Palin Boosts Mccain With Catholics

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Terra Pax' post='1662317' date='Sep 23 2008, 11:23 PM']How exactly was I not supposed to take that as a personal attack? You used my quoted post to launch an attack on anyone who doesn't vote for McCain simply because he is "pro-life" and then equated my statement with condoning voting for Obama.

Nothing I have said is against any Church teaching. I am not voting for a pro-abortion politician. I am simply saying that I will not be voting for McCain JUST BECAUSE he is pro-life. I will vote for an all around better person, if I can find them, who is pro-life AND a good candidate, or else I will not vote. I can not, in good conscience, vote for a man who claims to be against abortion, but has no grasp on everything else it means to be pro-life and pro-God.[/quote]

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1661954' date='Sep 23 2008, 04:53 PM']Well to be honest, having had no power for over 12 days has made following the news difficult, our one paper has a limited reading value. Still the fall of AGI and LB has hardly reduced the 10 trillion dollar a year economy of the US to a smoking shell. That is more than overly dramatic, its absurd. Now how exactly is anyone at fault for the massive overvaluation of housoing in most of the country anyones fault except the people who buy and sell those houses. In Houston one can buy a perfectly livable 800 to 1000 sq house for 60 to 70 thousand dollars, a 250 thousand dollar house is a veritable mansion, 4000 sq plus and this was before the housing correction. But in many parts of the nation that won't buy you a shack, how exactly is that the federal governments fault, much less the Priesident's. Last I checked no one MADE you pay any price for a house, houses sell for what the market will bear, and the market was lifted by individual greed for decades, NOT for the last 8 years. Greenspan, if indeed he is at fault, was not appointed by Bush, but of course no one was complaining during the 16 or so years of prosperity he presided over. Oil rose agian because commodities are seen as a safe haven in an unstable market, but they would never be seen as that if people really believed the economy was a "smoking shell" because oil demand would not be stable in such a economy.

That said, if the entire stock market system collapsed I would do handstands, the stock company has had way to much power for more than 400 years.[/quote]
What kind of "market correction" has to occur for it be considered serious in your mind? All economic indicators are terrible. Job losses are up; the price of oil is up; the stock market is in free fall; manufacturing output is contracting; the housing market has imploded; economic growth is anemic at best; US deficit spending and debt are at record levels. All of these are directly attributable to the Let the Market Decide If It Feels Good Do It economic policies of the Bush administration, policies which McCain would continue. The proof in the pudding is in the eating. Bush has had eight years to show how well or otherwise neocon economic policies would work - or not - and the jury is in: they're a disaster. I'm not sure who McCain thinks he's fooling but apart from Bush's "base" of millionaires and billionaires, Americans can literally not afford four more years of the last eight years.

[Didymus]

[quote name='Terra Pax' post='1662317' date='Sep 23 2008, 11:23 PM']I can not, in good conscience, vote for a man who claims to be against abortion, but has no grasp on everything else it means to be pro-life and pro-God.[/quote]

this EXACTLY how I feel in this election..

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1661954' date='Sep 23 2008, 04:53 PM']Well to be honest, having had no power for over 12 days has made following the news difficult, our one paper has a limited reading value. Still the fall of AGI and LB has hardly reduced the 10 trillion dollar a year economy of the US to a smoking shell. That is more than overly dramatic, its absurd. Now how exactly is anyone at fault for the massive overvaluation of housoing in most of the country anyones fault except the people who buy and sell those houses. In Houston one can buy a perfectly livable 800 to 1000 sq house for 60 to 70 thousand dollars, a 250 thousand dollar house is a veritable mansion, 4000 sq plus and this was before the housing correction. But in many parts of the nation that won't buy you a shack, how exactly is that the federal governments fault, much less the Priesident's. Last I checked no one MADE you pay any price for a house, houses sell for what the market will bear, and the market was lifted by individual greed for decades, NOT for the last 8 years. Greenspan, if indeed he is at fault, was not appointed by Bush, but of course no one was complaining during the 16 or so years of prosperity he presided over. Oil rose agian because commodities are seen as a safe haven in an unstable market, but they would never be seen as that if people really believed the economy was a "smoking shell" because oil demand would not be stable in such a economy.

