Three Positive Signs for Obama's Re-Election Chances

  • Thread starter Thread starter irishpatrick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, again, Seekerz. What do you think of your party?

You call yourself a pro-life voter? Yet you support the party that fights to keep abortion legal?

Cmatt your tactics are disingenuous and unbecoming of someone who professes to be a christian as you do. I’m thinking you totally understand my Nazi example, but you just refuse to admit it because of what the implications would be if you did. If you won’t have a straightforward conversation then perhaps atleast when you’re away from the forums and on your own, you’ll consider the possiblity that your support of the pro-abortion party is wrong. For that I will pray.

Ishii
Ishii, why did you quote Ringil and then ask Seekerz?

Yes I consider myself pro life. But that’s because I see many issues as life issues: A moral value of life beyond the single issue of aborton. Healthcare, concern for the poor and the economic security of the less fortunate, a greater sense of fairness, rather than an agenda to protect the rich from tax increases for instance. The growing gap between rich and poor. Education and environmental and war and peace issues. A sense of equality and not rejectng the human rights of those God created. These are values of justice and love and community that I believe Christ taught. And I believe within this spirit of community, government can play a greater role to supplement faith based groups and individuals in this endeavor.

Simply put not all people of faith support the Republican agenda. At the same time no political party is perfect. But I do not compare the President of the United States and his party to Nazis.

Thank you for your prayers. The Apostle James taught us to pray for another. So indeed in a unity of faith in God and peace, let us all strive to do so for each another.
 
MODERATOR NOTICE

Please charitably discuss the issues, not each other
 
Yes I consider myself pro life. But that’s because I see many issues as life issues: A moral value of life beyond the single issue of aborton. Healthcare, concern for the poor and the economic security of the less fortunate, a greater sense of fairness, rather than an agenda to protect the rich from tax increases for instance. The growing gap between rich and poor. Education and environmental and war and peace issues. A sense of equality and not rejectng the human rights of those God created. These are values of justice and love and community that I believe Christ taught. And I believe within this spirit of community, government can play a greater role to supplement faith based groups and individuals in this endeavor.
Not one of these outweighs “killed”, though, does it?

I think if I was still a faithful Democrat, I would be furious with Obama to the point of opposing him, precisely because, notwithstanding the total power he had for a full two years, he has done not one of the things you mentioned.

Perhaps, in my heart I’m still a Democrat. I would like to see the lot of the truly poor improved…the ones who can’t help themselves. I would like to see the small business people encouraged once again, so they would buy productive assets and employ people; the classic Democrat position that has been now abandoned for gender politics and canoodling with the super-wealthy. Obama is not a true Democrat in any sense of the word. He’s a Rockefeller Republican.
 
Yes I consider myself pro life. But that’s because I see many issues as life issues: A moral value of life beyond the single issue of aborton. .
Life issues…. . You may regard me as a lurker, I only post if I think it is worthwhile to throw my two cents into the fray. So here goes:
Abortion, fetal stem cell research, euthanasia, war and death penalty Sight difference over all in party positions republicans appear more anti-abortion and anti-euthanasia than democrats. Don’t think either party cares much about stem cell research as both will cave to money interest i.e. big education and big pharma. War, really, this president has had no qualms assassinating Americans abroad, or killing folks by the bushel basket in Libya, Yemen, and Pakistan, where Congress never authorized military action. At least Bush asked for and received congressional approval. Whether military action was justified or not is a separate debate.
Healthcare, .
The whole Obama care helps solve nothing. We never had a health care issue in this country we had cost and insurance issues. His massive messy little scheme is designed to reward a few constituents this administration thinks important while doing nothing to alleviate the fundamental problem. It is intended to give the HHS secretary total control over American lives.
concern for the poor .
When did either party do anything for the truly poor? Read the statistics on the destruction of poor families government policies wrought. Tell me again why a country that spends about $10,000 per poor person has any poor people. The destruction of the dignity of the human spirit is what the government is good at.
and the economic security of the less fortunate, .
Economic stability and growth opportunities these issue again not much separation on fundamentals between the players. Historically, repubs tended to enable policies that favored small business as this was the engine that fuelled job growth. What I see, by failing to cut purse strings to the bureaucratic apparatchiks that promulgates the ridiculous regulations, stopping the destruction of our manufacturing base, I am not convinced of there being any significant difference in party behavior. Repubs may slow down the overreach of government but really do nothing to reverse or stop it. If you seek economic security for the less fortunate seek economic growth not crony capitalism.
a greater sense of fairness, .
Fairness what is that? When I made my kids perform chores it was their first objection. It wasn’t fair big brother had to cut the grass and little sister had to stack the dish washer… If you have a problem with fairness you have a problem with being human or a problem with God.
rather than an agenda to protect the rich from tax increases for instance. The growing gap between rich and poor. .
If you are talking about the separation in income among the various classes I throw the B.S. flag. No one yells at the obscene pay of celebrities whether it is cinema music or sports. They sell tickets and demand a high price. The public voluntarily pays it. If you don’t like exec. bonuses then boycott the companies who policies you object to. If you mean in the quality of housing or cars you get to drive, cloths, or food really money talks, as Mel Brooks says in History of the World, “It is good to be king.”
Education .
Do you mean the difference in quality of schools and teaching staff? Then get over it. The differences will always exist money talks always had always will.
and environmental and war and peace issues. .
See above on government apparatchiks and life issues about war and peace. My only comment on peace is that we humans get to enjoy the peace our faith may give us and the peace of the grave; the rest of life remains a struggle good against evil, right against wrong. As I learned in school history is just one d$#m thing after another.
A sense of equality and not rejectng the human rights of those God created. These are values of justice and love and community that I believe Christ taught. .
Got me there Matt, you have to be alive first in order to have rights to reject. How about Obama insisting on the military being able to pick up Americans off the streets for suspicion of terrorist activities? To be held without charge, habeas corpus, or face their accuser indefinitely. Since the Defense authorization Bill was bi-partisan not much difference in party commitment to liberty or rights or adherence to the constitution.
And I believe within this spirit of community, government can play a greater role to supplement faith based groups and individuals in this endeavor. .
I hope you don’t think policies like gun runner is supporting local communities. Please read the histories of various societies with a discerning eye. Then show me one where the government (and I love this word) apparatchiks didn’t live better than their contemporaries. Governments always devolve to being about power over the little people, who cannot live their lives without being told what to do or think.
Simply put not all people of faith support the Republican agenda. .
No problem here. My personal opinion is let the 300+ million American live their lives according to what they think is best and we will all be better off for it.
At the same time no political party is perfect. But I do not compare the President of the United States and his party to Nazis. .
Not yet anyway.
 
