Voting

[Louis_Mazar]

I am a Pro Life Catholic who has voted Democrat ever since I started voting in the early 1980’s and I will continue to vote Democrat because the Republican politicians are only for the wealthy and not for the middle class. The Republican politicians do not want to give tax breaks only to the middle class they want to give tax breaks to the wealth also. The wealthy do not deserve any tax breaks at all.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Louis Mazar:

I am a Pro Life Catholic who has voted Democrat ever since I started voting in the early 1980’s and I will continue to vote Democrat because the Republican politicians are only for the wealthy and not for the middle class. The Republican politicians do not want to give tax breaks only to the middle class they want to give tax breaks to the wealth also. The wealthy do not deserve any tax breaks at all.

You are misguided by Democrat propaganda.

The definition of wealthy is very subjective.

Why do you think the “wealthy” should pay a higher percentage of their wages in taxes?

So let me see if I get this right.

You vote for Democrats, who are predominately for killing innocent infants becuase you think that the wealthy get too many tax breaks. Is that right?

 

[Richardols]

ByzCath:

You vote for Democrats, who are predominately for killing innocent infants becuase you think that the wealthy get too many tax breaks. Is that right?

Democrats are not for killing innocent infants. As a pro-life Democrat, I support pro-life Democrats. Louis’s reason for not voting Republican is only one reason. There are others.

 

[TPJCatholic]

Richardols,

“Many” democrats are not for the killing of the innocent unbonr, yet unfortunately the democrat national party and its platform is always in support of killing the unborn.

 

[Richardols]

TPJCatholic:

Richardols,

“Many” democrats are not for the killing of the innocent unbonr, yet unfortunately the democrat national party and its platform is always in support of killing the unborn.

Please read the platform. Nowhere does it state that the DNC supports “killing the unborn.”

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Louis Mazar:

The Republican politicians do not want to give tax breaks only to the middle class they want to give tax breaks to the wealth also. The wealthy do not deserve any tax breaks at all.

There are far more multimillionaire Democrats in Congress than Republicans.

Have you ever heard of “Earned Income Credit?” At the tax office where I work with a somewhat low income region it’s a huge money grab, and the more perverted a family situation is the greater the chance I can legally wangle it so they walk away with thousands of dollars they never earned.

Don’t fool yourself into thinking the Democrats are any more benevolent than Republicans.

What about the wealthy not “deserving” any tax breaks? Why should they “earn” the right to keep some of what they made? Of course, if they are CEOs then they are criminals, but they are protected equally well by Republicans and Democrats because money talks. Don’t try to tell me that Planned Parenthood’s considerable contributions to the Democratic party doesn’t buy them some favors.

Alan

 

[TPJCatholic]

richardols,

Let us not get cute here, we all know that there is NO democrat pro-life candidate that would make it beyond step one when running for the Presidency and that applies nearly all the time to both houses of congress as well. While you are quite correct that it is not in writing, the clear agenda ad platform has existed for decades. We are not blind and stupid people, we do listen to what politicians say and then we do see what they actually do.

 

[shockerfan]

Louis Mazar:

I am a Pro Life Catholic who has voted Democrat ever since I started voting in the early 1980’s and I will continue to vote Democrat because the Republican politicians are only for the wealthy and not for the middle class. The Republican politicians do not want to give tax breaks only to the middle class they want to give tax breaks to the wealth also. The wealthy do not deserve any tax breaks at all.

Louis, my recommendation to you is to do some research beyond listening to Howard Dean speeches.

First, lets do some simple math in an analogy. Lets say that a store sells coats. A wealthy man comes in a buys a fur coat worth $10,000, and a middle class man comes in and buys a parka worth $100. Lastly, the owner of the store donates a coat to a poor man for free. Now lets say that the owner of the store decides he wants to run a 10% off sale the next day. To be fair to the customers that paid full price the day before, he offers a refund equal to 10% of the purchase price paid. Therefore, the wealthy man will get $1000 back, the middle class man will get $10 back, and the poor man, who did not pay anything for his coat, does not get anything back.

A democrat would say that the amount paid by the rich man is irrelevant, and he “deserves” no refund, just for the sole reason that he is “wealthy”. Also, they would say that it does not matter that the poor man paid nothing to begin with, he should get a refund as well.

Second, I want you to read some recent articles regarding the impact of Bush’s tax cuts. They have caused our country’s revenues to INCREASE. Yes, thats right, the tax cuts (for everyone), have spurred economic activity that has generated MORE INCOME for the country.

Here is an article to get you started:
opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110006842

Lastly, Why the apparent dislike of the wealthy? They are the ones who create jobs for the rest of us.

 

[Mot_Juste]

Louis,

Are you suggesting that Republicans are trying to fix it so that the rich pay less taxes than the middle class?

–Bill

 

[Lucania]

Why the apparent dislike for the wealthy? Never mind about the fact that they create jobs, it’s one of the M.O.'s of the Democrat Party: Class Warfare. Oh yeah, then there’s the Race Card.

 

[Jabronie]

Louis Mazar:

I am a Pro Life Catholic who has voted Democrat ever since I started voting in the early 1980’s and I will continue to vote Democrat because the Republican politicians are only for the wealthy and not for the middle class. The Republican politicians do not want to give tax breaks only to the middle class they want to give tax breaks to the wealth also. The wealthy do not deserve any tax breaks at all.

