Romney stands by message in secret video

  • Thread starter Thread starter oldcelt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
seekerz said:
Romney may or may not be pro-life, that still does not make him a better candidate for president in my estimation. Saying you’re against abortion (even considering that it might have become true since you last accepted it as allowable), helps the unborn how exactly?
Click to expand...
So you’re basing your vote for Obama on his outstanding record on:

The economy:D
Foreign policy:D
Transparence:D
Help for the low and middle class:D

In contrast to Obama, Mitt Romney actually has some accomplishments in his resume, it’s not just breaded air. Although we have stated this numerous times since you have apparently missed the references: Success in business: through Bain Capital such well known companies as Staples and Steel Dynamics and Sports Authority–all were failing until Bain took over. This is but the short list. Success turning around the Olympics. Since I have some inside info on this, I heard about this at the time but even over a decade later there is no question he was instrumental in averting disaster, success at governing a bluer than blue state. Best schools in the nation.

Despite the Democrats efforts, not a whiff of scandal, no Jeremiah Wrights or Bill Ayers or Tony Rezkos in his background. He surrounds himself with people of class, quality and integrity, not a bunch of America haters, felons and domestic terrorists. As my granny always said, birds of a feather flock together…or show me your friends and I’ll tell you what you are. 😃

Obama was wafted to the top of the world based on Bush hatred, white guilt and empty promises. He has nothing to point to other than rivers of red ink, unpopular legislation, a war with Christianity and the most helpless among us, and a litany of unsuccessful ventures into green energy debacles.

Tell me seekerz, no matter how much an Obama supporter you are, who would YOU trust to invest your life savings?

Lisa
 
seekerz said:
Oh, now it’s Congress’ fault that the economy imploded in ‘08? So why is it not the do-nothing Congress’ fault that the recovery has not been more robust?

You can’t change the rules in the middle of the game: if the president is who must bear the blame for a bad economy, then let’s compare Bush and Obama. If it’s Congress, then let’s compare the '06-'08 one to the '08 -'10 one and the '10 -'12 one.
Click to expand...
As I recall, President Bush was elected in 2000. He was dealt a bad hand with Clinton’s Dot.com bubble bursting and a recession as he took office. He was then faced with the ramifications of 9/11. Instead of whining and blaming Clinton, being a man with a level of maturity above adolescence he simply addressed the problems and moved forward. The much reviled Bush Tax Cuts were a big part of our recovery from what Clinton left behind.

So let’s actually look at the entire Bush Presidency: 00 to 08. How many quarters of growth, rising markets, rising incomes, personal assets increasing, levels of employment did we have? It’s convenient for Democrats only to point to the Post Democrat takeover years at the end of his Presidency and forget about the many years of prosperity. As I recall the market was at 14000 right before the Dems took over. After four years it’s finally clawing its way back up. But dang those home prices, those income levels, the unemployment, the debt and the deficits…don’t have a selective memory seekerz. We both lived through those years and for me 00 to 07 were way better than anything subsequent.

Lisa
 
seekerz said:
Romney may or may not be pro-life, that still does not make him a better candidate for president in my estimation. Saying you’re against abortion (even considering that it might have become true since you last accepted it as allowable), helps the unborn how exactly?
Click to expand...
Romney is a better candidate under Catholic teaching when Obama supports intrinsic evils that violate the non negotiable principals of Catholic teaching that Pope Benedict has spoken of
 
LisaA said:
Tell me seekerz, no matter how much an Obama supporter you are, who would YOU trust to invest your life savings?

Lisa
Click to expand...
Obama, WITHOUT a doubt. And that decision would be soundly based on my faith and values.
 
Jeffrey said:
That’s too bad you support a baby killer. Life trumps all.
Click to expand...
It’s too bad that you attack me for expressing something that you disagree with. Life trumps all? So allow people to*** live their lives ***and think for themselves without the baseless name-calling.
 
seekerz said:
It’s too bad that you attack me for expressing something that you disagree with. Life trumps all? So allow people to*** live their lives ***and think for themselves without the baseless name-calling.
Click to expand...
Our consciences have to be rightly formed. It’s not what we individuals feel is right, but
what our faith has taught for 2000 years.
 
TexCatholic4JMJ said:
Our consciences have to be rightly formed. It’s not what we individuals feel is right, but
what our faith has taught for 2000 years.
Click to expand...
And who judges whether someone’s conscience is rightly formed or not? Is that authority given to just any passer-by?
 
seekerz said:
Obama, WITHOUT a doubt. And that decision would be soundly based on my faith and values.
Click to expand...
You would trust Obama to invest your life savings? Aren’t you afraid that he would give it away to his cronies - like he did with our tax money given to Solyndra?

Ishii
 
seekerz said:
And who judges whether someone’s conscience is rightly formed or not? Is that authority given to just any passer-by?
Click to expand...
God. LOL
One can also check what we have done to accept the orthodox teachings of the church.
Learning these from proper sources is essential. As an example, The Catechism of the
Catholic Church and other books with the Imprimatur, etc.
 