That said, if the entire stock market system collapsed I would do handstands, the stock company has had way to much power for more than 400 years.[/quote]
[url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080924/bs_nm/us_usa_economy_housingbiz"]Housing grim as financial rescue debate rages[/url]

[Kirisutodo333]

[quote name='Terra Pax' post='1662317' date='Sep 24 2008, 12:23 AM']How exactly was I not supposed to take that as a personal attack? You used my quoted post to launch an attack on anyone who doesn't vote for McCain simply because he is "pro-life" and then equated my statement with condoning voting for Obama.

Nothing I have said is against any Church teaching. I am not voting for a pro-abortion politician. I am simply saying that I will not be voting for McCain JUST BECAUSE he is pro-life. I will vote for an all around better person, if I can find them, who is pro-life AND a good candidate, or else I will not vote. I can not, in good conscience, vote for a man who claims to be against abortion, but has no grasp on everything else it means to be pro-life and pro-God.[/quote]

So...acknowledging the fact that everyone here has the right to post on the phorum if they feel the need to state something...since you're not voting for neither McCain nor Obama, why waste your time on this phorum? Do you have a certain message to get across? Is voting for McCain/Palin the wrong decision?

P.S. It's only a personal attack if you make it one.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1662564' date='Sep 24 2008, 08:27 AM']What kind of "market correction" has to occur for it be considered serious in your mind? All economic indicators are terrible. Job losses are up; the price of oil is up; the stock market is in free fall; manufacturing output is contracting; the housing market has imploded; economic growth is anemic at best; US deficit spending and debt are at record levels. All of these are directly attributable to the Let the Market Decide If It Feels Good Do It economic policies of the Bush administration, policies which McCain would continue. The proof in the pudding is in the eating. Bush has had eight years to show how well or otherwise neocon economic policies would work - or not - and the jury is in: they're a disaster. I'm not sure who McCain thinks he's fooling but apart from Bush's "base" of millionaires and billionaires, Americans can literally not afford four more years of the last eight years.[/quote]


What type of a correction would I consider serious? How about an actual recession, you know this thing that everybody keeps saying we are in but that we have yet to meet the very simple definition of. It's really not that hard, 2 consecutive quarters with negative growth. Oh wait we haven't had that. we have only had 1 quarter of negative growth in about 7 years. You realize tyhat we went into a recession in 2001 an actual recession not a made up one, that would I assume be related to the policies of Clinton right? And the recession f the early 90's I guess that was because of the policies of Regan and Bush the first. Hmmmm, ANd the recession in the early 80's that i suppose was Carters fault, and those in mid 70's those would be Nixon and The early 70's would that be Nixion of Johnson's fault? Of course those in the early 60's and late 50's those are Ike's fault, but how about the one in 48/49 is that Truman's policies failure or should we blame that on the Axis powers, I mean if they hadn't been defeated the manufacturing would have still been up right? You do know there have been 10 recessions ( you know those things that actually meet the definition of the word) since WWII thats one about every 6 years or so, I guess that would put us right on schedule, oh except we arn't in one.

I have already answered you about the housing market, that is the fault of greedy people not of the Federal government.
As for unemployment 6.1 % is hardly catastrophic, a roaring economy still normally has a 5% unemployment rate, we have just been spoiled by an extraordinarily low unemployment rate for the last 6 years of Bush.

"The proof in the pudding is in the eating" and we have been saying " can i have some more please" for 6 years, now we are cycling down and we are pissed off.

