures on arms and supplies. There is a human cost that continues after the war that is probably hard to truly calculate. However, you’re entitled to your own opinion that defense spending is why we have so much debt, but not your own facts: the reality is that its runaway entitlements coupled with low economic growth (and hence less revenue) that is responsible for the situation we’re in.** I would have to disagree with the notion that the military budget is not a major part of the national budget.** One has to remember that we’re not only talking about the huge cost of wars but also the continuing enormous expense involved in caring for the maimed, the children and widows, all sorts of other related costs. Plus, more and more hostility directed at the US because of our military adventures that involve other vast expenditures. I suspect that several trillion dollars in debt are being incurred because of Afghanistan and Iraq, etc., not counting the loss of so many US military and ‘enemy’ civilians. Witness the murders of civilians reported just today in Afghanistan. Think about Abu Graib and other outrageous acts by US military personnel. So costly.
Code:It's time that the US tended to its own domestic problems and not race around the world intervening in the affairs of others. Had we not interferred abroad before 9-11, likely t9-11 would not have happened. If 9-11 hadn't happened we wouldn't have gone into Afghanistan, then Iraq. Now there are those pushing us toward war with Iran, intervention in Syria - when will this foolishness stop? Sounds like we're trying to mimic the British and other empires, all of whom gradually failed. I would like to vote for the GOP, but when I listen to the extreme hawkish rhetoric of three of the four candidates I wonder if I can in good conscience do that. I am not an isolationalist, so Ron Paul isn't my choice, either. And Obama certainly is a disappointment. It's a quandary. I will never vote for Santorum or Gingrich, and Romney doesn't appeal. either. But he seems much less incendiary than the other two.
ProVobis your reference to corruption was with respect to Roe not the money supply. Regardless of the advisability of going off the gold standard, it’s been while now and I’m not holding my breath hoping we’ll return soon.Like Nixon’s removal of the gold standard, Reagan’s appointment of Greenspan, and Bush’s appointment of Bernanke had nothing to do with printing the money necessary to create the budget deficit in the first place? No money printing and no taxes means less money to spend. But that’s not what is happening.
Ron Paul said the reason he even entered politics was because of the enormous amounts of money printing that started after the removal of the gold standard in 1971. He only declared he was Republican because that was the only viable way to get heard. The Republican Party should feel lucky to have him. His 10% or so support over the years may not get him into the Presidency but it sure brought out his message.
And Obama perpetuated the mess. Many voted for him because he appointed Volcker on his economic team but that move fizzled and his voters realized they were deceived.
So who’s going to fix things now? Who is going to pay $18 trillion worth of our debt before it becomes $30 trillion? I don’t hear any plans from either party or from the Fed Chairman.
Obama has destroy the traditional notions of personal accomplishment and demonstrated capability as being prerequisites for occupying the White House. Apparently, all you need to be is the right age and the ability to have multi-billionaire supporters and the support of media…who are owner by multi-billionaire supporters.Or Ron Paul, for that matter. I mean, Ron Paul has not had any power ever has he? So we don’t really know what he’d do if he were to ever gain power. You could look at his votes which have been consistent of course, but what hard choices has he ever had to make? What vote or position has he taken in which we are able to see what the consequences of the votes were? Has he ever been faced with a tough choice and had to take a risk? Say what you want about Romney and the others, they have been in the thick of things making hard choices - Romney as governor, Santorum as senator and even Gingrich as speaker. They all have had to make hard choices because their votes had consequences. Santorum had to choose who to endorse for senate - Pat Toomey or Arlen Spector. Endorse Toomey and if he looses you lose the senate perhaps and limit your ability to get Alito or Roberts approved. Endorse Spector and you’ll catch flack for everything he does - including changing parties. I am not saying that we shouldn’t hold our politicians accountable, rather I am merely comparing the experience of Romney, Santorum and Gingrich with what Ron Paul has done, or not done. Its easy to be the “true believer” candidate when you’ve never had to make a seriously tough decision while in office. What frame of reference do we use to judge how Ron Paul would act or lead in crisis situations? Anyway, just a thought.
Ishii
I think this year we will find out if Obama’s election in 2008 was a fluke based on different factors coming together - guilt for racism, sense of wanting to “make history”, falling for rhetoric such as “no blue or red states” etc. Add to that Bush fatigue, the economy, two wars and its a wonder McCain didn’t lose in a landslide. We will see if the having the right supporters will get him re-elected in 2012.Obama has destroy the traditional notions of personal accomplishment and demonstrated capability as being prerequisites for occupying the White House. Apparently, all you need to be is the right age and the ability to have multi-billionaire supporters and the support of media…who are owner by multi-billionaire supporters.
If people had Bush fatigue in 2008, they must be exhausted by it now.I think this year we will find out if Obama’s election in 2008 was a fluke based on different factors coming together - guilt for racism, sense of wanting to “make history”, falling for rhetoric such as “no blue or red states” etc. Add to that Bush fatigue, the economy, two wars and its a wonder McCain didn’t lose in a landslide. We will see if the having the right supporters will get him re-elected in 2012.
Ishii
I have lost all confidence in the American electorate. Anyone who looked at Obama’s background and his “accomplishments” would never have voted for him in the first place. Those people are still there, along with those still waiting for their handouts, those who would ever vote for a republican even though the Democrat party of their fathers is long gone. It is a very scary picture I see for 2012. Throw in the forces of Acorn, etc., and I greatly fear we are going to end up with Obama again. At that point, I think the America we knew will be long gone.I think this year we will find out if Obama’s election in 2008 was a fluke based on different factors coming together - guilt for racism, sense of wanting to “make history”, falling for rhetoric such as “no blue or red states” etc. Add to that Bush fatigue, the economy, two wars and its a wonder McCain didn’t lose in a landslide. We will see if the having the right supporters will get him re-elected in 2012.
Ishii
Oh, Bush = Obama? What a strange, bizarre world you live in.If people had Bush fatigue in 2008, they must be exhausted by it now.
Ya, its called the American Empire.Oh, Bush = Obama? What a strange, bizarre world you live in.
Ishii
Mary while I agree with you anyone with two functioning ears and a few synapsis firing in their brains could have EASILY seen Obama was a disaster in the making. I hate to think so little of the American electorate to believe they got what they THOUGHT they were getting with Obama.I have lost all confidence in the American electorate. Anyone who looked at Obama’s background and his “accomplishments” would never have voted for him in the first place. Those people are still there, along with those still waiting for their handouts, those who would ever vote for a republican even though the Democrat party of their fathers is long gone. It is a very scary picture I see for 2012. Throw in the forces of Acorn, etc., and I greatly fear we are going to end up with Obama again. At that point, I think the America we knew will be long gone.
I see. It seems your only issue is foreign policy. There really is a lot more going on inside America and I hope you start paying attention to it.Ya, its called the American Empire.
The fundamental characteristics of empires begin with both flawed foreign and domestic policies.I see. It seems your only issue is foreign policy. There really is a lot more going on inside America and I hope you start paying attention to it.
Ishii
Santorum, Gingrich vie for Southern supremacy - [CNN](http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/11/politics/campaign-wrap/)Team Obama hires lobbyist again, ethics be damned - [Washington Examiner](http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/team-obama-hires-lobbyist-again-ethics-be-damned/422491)