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

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

Nov 24th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: (Quote) James-17080 said: The blizzard of crapola won't work....
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

Quote:
James-17080 said:



The blizzard of crapola won't work. Now, I posted a reply. Do you want to answer it or not?

James


I alreacy replied to you....and you are the spreader of "crapola" on here and always have been as far as I know....it is a fact that the liberal-socialist party denied God three times at their convention before finally overiding their party and putting him back in...again...I am soooo hurt and offended.....another manipulation on that part of liberals.

--hide--



Oh yes, I know, your're hurt and victimized.... ROTFLMAO! laughing

You're "hurt", you're "victimized", and you're "manipulated". You are a liberal.

James ☺

Nov 24th 2012 new

(Quote) Keith-806420 said: You go Cheryl! I dont see anything hurtful or at all 'untrue' about your posts hear! They seem v...
(Quote) Keith-806420 said: You go Cheryl! I dont see anything hurtful or at all 'untrue' about your posts hear! They seem very thoughtful and Pro gospel (Catholic) !! Im not sure what is going on with this judgdment, but I would not worry about it.. :-) God speed, and God Bless you!!!
--hide--


Hi Keith et alia,

Ah, we have something in common. I hope Cheryl keeps going here, too.

wink

James ☺

Nov 25th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: (Quote) James-17080 said: I don't know how true your story is...
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

Quote:
James-17080 said:



I don't know how true your story is or not.

But this is what want to ask you: Do you have any idea at all how insulting and hurtful your comment might be to anybody here who might be on what you classify as "socialism" or "welfare" or any other pejorative word you've used over the last few days?

James ☺


Also, the republicans do the same social programs to help people, but I believe it is their intent to help them get a step up and a new start...not to keep them on welfare and make them dependent to have more constituencies....not I don't call Repbulicans socialist...indeed I think they are the real democrat party. However "democrats" are liberal socialist....they have an agenda....to spread prodeath culture while making people dependent on govt. Perhaps that is what you are referring to when you say I have commented on socialism. I stand by that...there are only two parties now. One that is Repubican-democrat (prolife) and one that is liberalism-socialist (prodeath).

--hide--


Really, Cheryl? You show me some evidence of that, hard evidence, and I will take it under advisement.


James ☺

Nov 25th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: I should have addressed one more thing from James reply "the govt. takes taxes to fund mili...
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

I should have addressed one more thing from James reply "the govt. takes taxes to fund military that is socialism"...no it is not...the Federal govt. in its original purpose was for our defense...that is what it was supposed to be all about...not take over as it has in every other aspect which private business and ministry should be.


Also, I think if I would let myself go and fall into the "safety net" trap that won't ever end, I'd give up my job search...I have to tell myself that the safety net that goes on forever doesn't exist to avoid falling into discouragement and depression and just give up. I can just imagine with all the jobs being lost now because of Obama and democrats that we will have many people that will give up though and fall into discouragement after trying forever to find employment again.

--hide--


Looks like you never listened to President Eisenhower's speech, warning us of the military-industrial complex. Here, I'll post it, just for you, because I like you wink

www.youtube.com

The relevant points of Eisenhower's speech in relation to this thread start at about 7:00, but the whole thing is worth watching. Lest anyone discount what Eisenhower is saying, we have here a man who served at the very top of his profession, a General of the Army, equivalent to a Field Marshal in the British, Russian, or German armies. Eisenhower served 8 relatively untarnished years as President, a record that has not been repeated since the end of his tenure of office.

Cheryl, I am not suggesting that you just "give up". I would never suggest that to you or anybody else. But sometimes, we have to deal with circumstances beyond our control. That's part of life. It's also possible that without that safety net, you can get yourself in real trouble. I'm obviously not familiar with your circumstances, but according to your profile, you have children at home part time. This is part of the public record. I'm sure you thought about this, but what if they become ill, and you aren't working?

I want to be very clear on what I'm saying here. I am not throwing this in your face for giggles (there is so much other stuff I can laugh at). What I am trying to say is that sometimes, some of us need help because we become involved in desperate situations through no fault of our own. And nobody should be ashamed to ask for that help.

