Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

error: Post not found!

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for the discussion of current events,cultural issues and politics especially in relation to Catholic values.

Saint Thomas More was martyred during the Protestant Reformation for standing firm in the Faith and not recognizing the King of England as the Supreme Head of the Church.
Learn More:Saint Thomas More

Oct 4th 2012 new
(Quote) Cat-163322 said: Anyone else think it is strange and narcissistic to hear Obama refer to the "The Patient Protection and Affo...
(Quote) Cat-163322 said:

Anyone else think it is strange and narcissistic to hear Obama refer to the "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act," or the "Healthcare for America Plan" as "Obamacare"? Is that the official name of this plan/act?

Cat

--hide--


Obamacare is not the official name, but it morphed into our language as it was being debated and pushed on us. Some liberal wags were actually starting to claim that to use the word was racism!
Oct 4th 2012 new
(Quote) Laura-56149 said: I was reading comments on a Yahoo article that was about Romney doing well and I have to share...tho...
(Quote) Laura-56149 said:




I was reading comments on a Yahoo article that was about Romney doing well and I have to share...thought it funny:)



"293users liked this comment 14users disliked this comment"

gadfly05

"Wait for the media deluge over the next several days telling you how you didn't see what you just saw."

--hide--


Yes, funny! But sadly true, I think.
Oct 4th 2012 new
I actually was planning on NOT watching the debate, but curiosity got the best of me. All I can say is that if Mitt Romney does actually defeat BHO, I hope that he actually lives up to his stated goal of protecting our founding documents, the US Constitution and Declaration of Independence, as he clearly asserted in last night's debate. Always, these career politicians reference the Constitution, even as they are gutting it.

If he repeals Obamacare and leaves its application to the states, THAT would be following the Constitution, and as he stated, allowing free competition across state lines between competing medical insurance companies. Competition always drives prices down.

If he balances the budget every year, and eliminates the deficit, THAT would be following the Constitution and the example set by our founding generations. Our nation being $16 Trillion in the hole at birth is not the way we should be starting out our children's lives.

If he continues the policies of globalist expansion in a close relationship with the UN (which never seems to get discussed in these types of debates), then we are no better off with Romney than with Obama. Certainly, at this point, rational people prefer Romney over Obama. We will see what happens on November 6th. There are many people on government assistance who don't care about debates or even principles; they only care about their free stuff from the government.

.
Oct 4th 2012 new
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: Wow! My reaction to the first debate: Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of a...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:

Wow! My reaction to the first debate:

Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of accomplishment and understanding versus a man who is an ideologue and a puppet and who has just taken from government handouts his whole life.

It appeared to me that Mr. Romney's vision was vibrant, mostly realistic, and likely effective. He is a leader but also understands the 10th Amendment. He is a man who can work across the isle. Yet, he defended himself well against Obama's mischaracterizations of him, and led the discussion always back to what would create jobs and preserve freedom.

On the contrary, Mr. Obama gave more lame spin, straw man demagoguery and generalization. He is a man who has refused to work across the isle in any way. And in true Saul Alinsky fashion, he accused his opponent of doing exactly what he himself was in fact doing, refusing specifics. Mr. Obama's Chicago political machine lying through his teeth came out again and again.

Perhaps I am a little biased, since I do not like Mr. Obama's vision of big government and socialism.
But, I was so impressed that Mr. Romney was hard hitting, bold but not rude, assertive, reasonably specific for a general debate.

No question in my mind who should lead the USA and the free World.

What say you?

--hide--
Oct 4th 2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: Wow! My reaction to the first debate: Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre m...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:

Wow! My reaction to the first debate:

Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of accomplishment and understanding versus a man who is an ideologue and a puppet and who has just taken from government handouts his whole life.

It appeared to me that Mr. Romney's vision was vibrant, mostly realistic, and likely effective. He is a leader but also understands the 10th Amendment. He is a man who can work across the isle. Yet, he defended himself well against Obama's mischaracterizations of him, and led the discussion always back to what would create jobs and preserve freedom.

On the contrary, Mr. Obama gave more lame spin, straw man demagoguery and generalization. He is a man who has refused to work across the isle in any way. And in true Saul Alinsky fashion, he accused his opponent of doing exactly what he himself was in fact doing, refusing specifics. Mr. Obama's Chicago political machine lying through his teeth came out again and again.

Perhaps I am a little biased, since I do not like Mr. Obama's vision of big government and socialism.
But, I was so impressed that Mr. Romney was hard hitting, bold but not rude, assertive, reasonably specific for a general debate.

No question in my mind who should lead the USA and the free World.

What say you?

--hide--


There is no contest between the two men. Romney has years and years of Government experience, business experience
and leadership experience behind him.

Even though Obama has been President for four years, he has done nothing and has no experience to pull from when talking
in a debate.