Lack of knowledge regarding history and basic economics is going to destroy this country, but we deserve nothing more, we kill our own children.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1662684' date='Sep 24 2008, 12:05 PM'][url="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080924/bs_nm/us_usa_economy_housingbiz"]Housing grim as financial rescue debate rages[/url][/quote]
"the median national home price declined a record 9.5 percent to $203,100, the National Association of Realtors said on Wednesday."

You see you see this as bad, I do not, i see this as a market correction towards reason when it hits about 120,000 then I think we will be about were it should be.

[Don John of Austria]

Still waiting on an explanation of why the War between the states, and particularly the northern invasion of the South was necessary butthe invasion of Iraq, which has been so bloodless in comparison that it should not even be in the same catagory, was not necessary.

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1662986' date='Sep 24 2008, 05:10 PM']What type of a correction would I consider serious? How about an actual recession, you know this thing that everybody keeps saying we are in but that we have yet to meet the very simple definition of. It's really not that hard, 2 consecutive quarters with negative growth. Oh wait we haven't had that. we have only had 1 quarter of negative growth in about 7 years. You realize tyhat we went into a recession in 2001 an actual recession not a made up one, that would I assume be related to the policies of Clinton right? And the recession f the early 90's I guess that was because of the policies of Regan and Bush the first. Hmmmm, ANd the recession in the early 80's that i suppose was Carters fault, and those in mid 70's those would be Nixon and The early 70's would that be Nixion of Johnson's fault? Of course those in the early 60's and late 50's those are Ike's fault, but how about the one in 48/49 is that Truman's policies failure or should we blame that on the Axis powers, I mean if they hadn't been defeated the manufacturing would have still been up right? You do know there have been 10 recessions ( you know those things that actually meet the definition of the word) since WWII thats one about every 6 years or so, I guess that would put us right on schedule, oh except we arn't in one.

I have already answered you about the housing market, that is the fault of greedy people not of the Federal government.
As for unemployment 6.1 % is hardly catastrophic, a roaring economy still normally has a 5% unemployment rate, we have just been spoiled by an extraordinarily low unemployment rate for the last 6 years of Bush.

"The proof in the pudding is in the eating" and we have been saying " can i have some more please" for 6 years, now we are cycling down and we are pissed off.

Lack of knowledge regarding history and basic economics is going to destroy this country, but we deserve nothing more, we kill our own children.[/quote]
Whatever about the technical definition of a recession, *real* people are in distress. But I guess that's just because we're a "nation of whiners." In the meantime, yes, the housing crisis is *partially* because of "greedy people" but it is also because of people desperate to get on the property ladder, encouraged directly by the Bush administration which touted the "ownership society," encouraged directly by the Bush administration to view their houses as giant ATM's to support the "war on terror" by "going shopping," and encouraged indirectly by the Bush administration via its Let the Market Decide If It Feels Good Do It non-regulation of the financial services industry, which literally lent out billions of dollars, no questions asked. Well, the chickens have come home to roost. What we have sown, we now must reap.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1663409' date='Sep 25 2008, 08:31 AM']Whatever about the technical definition of a recession, *real* people are in distress. But I guess that's just because we're a "nation of whiners." In the meantime, yes, the housing crisis is *partially* because of "greedy people" but it is also because of people desperate to get on the property ladder, encouraged directly by the Bush administration which touted the "ownership society," encouraged directly by the Bush administration to view their houses as giant ATM's to support the "war on terror" by "going shopping," and encouraged indirectly by the Bush administration via its Let the Market Decide If It Feels Good Do It non-regulation of the financial services industry, which literally lent out billions of dollars, no questions asked. Well, the chickens have come home to roost. What we have sown, we now must reap.[/quote]

You do know that the squeezing of home equity for ready cash at a break-neck pace did not start under Bush right, it started under Clinton, or that deregualtion of the financial industry also was not a Bushism but started more than 25 years ago, and has pretty much continued unchecked by any administration since that time.

And when did Bush or anyone in his administration get up and say, "please hock your house to buy consumer goods to help us fight the war on Terror"? I must have missed that one.