Not one of these outweighs “killed”, though, does it?

I think if I was still a faithful Democrat, I would be furious with Obama to the point of opposing him, precisely because, notwithstanding the total power he had for a full two years, he has done not one of the things you mentioned.

Perhaps, in my heart I’m still a Democrat. I would like to see the lot of the truly poor improved…the ones who can’t help themselves. I would like to see the small business people encouraged once again, so they would buy productive assets and employ people; the classic Democrat position that has been now abandoned for gender politics and canoodling with the super-wealthy. Obama is not a true Democrat in any sense of the word. He’s a Rockefeller Republican.
👍
 
When it comes to how Americans view President Obama going into the new year, there appears to be very little spirit of Auld Lang Syne. Instead, according to the new Washington Whispers poll, many voters aren’t forgetting what they dislike about Obama and want him out of office.
In our New Year’s poll, when asked what news event they fear most about 2012, Americans by a margin of two-to-one said Obama’s reelection. Only 16 percent said they fear the Democrat won’t win a second term, while 33 percent said they fear four more years. [Check out the top political events of 2011]
Next to Obama’s reelection, 31 percent of Americans said they feared higher taxes, which may be proof that the president’s focus on the payroll tax cut has hit paydirt.
The poll, however, held out some hope for Obama. Some 38 percent of younger Americans, 18-24, said their biggest fear was higher taxes. Just 28 percent of those same voters said they feared Obama winning in November. [See pictures of Obama behind the scenes.]
usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/01/09/poll-americans-2-1-fear-obamas-reelection
 
The Catholics I’ve seen defend it wouldn’t have to if they weren’t asked over and over again to defend it after having defended it.
The problem is they.never do quite defend it. All we get is one line snippets from Faithful Citizenship. Vague references to " conscience and how republicans are going to end all life on earth if they are not stopped what you be never see is references to actual Church documents or quotes from members of the magestrium to back up their views.

It is true that practicing Catholics tend to.vote Republican -it is generally the only way one can vote and still be in adherence with the teachinges of the Church
 
I think this is not to be trusted. Polls can show many things and are quite easy to skew in one direction or another. Most thinking Americans recognize that these three years have been very difficult ones for our country, and that some of this was set in motion well before Mr. Obama became President. He has accomplished some really good things, and against great opposition from the Republicans and the radical conservatives of the Republican party.

Frankly, i find it really reassuring to have a President who is sort of unflappable, very bright and well-read. I am really tired of the return to know-nothing politics and politicians. We need more statesmen than politicians.

I know President Obama has supported pro-choice legislation, but that is one issue. Compared to the many other issues on which he has supported the least of us, I think he is worthy of another term.
 
Poll of whom exactly? Can’t be of the same people who will be actually voting. I think I fear the pollsters more than the politicians.
 
Frankly, i find it really reassuring to have a President who is sort of unflappable, very bright and well-read. I am really tired of the return to know-nothing politics and politicians. We need more statesmen than politicians.
So you agree that Obama needs to go?
 