Obama was slaughtered in this debate: No teleprompter, no experience, and no stage presence--only a few lame smircks.

The next debate is going to be different though because Obama has seen the enemy now and can fight back more effectively.

There just is no contest between the two candidates as far as experience and wisdom.

Oct 4th 2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: Wow! My reaction to the first debate: Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre m...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:

Wow! My reaction to the first debate:

Impressive: an intelligent man versus a mediocre man. A man of accomplishment and understanding versus a man who is an ideologue and a puppet and who has just taken from government handouts his whole life.

It appeared to me that Mr. Romney's vision was vibrant, mostly realistic, and likely effective. He is a leader but also understands the 10th Amendment. He is a man who can work across the isle. Yet, he defended himself well against Obama's mischaracterizations of him, and led the discussion always back to what would create jobs and preserve freedom.

On the contrary, Mr. Obama gave more lame spin, straw man demagoguery and generalization. He is a man who has refused to work across the isle in any way. And in true Saul Alinsky fashion, he accused his opponent of doing exactly what he himself was in fact doing, refusing specifics. Mr. Obama's Chicago political machine lying through his teeth came out again and again.

Perhaps I am a little biased, since I do not like Mr. Obama's vision of big government and socialism.
But, I was so impressed that Mr. Romney was hard hitting, bold but not rude, assertive, reasonably specific for a general debate.

No question in my mind who should lead the USA and the free World.

What say you?

--hide--


There is no contest between the two men. Romney has years and years of Government experience, business experience
and leadership experience behind him.

Even though Obama has been President for four years, he has done nothing and has no experience to pull from when talking
in a debate.

Obama was slaughtered in this debate: No teleprompter, no experience, and no stage presence--only a few lame smircks.

The next debate is going to be different though because Obama has seen the enemy now and can fight back more effectively.

There just is no contest between the two candidates as far as experience and wisdom.

Oct 4th 2012 new

(Quote) ED-20630 said: I thought that Jim Lehrer did a really good job too. I have always thought that the McNeil-Lehrer sho...
(Quote) ED-20630 said:

I thought that Jim Lehrer did a really good job too. I have always thought that the McNeil-Lehrer show was perhaps the best in terms of actually being thoughtful, well balanced and really informatiive. I did sort of expect that there may be a bit of left-leaning bias in terms of the way that the questions would be asked. I was impressed that (almost) all of the questions seemed to be asked in a very neutral manner.

Ed

--hide--


On the radio last night, they said the only one that did not do well was Jim Lehrer. I thought he did well. He did
not pressure the President to stay in the alloted time though.

Oct 4th 2012 new

I didn't see the whole debate and although Mr. Romney presented himself and his ideas quite well, there were still several things from him that made me cringe.

One was with regard to health care. Getting the federal government out of the health care business is the right thing, and I was especially glad that Romney emphasized the part of the Affordable Care Act that puts in place a 15 man, unelected panel that will decide what type of medical treatments you will have access to...talk about the 1%! But to say that the solution is to turn the problem over to the state governments is quite disappointing. It's the third party payer system, whether it be insurance companies or the government, that distorts the health care system...and turning the problem over to the state governments is not likely to be a very good fix to the problem. Medical care need to be paid for by the patient...it is the only way to keep the proper doctor/patient relationship and hold costs down, although insurance for catastrophic coverage is reasonable. Admitting that the government (state or federal) is the only means of providing health care just shows how far the country has moved to the left on this issue, and if state government provided health care is the alternative to the ACA, then I would say that the left has won this battle, even if Romney gets elected.

The other moment that made me cringe, was the discussion regarding education. Again, there was a back and forth regarding which entity is the most important in providing education for children with the President touting the federal government and Mr. Romney touting state and local governments. Actually the most important group involved in the education of children are parents, not the government...and the education system should be structured accordingly. Again, if the government is considered the only means for educating children in this country, it again shows how far the coutnry has moved to the left and again, the left has won this battle, even if Romney gets elected.

Oct 4th 2012 new
(Quote) Dan-28682 said: I didn't see the whole debate and although Mr. Romney presented himself and his ideas quite well, there were s...
(Quote) Dan-28682 said:

I didn't see the whole debate and although Mr. Romney presented himself and his ideas quite well, there were still several things from him that made me cringe.

One was with regard to health care. Getting the federal government out of the health care business is the right thing, and I was especially glad that Romney emphasized the part of the Affordable Care Act that puts in place a 15 man, unelected panel that will decide what type of medical treatments you will have access to...talk about the 1%! But to say that the solution is to turn the problem over to the state governments is quite disappointing. It's the third party payer system, whether it be insurance companies or the government, that distorts the health care system...and turning the problem over to the state governments is not likely to be a very good fix to the problem. Medical care need to be paid for by the patient...it is the only way to keep the proper doctor/patient relationship and hold costs down, although insurance for catastrophic coverage is reasonable. Admitting that the government (state or federal) is the only means of providing health care just shows how far the country has moved to the left on this issue, and if state government provided health care is the alternative to the ACA, then I would say that the left has won this battle, even if Romney gets elected.