James ☺

Nov 25th 2012 new

(Quote) James-17080 said: Looks like you never listened to President Eisenhower's speech, warning us of the mili...
(Quote) James-17080 said:



Looks like you never listened to President Eisenhower's speech, warning us of the military-industrial complex. Here, I'll post it, just for you, because I like you

www.youtube.com

The relevant points of Eisenhower's speech in relation to this thread start at about 7:00, but the whole thing is worth watching. Lest anyone discount what Eisenhower is saying, we have here a man who served at the very top of his profession, a General of the Army, equivalent to a Field Marshal in the British, Russian, or German armies. Eisenhower served 8 relatively untarnished years as President, a record that has not been repeated since the end of his tenure of office.

Cheryl, I am not suggesting that you just "give up". I would never suggest that to you or anybody else. But sometimes, we have to deal with circumstances beyond our control. That's part of life. It's also possible that without that safety net, you can get yourself in real trouble. I'm obviously not familiar with your circumstances, but according to your profile, you have children at home part time. This is part of the public record. I'm sure you thought about this, but what if they become ill, and you aren't working?

I want to be very clear on what I'm saying here. I am not throwing this in your face for giggles (there is so much other stuff I can laugh at). What I am trying to say is that sometimes, some of us need help because we become involved in desperate situations through no fault of our own. And nobody should be ashamed to ask for that help.

James ☺

--hide--
Again, I've never said a true safety net shouldn't be there...for the disabled for instance. I just don't think that is what we have these days and I definitely think the republicans are the better group to make sure that it is a true safety net and not funding for abortions and birth control, etc... I'll have to look at Eisenhower's speech in a bit as it is too late, but that won't negate from the fact that the federal govt. was established primarily for defense and that is all the federal govt. should be taxing for. Well, perhaps for interstate roads too perhaps...but an argument could be made for that being part of defense too.

Nov 26th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: (Quote) James-17080 said: Looks like you never listened to Presid...
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

Quote:
James-17080 said:



Looks like you never listened to President Eisenhower's speech, warning us of the military-industrial complex. Here, I'll post it, just for you, because I like you

www.youtube.com

The relevant points of Eisenhower's speech in relation to this thread start at about 7:00, but the whole thing is worth watching. Lest anyone discount what Eisenhower is saying, we have here a man who served at the very top of his profession, a General of the Army, equivalent to a Field Marshal in the British, Russian, or German armies. Eisenhower served 8 relatively untarnished years as President, a record that has not been repeated since the end of his tenure of office.

Cheryl, I am not suggesting that you just "give up". I would never suggest that to you or anybody else. But sometimes, we have to deal with circumstances beyond our control. That's part of life. It's also possible that without that safety net, you can get yourself in real trouble. I'm obviously not familiar with your circumstances, but according to your profile, you have children at home part time. This is part of the public record. I'm sure you thought about this, but what if they become ill, and you aren't working?

I want to be very clear on what I'm saying here. I am not throwing this in your face for giggles (there is so much other stuff I can laugh at). What I am trying to say is that sometimes, some of us need help because we become involved in desperate situations through no fault of our own. And nobody should be ashamed to ask for that help.

James ☺


Again, I've never said a true safety net shouldn't be there...for the disabled for instance. I just don't think that is what we have these days and I definitely think the republicans are the better group to make sure that it is a true safety net and not funding for abortions and birth control, etc... I'll have to look at Eisenhower's speech in a bit as it is too late, but that won't negate from the fact that the federal govt. was established primarily for defense and that is all the federal govt. should be taxing for. Well, perhaps for interstate roads too perhaps...but an argument could be made for that being part of defense too.

--hide--


If you say that you think a safety net should be there, then there is little for us to bicker about. Do I think the Republicans would do a better job at constructing one? Not a chance. Everything the Republicans have said suggest that the want to take that safety net down and turn it over to the private sector. A case in point would be Bush's privatization plan for Social Security.