TexCatholic4JMJ said:
God. LOL
One can also check what we have done to accept the orthodox teachings of the church.
Learning these from proper sources is essential. As an example, The Catechism of the
Catholic Church and other books with the Imprimatur, etc.
Click to expand...
Good answer. So then there is no justification for calling people names based on what they believe, because you and I can’t just walk around determining if their consciences are well-formed or not. Agreed?
 
seekerz said:
Good answer. So then there is no justification for calling people names based on what they believe, because you and I can’t just walk around determining if their consciences are well-formed or not. Agreed?
Click to expand...
The only name I would call a Catholic who thinks its okay to vote for Obama would be misinformed or ignorant. I suppose there might be some who know that Obama is hostile to the values of the Catholic church but support him anyway, because they support liberal/left values more than Catholic values - so they aren’t misinformed or ignorant. I suspect the latter are few in number - its more a case of people being not informed of Catholic teaching as well as misinformed about what Obama stands for and represents. His agenda is opposed to Catholic values.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
You would trust Obama to invest your life savings? Aren’t you afraid that he would give it away to his cronies - like he did with our tax money given to Solyndra?

Ishii
Click to expand...
Not at all. Solyndra was a serious error of judgment, but considering the number of companies run by people who support him who have not received the same benefits, I would consider 1 (out of potentially, hundreds) a pretty good record by the standards of Washington. Everybody who is anybody in terms of money and power lobbies for government money in one form or the next - and many get it too, regardless of the party in power.

On the other hand, Obama is not excessively afraid to also stand up for those who lack the money and power to lobby for themselves. That’s why I would trust him to invest my money.

Romney…well, I would need 5 years (better still 10) of his tax returns so I could see what he invested in, claimed for etc. before the spotlight fell on him.
 
ishii said:
The only name I would call a Catholic who thinks its okay to vote for Obama would be misinformed or ignorant. I suppose there might be some who know that Obama is hostile to the values of the Catholic church but support him anyway, because they support liberal/left values more than Catholic values - so they aren’t misinformed or ignorant. I suspect the latter are few in number - its more a case of people being not informed of Catholic teaching as well as misinformed about what Obama stands for and represents. His agenda is opposed to Catholic values.

Ishii
Click to expand...
Calling a person misinformed or ignorant for choosing Obama over Romney is STILL judging the state of their conscience.

I have my reasoning, which I consider proportional when all things are considered - including abortion and other matters of faith. It is NOT your place to judge that. Perhaps I see more in Romney that is opposed to Catholic values (actually, I do) than in Obama. How is that your call?
 
seekerz said:
It’s too bad that you attack me for expressing something that you disagree with. Life trumps all? So allow people to*** live their lives ***and think for themselves without the baseless name-calling.
Click to expand...
Baseless Namecaling? Obama voted against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act (BAIPA). Of course, some of us may be willingly uninformed.
 
seekerz said:
Calling a person misinformed or ignorant for choosing Obama over Romney is STILL judging the state of their conscience.

I have my reasoning, which I consider proportional when all things are considered - including abortion and other matters of faith. It is NOT your place to judge that. Perhaps I see more in Romney that is opposed to Catholic values (actually, I do) than in Obama. How is that your call?
Click to expand...
I disagree. If one purports to be good Catholic who accepts Catholic teaching and at the same time supports the anti-Catholic Obama, I have no choice but to consider them ignorant. How else to explain it? I certainly won’t go around calling them “false catholics” or frauds.

Ishii
 
seekerz said:
Not at all. Solyndra was a serious error of judgment, but considering the number of companies run by people who support him who have not received the same benefits, I would consider 1 (out of potentially, hundreds) a pretty good record by the standards of Washington. Everybody who is anybody in terms of money and power lobbies for government money in one form or the next - and many get it too, regardless of the party in power.

On the other hand, Obama is not excessively afraid to also stand up for those who lack the money and power to lobby for themselves. That’s why I would trust him to invest my money.

Romney…well, I would need 5 years (better still 10) of his tax returns so I could see what he invested in, claimed for etc. before the spotlight fell on him.
Click to expand...
If Obama is going to invest your money, aren’t you interested in his background in terms of his knowlege of money/investing? Oh, I forgot - he hasn’t released any of his academic records - its a mystery. Obama would take you money and redistribute it.

Ishii
 
ishii said:
I disagree. If one purports to be good Catholic who accepts Catholic teaching and at the same time supports the anti-Catholic Obama, I have no choice but to consider them ignorant. How else to explain it? I certainly won’t go around calling them “false catholics” or frauds.

Ishii
Click to expand...
It is not your place to judge a person’s conscience, it’s really that simple. There is no agreeing or disagreeing over this. My conscience is mine - tend to yours.
 
ishii said:
If Obama is going to invest your money, aren’t you interested in his background in terms of his knowlege of money/investing? Oh, I forgot - he hasn’t released any of his academic records - its a mystery. Obama would take you money and redistribute it.

Ishii
Click to expand...
What would his academic records have to do with my investment? :confused: I’m willing to bet that people like Madoff and Rajaratnam were near, if not at, the tops of their respective classes.

Income redistribution? The government, through the IRS, has been doing that since before Obama was born…🤷 It’s called progressive taxation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top