The other moment that made me cringe, was the discussion regarding education. Again, there was a back and forth regarding which entity is the most important in providing education for children with the President touting the federal government and Mr. Romney touting state and local governments. Actually the most important group involved in the education of children are parents, not the government...and the education system should be structured accordingly. Again, if the government is considered the only means for educating children in this country, it again shows how far the coutnry has moved to the left and again, the left has won this battle, even if Romney gets elected.

--hide--


Actually, I had quite the opposite feeling when Romney said to turn it over to the states. The federal government is supposed to work under the guidance of the US Constitution. In the Constitution, there are enumerated powers that have been GRANTED to the Federal Government by the States and the people. We are the masters of the Federal government, not the other way around. SINCE there is no enumerated power for Healthcare, the Federal Government should not even have been talking about it, (And the Supreme Court should have thrown out Obamacare for this reason as well). Any power not specifically assigned to the Federal Government (enumerated) belongs to the States and to the People (who are sovereign). The only way that the Federal Government should be addressing healthcare is for there to be an Article V Amendment convention in which a quorum of the states passed an amendment to the Constitution to add the healthcare enumerated power to the Constitution. The founding fathers were VERY clear, that the General Welfare clause was NOT to be used to build any infrastructure the Federal Government wanted to take control away from the states, but this is exactly what has been done over the last 144 years. The comment he made about allowing competition in the insurance industry is spot on. Also needed is tort reform to eliminated frivolous lawsuits which drive up the cost of insurance for everyone. Those two things would have actually helped. All that other stuff in Obamacare is to "decrease the surplus population" and simply for control of the healthcare economy and all humans.

Regarding education, all of the reforms that are going around the country right now are designed to put the federal government in control of the curricula in schools, and even home schools, and leaving parents without say. Having a voucher to choose which school to send your kid to is NOT the same as controlling what curricula your child is going to learn. Again, there is no enumerated power in the US Constitution for a Department of Education (nor is there an enumerated power for Interior, Commerce, or Energy). Since the early 80s when this agency was created, they have spent billions of dollars, and have not increased test scores or improved American children's standing in knowledge in the world; in fact, American students now rank around 17th in the world. How can that be? Because Mitt Romney was right about something else too, the private sector can do everything better than government can, which is why we need smaller government; not no regulations, but less oppressive and intrusive one-size-fits-all control from the Federal Government.
Oct 4th 2012 new

(Quote) Gerald-283546 said: I think it is the "Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act," but since it i...
(Quote) Gerald-283546 said:



I think it is the "Affordable Care and Patient Protection Act," but since it is neither affordable nor affords patients any protection, Conservatives do not like to use the 1984-style spin title given it by the Democrat Comgress. Since it is one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation passed in the last generation, labeling it as "Obamacare" seems to do no harm.

I agree though, it is a little un-nerving to see the President so happy with the title. As if it were his idea. "Pelosicare" or "Pelosi-Reed-Obamacare" would be more appropriate. But this President is obsessed with his legacy. Try massive unemployment, disregard for the Constitution and dead ambassadors along with doubling the national debt in 4 years...that's enough legacy for anyone.

Reminding people about it reminds us that Obama's signature piece of legislation:
1. Was not his creation, yet he loves to glory in it.
2. Was passed in a totally partisan fashion, without acquiring even one Republican vote
3. And actually takes $700 billion from Medicare to pay for it, in addition to something like 17 other taxes that clamp in over the next several years, including the Mandate.

I thought Romney did a pretty good job of calling Obama out on the differences. Most importantly to me were the lack of bipartisanship in the passing of Obamacare, and the fact that it is a States Rights issue. Romney actually turned the topic to his own advantage, because Romneycare was Bipartisan, and responded to the needs of a leftist State. I'm not sure I bought his claim that it reduced costs...would have to look at that one more closely. But, clearly, Romney is not going to try to impose from the Federal level something that belongs at the state level. The Tenth Amendment will survive under him.

--hide--
I thought Romney did a good job of calling Obama out on the differences as well. His well-made point concerning Obama's partisan stomping of political discourse in the passing of Obamacare vs. Romney's careful, bipartisan efforts for his state health care plan was indeed a high point, and clearly illustrated Romney's ability to work across the isle - and Obama's inability to do so.

I will say this, however. Be prepared Governor Romney for all the negative press from the liberal media about your "unfair attacks" on the president during the debate, and know that Obama will show up for the next debate with the gloves off looking for revenge. God's Love be with you.

Posts 31 - 40 of 150