I
- Status
I
iloveangels
Guest
Seriously, do I not get any Obamacare feedback???
J
jwinch2
Guest
The Social Doctrine of the Church teaches that wealth is not evil. Of course, that implies a responsibility to use that gift for good. While we may disagree with his religious views, (I certainly do), we should at the least acknowledge that Romney seems to be pretty devout in living according to the faith he was raised in. Of course, I would prefer if he was a devout Catholic instead of a devout Mormon, but I find it hard to fault someone for being born into a different faith. In addition, he gives a great deal of money to charities and to his church and also seems to be a good family man. I don’t see any White House Scandals under a Romney-Ryan administration, at least not involving them.
J
jwinch2
Guest
What I meant was that he should have emphasized it. He mentioned it in passing but missed an opportunity to link it to the topic at hand, and his specific examples of education and health care. He missed on opportunity label the President as violating multiple parts of the Bill of Rights.
I
iloveangels
Guest
I think he did a really good job. You and I are both word people, meaning we pay attention first to what was said. But at least half of what goes on during a presidential debate, which is different than other kinds of debates, is not about words at all. It’s about demeanor and all those things a person judges with their brain stem–their reptilian brain. I don’t find it natural to look at that first, but I can since I know that’s how it’s going to “play” with most people.
Romney really did well last night because of body language, eye contact, flow, the impression of health and being “with it,” capable, on his game. Obama didn’t because he didn’t look like he wanted to be there, he looked a little shell-shocked for some reason and his body language was really off kilter.
And even though I believe Obama had more minutes to talk, he rambled and rolled through his words, losing everybody, which mattered more than anything he factually said. He just looked lost.
And at the end, he and Michelle both looked stunned. It was really surprising.
Either:
- he’s been too withdrawn and he’s out of practice. He doesn’t do press conferences and isn’t used to being questioned, or
- there’s something very serious going on politically that we don’t know about, or
- there’s something wrong with him that we don’t know about, or
- his performance is really THAT variable, which is striking, even shocking in someone with that kind of profile. (3AM call etc!!)
L
LisaA
Guest
Rasmussen who has been one of if not the most accurate said that Sunday will be the first day with ONLY post debate info. The next few days will have as you said, the rolling averages including pre and post debate figures. So check Sunday and see if there’s a good bounce
Bob Beckel of all people claimed he’d get a large bounce but I suspect only to demean Romney if it’s not as high as Beckel predicted (7 pts).
Lisa
G
gilliam
Guest
I suspect Romney will get a bounce, but it will be in the 1-3 point range.
meltzerboy
New member
I understand Ryan is also a health nut due to the genetic link to heart disease in his family. So we might have two (health) nuts in the White House soon.
meltzerboy
New member
Romney mentioned freedom of religion only in passing. It seems he’s keeping away from social conservative issues as he moves yet again somewhat closer to the center. As a few pundits remarked, he has extricated himself from his conservative base as a last-ditch effort to appeal to Independent voters.
I
iloveangels
Guest
RE: Religious freedom, mentioned by Romney in the debates last night. How big an issue is it with Catholics?
I’m really starting to wonder personally how seriously Catholics are taking the Obamacare situation. I’m wondering how many of them care. Do they not know what it is? Do they not take the HHS and the IRS seriously? Do they think that the bishops are bluffing? Do they not think that Church teaching matters? Do they see themselves as Americans first and Catholics later?
If Obama is re-elected and Obamacare isn’t appealed, there’s one interesting thing that will happen, no matter what else happens. A lot of places are going to close, and a lot of them will go “secular,” even if they keep the same name, becoming in effect, as secular as everyplace else.
And in places that have these precious exemptions–meaning parish churches, diocesan administration of parishes and only some religious orders–there will be a lot of new rules about what you can do and can’t do, and what you can claim you are doing and what you can’t without bringing the IRS down on your head. That ought to be interesting.
In a very real concrete way, there’s a lot of poetic justice to it, given the profiles & preferences of those who might have to make other career plans. Truth has a sense of humor. I can appreciate that. There could be some unintended consequences that aren’t so bad.
The other interesting thing: There will be very clear markers for authenticity out there, unlike now. Very clear.
One worry: If they get away with this, what will they try next? How much damage can they do in 4 years? I have no idea. The last 4 have been brutal.
I’m really starting to wonder personally how seriously Catholics are taking the Obamacare situation. I’m wondering how many of them care. Do they not know what it is? Do they not take the HHS and the IRS seriously? Do they think that the bishops are bluffing? Do they not think that Church teaching matters? Do they see themselves as Americans first and Catholics later?
If Obama is re-elected and Obamacare isn’t appealed, there’s one interesting thing that will happen, no matter what else happens. A lot of places are going to close, and a lot of them will go “secular,” even if they keep the same name, becoming in effect, as secular as everyplace else.