I think it’s funny that if you ask a Rebpublican why he’s a Rebpublican, he’ll tell you everything that’s good about the Rebpublican Party.

If you ask a Democrat why he’s a Democrat, he’ll tell you everything that’s bad about the Republican Party.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I tried to edit my post but the server seemed to be having problems again and I had to go to a meeting so let me add this.

Let the record show that I am not a Republican and I think the most idiotic way to vote is by party.

I vote for individuals. I may look at their party affiliation to get an idea of what they stand for but I look at the individual and what they say before I vote. If I do not know any of the candidates in a certain race I do not vote in that race as it is highly irresponsible to vote for someone when you do not know how they stand on the issues.

No one should ever, nor should they be allowed to, vote by party line.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Richardols:

Democrats are not for killing innocent infants. As a pro-life Democrat, I support pro-life Democrats. Louis’s reason for not voting Republican is only one reason. There are others.

Sorry but Louis only listed that one reason for not voting for Republican Candidates.

 

[Stu]

Richardols:

Please read the platform. Nowhere does it state that the DNC supports “killing the unborn.”

Of course it doesn’t say “killing the unborn” but the net effect is the same. I don’t know how someone can even associate with a party that has folks “under their banner” that almost celebrate the fact that we allow infanticide in this country.

From one of your “teammates”:

** “We didn’t feel so much that we had abandoned the Democratic Party as it had abandoned us. Borrowing the spirit of the “No Irish Need Apply” mentality of my grandparents’ time, the Democrats posted a “no pro-lifers need apply” sign on their party doors.”
Source: June 16, 2005 USA Today James P. Gannon

**

 

[Richardols]

TPJCatholic:

Let us not get cute here, we all know that there is NO democrat pro-life candidate that would make it beyond step one when running for the Presidency

Why do you presume that the only office one can run for as a pro-lifer is that of the President?

 

[Richardols]

Stu:

Of course it doesn’t say “killing the unborn” but the net effect is the same. I don’t know how someone can even associate with a party that has folks “under their banner” that almost celebrate the fact that we allow infanticide in this country.

Stu, abortion is an evil practice, but it is not infanticide. Try to avoid inaccurate emotional terms.

I notice that you call yourself an extremist pro-lifer. Is your extremism intended to mean that you’d support blowing up abortion clinics or shooting their staff? If not, you might try avoiding inaccurate emotional terms there as well.

 

[Stu]

Richardols:

Stu, abortion is an evil practice, but it is not infanticide. Try to avoid inaccurate emotional terms.

I notice that you call yourself an extremist pro-lifer. Is your extremism intended to mean that you’d support blowing up abortion clinics or shooting their staff? If not, you might try avoiding inaccurate emotional terms there as well.

No emotion my friend.

Unborn infant children are just that, “infant children”. Thus killing them is infanticide. Let’s call it what it is instead of using vanilla terms that allow us to sleep at night.

I call my self “extremist” because in the views of the infanticide apologists anyone who is against abortion is an “extremist”. Make no mistake, you are one too if you don’t support their abortion on-demand agenda. (And for the record, I do not support bombing or shootings to fight the battle.)

“Many anti-choice candidates are trying to hide their extremist right-wing positions, NARAL will not let them hide. We are a pro-choice state and candidates’ positions on this issue matter to the voters of our state”, she continued. (link)

So if being against abortion makes me an “extremist” then I wear the title proudly.

 

[Richardols]

Stu:

Unborn infant children are just that, “infant children”. Thus killing them is infanticide. Let’s call it what it is instead of using vanilla terms that allow us to sleep at night.

Infanticide has a specific legal definition, and in this country, abortion doesn’t come under infanticide.

I call my self “extremist” because in the views of the infanticide apologists anyone who is against abortion is an “extremist”.

You allow them to define you? I wouldn’t give them the satisfaction myself.

And for the record, I do not support bombing or shootings to fight the battle.

Glad to hear that.

 

[Lucania]

ByzCath:

I tried to edit my post but the server seemed to be having problems again and I had to go to a meeting so let me add this.

Let the record show that I am not a Republican and I think the most idiotic way to vote is by party.

I vote for individuals. I may look at their party affiliation to get an idea of what they stand for but I look at the individual and what they say before I vote. If I do not know any of the candidates in a certain race I do not vote in that race as it is highly irresponsible to vote for someone when you do not know how they stand on the issues.

No one should ever, nor should they be allowed to, vote by party line.

WOW! “No one should ever, nor should THEY BE ALLOWED TO, vote by party line.” How one chooses a candidate is their business. Whether they stick their finger in the wind, or pick someone who reflects their ideals through party lines or not. You are talking about putting conditions on the voter. Now I agree with not voting for someone that I know nothing about, but on your last line, you lost me and it sounds:whacky: IMO. We cannot dictate how someone votes for a particular candidate.

 

[Stu]

Richardols:

Infanticide has a specific legal definition, and in this country, abortion doesn’t come under infanticide.

Well slavery was once legal too and not seen as a crime. Have to start somewhere. The “specific legal definition” needs to change not my characterization.

Richardols:

You allow them to define you? I wouldn’t give them the satisfaction myself.

No worries. I get tickled when they get all worked up. Truly many on that side are the ones who get emotion. Thus all of the labels to villify those they cannot combat with ideas. Let them call me what they want. Sticks and stones as they say.