James ☺

Nov 26th 2012 new

(Quote) James-17080 said: (Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: (Quote) James-17080 said: <...
(Quote) James-17080 said:

Quote:
Cheryl-409772 said:

Quote:
James-17080 said:



Looks like you never listened to President Eisenhower's speech, warning us of the military-industrial complex. Here, I'll post it, just for you, because I like you

www.youtube.com

The relevant points of Eisenhower's speech in relation to this thread start at about 7:00, but the whole thing is worth watching. Lest anyone discount what Eisenhower is saying, we have here a man who served at the very top of his profession, a General of the Army, equivalent to a Field Marshal in the British, Russian, or German armies. Eisenhower served 8 relatively untarnished years as President, a record that has not been repeated since the end of his tenure of office.

Cheryl, I am not suggesting that you just "give up". I would never suggest that to you or anybody else. But sometimes, we have to deal with circumstances beyond our control. That's part of life. It's also possible that without that safety net, you can get yourself in real trouble. I'm obviously not familiar with your circumstances, but according to your profile, you have children at home part time. This is part of the public record. I'm sure you thought about this, but what if they become ill, and you aren't working?

I want to be very clear on what I'm saying here. I am not throwing this in your face for giggles (there is so much other stuff I can laugh at). What I am trying to say is that sometimes, some of us need help because we become involved in desperate situations through no fault of our own. And nobody should be ashamed to ask for that help.

James ☺


Again, I've never said a true safety net shouldn't be there...for the disabled for instance. I just don't think that is what we have these days and I definitely think the republicans are the better group to make sure that it is a true safety net and not funding for abortions and birth control, etc... I'll have to look at Eisenhower's speech in a bit as it is too late, but that won't negate from the fact that the federal govt. was established primarily for defense and that is all the federal govt. should be taxing for. Well, perhaps for interstate roads too perhaps...but an argument could be made for that being part of defense too.




If you say that you think a safety net should be there, then there is little for us to bicker about. Do I think the Republicans would do a better job at constructing one? Not a chance. Everything the Republicans have said suggest that the want to take that safety net down and turn it over to the private sector. A case in point would be Bush's privatization plan for Social Security.

James ☺

--hide--
There is nothing to debate about...EVERYTHING that CAN possbily be in the hands of the private sector should be...however, S.S. is safe with either party as are the rest of the social programs. However, only one party will do its best to cut waste and programs that should not be covered by tax payers like abortion and that is the republican party which is really the democrat party now. Really, they haven't done enough either because they have moved too far left....have also let it go from a safety net to cover people who don't really need it and shouldn't have it. Recently saw a show on North Korea....people there are starving and resorting to eating tree bark and even eating each other....that is a total communist country with benevolent govt. controlling everything (oh and thanks to Obuma's watch, they are now up to six nukes, I believe...scary considering how crazy these rulers are)....we don't want that here. God is outlawed there too...what party is trying to take him away here...yes the previous democrat party now the liberal socialist party. The only reason someone could not see how different these two parties are now from what they used to be is due to blind allegiance to a party...that is sad.

Nov 27th 2012 new

Bernie from the raise the Taxes thread (God forbid, but they will do it yet again, the "republicans" are already giving in because of the bad rap the "dems' have given them about loving the rich so if they dont they won' t get reelected)

Anyway, Bernie correectly said, " Let's look at history again. Bush inauguration had a deep recession and collapse of the dot com market, which occurred under Clinton, but Bush didn't blame him, he just took on the challenge.

911 occurs and 3,000 people die. 3,000 jobs disappear immediately. Along with those jobs 15,000 ancillary jobs disappear. These are jobs that depended on those earners for their jobs. In addition, we had to shut down commercial and general aviation. This alone caused 100,000 direct job losses and 1,000,000 ancillary job losses.

If allowed to fester or trying to spend our way out of it like Obama would have caused a mess like we have now. Instead Bush pushed through tax cuts and within one year the economy was higher than it was when he was sworn in. The tax cuts increased revenues by 16% for the first 6 years of his administration. Then Democrats got control of Congress in 2006 and screwed things up. Two years time and the increased the deficit, ruined the economy and managed to blame Bush for their mess.