IMHO - President Obama’s rampantly Pro - Abortion plank, which in turn facilitates the growth of the culture of death in this country and others, simply nullifies him as a viable candidate.

I, as a Catholic, can not vote for him **ever **as he violates the the principles of the 5 **non -negotiables. **

See here: catholic.com/search/content/non%20negotiables

Since** Obama** does indeed** advocate for such an availability of such horrific sins and Obama receives funding from** Planned Parenthood **I would not want the sin of participation of evil by voting for him upon my head IMHO.

If one thinks Obama is viable as a candidate because he will ‘stop the war’ then I must ask - Is not war a punishment for sin? Is not killing babies in the womb at the rate of 4,000 a day a sin that would call out for judgement?

Will our Lord bless this nation with a wonderful economy when we flaunt His laws so flagrantly:confused:

No. We must **stand **for the truth. Not strategize for the truth. We must vote for our faith - not for our wallets.

The only candidate(s) that gets my attention is the Pro - life candidate. Furthermore I will vote only for the Pro - Life candidate -even if he has not a chance of being elected. I take no Prisoners on this issue. Once again: I stand for the truth. I do not strategize for the truth. The rest is up to our Lord.
 
Obama winning again will be the best thing that can happen in 2012. God bless Obama!!!
 
I simply do not understand Catholics that even entertain the idea of voting for Pres. Obama.:confused:
I seriously in all earnestness do not get it. 🤷

We need to address our fellow Catholics on these issues. If just the Catholics voted as actual Catholics then all would well methinks.😊
 
I know President Obama has supported pro-choice legislation, but that is one issue. Compared to the many other issues on which he has supported the least of us, I think he is worthy of another term.
If he hasn’t supported the most defenseless of society - how has he supported “the least of us”?
 
And for many good reasons.

In addition to everything else, there is the failed coverup of the dysfunctionality inside the White House.

The president’s official staff is coming apart at the seams.

Bill Daley quit as the chief of staff. Do you know what the political headline is? “Why Daley Had to Go.” No, the headline is: “Why Daley Had to Quit!”

This is the fourth chief of staff in three years.

The economic team has abandoned Obama.

The chief of staff in the White House is the person closest to the president.

He does all the scheduling, controls access to the guy. You want to meet him with Obama, you go through the chief of staff. At least that’s normally how it has always worked.

Unless Mrs. Obama is going to take on that role.

If this were a Republican president, do you know what the stories would be? “Why is this guy so hard to work with? What do all these wonderful employees hate about the president? Why can’t he keep his economic team intact?” They’d then be looking, “Is the first lady driving 'em off?” They’d be looking at any number of possible explanations for this. But, no, Bill Daley leaves, and The Politico: Why This [fellow] Had to Go!

Well, “scumbag” is not in the headline, but Daley quit!

He quit a year earlier than he said he would.

He said he’d see Obama through the election.

He decided over the holidays to quit, told Obama about it, Obama didn’t want him to leave, and Politico headline is: “Why Daley Had to Go”?

When you write a headline, “Why Daley Had to Go,” the implication is clear: Why he had to be gotten rid of. So that’s shoring up Obama. … it’s not sweetness and light, roses and sunshine and hunky-dory and milk and and so forth on the Obama side.

Bill Daley was brought in as a response to the Tea Party victories in the midterm. Daley was brought in because he has ties to Wall Street. That’s where he was. It’s where most Democrats are, is on Wall Street! Bill Daley was brought in because he had the ear of people on Wall Street; he was also brought in as a response to the Tea Party victories.

He was a token to show that Obama was moving to the center, but it never happened.

Obama didn’t move to the center, and so the tokenism aspect of Daley blew up.

We now know that Michelle Obama and Valerie Jarrett didn’t want a “move to the center,” and they really weren’t crazy about Bill Daley being brought in; and so now, Bill Daley, is history … out of there.

So not only can Obama not get along with members of Congress, he can’t get along with people on his own staff.

They brought Daley in to further this idea of Obama reaching across the aisle, compromise; but then there wasn’t any.

There is real trouble there, and they know it on the Obama side.

Even Donna Brazile … is the latest that let the cat out of the bag on the Obama campaign preference for Romney.

We had Donna Brazile, who let that cat out of the bag on Saturday night. George Stephanopoulos tried to rein her in.

If this were a Republican presidency the headline would be, “White House in Disarray!” Obama can’t hold onto his economic team.

They’re all gone. It’s a lot of people.

You won’t hear about it from the Main Stream Media … Austan Goolsbee, economic advisers … he was the last one … and he left:

news.firedoglake.com/2011/06/07/austan-goolsbee-leaves-cea-post/

Why Can’t This President Hold onto His Staff?
 
As a Catholic…give me one moral reason why I should want him in office.

BTW: He’s NOT Pro-choice… he’s Pro-abortion!..let’s not try to water down his commitment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top