As for he technical definition of "recession being so cavalierly disgarded.... we have definitions for a reason, you see words have meaning, and that meaning is important for language to allow communication.

What makes a person a "real person". I am a teacher, I support my wife and 2 children, my wife does not work. Am I better of than I was 8 years ago.... YES, a huge resounding YES, and 8 years ago both of us worked, and I was unemployed for 5 months of the last year. It is not President's fault, and I don't care what party he is, if individuals squander their own money, if they make bad financial decisions, or if they hock their housee to by a plasma TV. There is something called personal responsability for your own actions.

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' post='1663420' date='Sep 25 2008, 06:54 AM']It is not President's fault, and I don't care what party he is, if individuals squander their own money, if they make bad financial decisions, or if they hock their houses to by a plasma TV. There is something called personal responsibility for your own actions.[/quote]

My own bad financial decision was not buying a house that would end up being mostly paid for with tax payer dollars...

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='T-Bone _' post='1663423' date='Sep 25 2008, 09:08 AM']My own bad financial decision was not buying a house that would end up being mostly paid for with tax payer dollars...

[/quote]

LOL

[Don John of Austria]

Oh and yes we are a "nation of whiners" well on our way to being a nation of sissy whiners.

[johnnydigit]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1660956' date='Sep 22 2008, 07:38 AM']Well, I "claim to be Catholic" - I'm at Mass every Sunday - and yet I won't vote for McCain / Palin. That they may be "pro-life" - and in McCain's case, I'm not convinced - doesn't give them an automatic pass on all the other issues on which they're terrible: the "war on terror," torture, the erosion of civil liberties, and the smoking shell that is the US economy as a result of policies which McCain / Palin would continue.

Note: that doesn't mean I'll vote for Obama nor am I advocating for him. But the Bush administration has been a trainwreck, and McCain / Palin offer only more of the same. Their "pro-life" stance doesn't whitewash the fact that they'd be a disaster in every other way.[/quote]

[quote name='Terra Pax' post='1661305' date='Sep 22 2008, 05:20 PM']I agree. Just because a candidate is pro-life does not give them a free pass. I will not vote for McCain/Palin either. Nor will I vote for Obama. But it sickens me when Catholics decide that just because a candidate is pro-life, they are automatically what the country needs. Not necessarily true. Being pro-life is an absolute necessity for a politician, but that doesn't mean they ought to be elected. And I don't think the "well, the other guy is pro-choice" is a good argument. Find someone different to vote for, someone who is actually fit to serve.[/quote]

don't waste your votes. be realistic. choose the one that will most likely cause babies not to be murdered. voting doesn't mean you endorse whatever else they do. our goal is to stop abortion. it's about the babies, not the economy right now.

[quote name='dominicansoul' post='1661790' date='Sep 23 2008, 09:12 AM']ken,

I can respect that. I just believe the other candidates don't stand a chance. It's basically between Obama and McCain. So, if you don't vote against the Pro-Death candidate, he's gonna win. If Catholics don't vote against the pro-death candidates they always win...we will probably never have a "perfect" pro-life candidate, but at least the pro-life candidates don't make things worse for babies. Bush is a horrible prez, but at least he passed laws to protect the babies born alive. If Obama wins, all these laws will be history. It'll be once again, "massacre-at-will" without any restrictions. I know our laws do next to nothing to help these poor children, but at least we have some hope with a pro-life candidate. We never know what they can accomplish in their terms. But we definitely know what the pro-death candidates will accomplish![/quote]

yep. abortion is one of the highest priorities in our Church. don't waste your vote for lesser issues.

[Don John of Austria]

So still no answer on the whole war thing? Dominicansoul? So are you conceding that Lincoln was a war criminal and committer of genocide? If so that leaves us with Regan, Regan is the only good president you can come up with? Out of 43, so Bush is one of 42 horrible presidents? Wow.