I refer you to previous post concerning how Republicans balance the budget under Clinton, but got no credit. From '94 to '96 Republicans forced Clinton to balance the budget. In two years time they turned around the economy and had it roaring. Two years after taking control of Congress in '06. Democrats have ruined our economy and may have ruined what America stood for and was based on."

Nov 27th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: Bernie from the raise the Taxes thread (God forbid, but they will do it yet again, the "rep...
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

Bernie from the raise the Taxes thread (God forbid, but they will do it yet again, the "republicans" are already giving in because of the bad rap the "dems' have given them about loving the rich so if they dont they won' t get reelected)

Anyway, Bernie correectly said, " Let's look at history again. Bush inauguration had a deep recession and collapse of the dot com market, which occurred under Clinton, but Bush didn't blame him, he just took on the challenge.

911 occurs and 3,000 people die. 3,000 jobs disappear immediately. Along with those jobs 15,000 ancillary jobs disappear. These are jobs that depended on those earners for their jobs. In addition, we had to shut down commercial and general aviation. This alone caused 100,000 direct job losses and 1,000,000 ancillary job losses.

If allowed to fester or trying to spend our way out of it like Obama would have caused a mess like we have now. Instead Bush pushed through tax cuts and within one year the economy was higher than it was when he was sworn in. The tax cuts increased revenues by 16% for the first 6 years of his administration. Then Democrats got control of Congress in 2006 and screwed things up. Two years time and the increased the deficit, ruined the economy and managed to blame Bush for their mess.

I refer you to previous post concerning how Republicans balance the budget under Clinton, but got no credit. From '94 to '96 Republicans forced Clinton to balance the budget. In two years time they turned around the economy and had it roaring. Two years after taking control of Congress in '06. Democrats have ruined our economy and may have ruined what America stood for and was based on."

--hide--
...and Bernie goes on to say this:

You can't fix a problem unless you recognize that is exists and who caused it. If government caused the problem, then more government won't fix it. However, the resolution is in your retort and you don't even know it. We are actually spending $18 Billion an hour (going to have to check numbers, could be $118 Billion).

Obama's tax increase would take 525 years just to cover his deficit spending for 2011. The problem isn't the taxes, it is spending, and you outlined how much more we are spending compared to decades past. Obama though has come all in and increased spending on the nonsense that it will stimulate the economy. It didn't work during the depression, and in retrospect, only made it worse.

The higher tax rates in the past didn't affect people as that marginal tax rate would only apply to those earning the equivalent of $1 Billion a year now. The average person and millionaire actually paid less in taxes then than now. It is because of inflation which caused tax creep. Now Reagan got some indexing, but not enough and I think some of that was repealed during Clinton's first two years when Democrats controlled Congress.

Now, don't get me wrong, There are several things I didn't like about Bush, prescription coverage being one. The choice though was between him or some Democratic idiot. We have to chose the better candidate, not the best, as the best person may not be running. Obama is a disaster and by 2016 we are going to be facing collapse of the Dollar and our country.

We have to get past the idea that government is supposed to fulfill our desires as the instills greed in people, thinking they are entitled to other people's earnings.

"A lie will go around the world twice, before the truth gets out of bed."
Abraham Lincoln

Nov 27th 2012 new

(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said: Also, how in the world can liberals say they believe in helping the less fortunate when they bel...
(Quote) Cheryl-409772 said:

Also, how in the world can liberals say they believe in helping the less fortunate when they believe in killing babies...the MOST less fortunate...it just doesn't make any sense to me!

--hide--

See, that's just one of those lies from the fringes of the right wing that just won't go away. The problem with a lot of the people who call themselves "pro life" is that once you're outside the womb, you're on your own. No help, just survival of the fittest. That's why I don't believe a lot of conservatives who say they're pro life. Conservative politicians run their mouth about life beginning at conception (Which I believe too, and I identify myself as liberal) except that they also favour programs that create a Darwinist society, with no help for vulnerable people. And the people who vote for conservatives talk like that too.

It doesn't make sense to me saying life begins at conception, yet once outside the womb it's okay for people to just fall into poverty with no help to get back on their feet. That's social darwinism and that's contrarty to the dignity and worth that's owed to the human person.

Posts 71 - 80 of 146