And in places that have these precious exemptions–meaning parish churches, diocesan administration of parishes and only some religious orders–there will be a lot of new rules about what you can do and can’t do, and what you can claim you are doing and what you can’t without bringing the IRS down on your head. That ought to be interesting.
In a very real concrete way, there’s a lot of poetic justice to it, given the profiles & preferences of those who might have to make other career plans. Truth has a sense of humor. I can appreciate that. There could be some unintended consequences that aren’t so bad.
The other interesting thing: There will be very clear markers for authenticity out there, unlike now. Very clear.
One worry: If they get away with this, what will they try next? How much damage can they do in 4 years? I have no idea. The last 4 have been brutal.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
Yes, because he’s cool and “diverse.” And because, lacking personal historical perspective, they view ultra-tolerance of every imaginable lifestyle as always a good thing. (Always harmless.)
K
katcecelia
Guest
I take the issue very seriously. However, I think that we’re kinda at a wait and see position. The issue will probably be kicked back to the Supreme Court next year… Romney may be able to either repeal it or at least except religious institutions…
I believe that we need to be working on a plan for civil disobedience however… rather than shutting down, if the Catholic ( and other Christian) institutions can stand as one and simply refuse to go against their consciences and also refuse to pay the fines (imposed if one wants to follow its conscience)… I’m not sure if the gov’t could actually do anything about it, Especially since the whole thing is UNCONSTTUTIONAL
K
katcecelia
Guest
Course I may be a bit optimisitic about the constitution still being respected
I
iloveangels
Guest
Thank you, Katcecelia, for your answer.
Nobody’s doing anything, except a few lawyers at very high levels, Katcecilia. I have heard very little at the parish level. I’m not sure the Catholic church is capable of mobilizing anybody at this point, especially over this. We had one of those supposedly high profile protests here, and a good-sized roomful of people showed up out of the whole diocese. Even right to life is rolling along with their tiny 40 day campaign like nothing is going on. OBLIVIOUS.
I’m starting to wonder if people aren’t going to have to suffer the loss of something to take this thing seriously. They’re not going to understand at first when things start to shut down. And there’s going to be a lot of ultra-liberal employees of the Church who are going to be stunned when they get pink-slipped. (Pink slipping ultra-libs is not bad. But closing and losing is.)
K
katcecelia
Guest
And I have a feeling if Obama is reelected he will make FDR appear to be a libertarian
I
iloveangels
Guest
I agree. They’re going to come after us for their next project, which will be who knows what.
K
katcecelia
Guest
It had greater push before the Supreme Court decision… I agree most Americans are political first… and whichever faith second. I am distressed that although the majority of the country, even if not the entire Catholic church, is against the HHS mandate somehow we seem to be and definitely Feel like there is nothing we can do against the gov’t… This is still America?
Unfortunately Americans have been handing over their God given rights to the fed gov’t for a hundred years now, so many are not even able to identify what one is or what it looks like
Unfortunately Americans have been handing over their God given rights to the fed gov’t for a hundred years now, so many are not even able to identify what one is or what it looks like
I
iloveangels
Guest
I think you’re being very optimistic, katcecelia.
I
iloveangels
Guest
Yeah, well generalities are entertaining, but this is going to get real specific pretty soon I think.
I think we’re on a collision course between the American-first attitudes of many Catholics and the teaching of the Church, and it doesn’t cut in the way we’re used to thinking of liberal and conservative in the Church. A re-alignment. With some people just plain somewhere else.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I have the same questions, the same worries. I do know that doing nothing will not make these structural changes disappear. I also know that merely subsidizing those who cannot meet the challenges of a new economy (and eventually replacing their incomes entirely) is a cynical and limiting “response” to this, but it is the response that the Left continues to offer as a “solution.”
Limiting my own discussion of this only to the poor (framing this in social justice terms), I have always been unwilling to relegate the poor to government assistance or long-term subsidies. That is, the employable poor, the healthy poor, the non-aged poor. Now, not in the future, the poor in my region are utterly unprepared for a 21st century economy without robots. They are undereducated, under-skilled, under-trained, and generally lacking structures into which they can fit and reasonably prosper – i.e., be and stay independent. This is true of those born here, and even more so of those here illegally. The United States is not the country “paved with gold” of yore. Everybody, immigrant or not, legally here or not, does not automatically have an upward economic path merely by virtue of “opportunity.” If you are not educated, you have very few opportunites. If you are not literate (or refuse to become literate), you have very few opportunities. If your job skills have not advanced beyond the level of 30 years ago, those skills are now outdated.
The Cost of Living, in this First World country, demands an income reflecting current market demands and the readiness to deliver those demands.
Although I doubt that robots will replace all machinery “in 10-15 years,” there is no question that even more rapid automation and sophisticated technology is making an awful lot of manual labor obsolete.
- Status