Posted by Tina
Can you guess who said the following?
“We must seek support in the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilization. Honesty and hard work, responsibility and faith in our strength are bound to bring us success.”
The answer might surprise or at least intrigue you. I found it in a post election opinion piece. See if you agree with me that “Obama’s Soviet Mistake,” by Xavier Lerma – PRAVDA makes for interesting Sunday reading:
Putin in 2009 outlined his strategy for economic success. Alas, poor Obama did the opposite but nevertheless was re-elected. Bye, bye Miss American Pie. The Communists have won in America with Obama but failed miserably in Russia with Zyuganov who only received 17% of the vote. Vladimir Putin was re-elected as President keeping the NWO order out of Russia while America continues to repeat the Soviet mistake.
After Obama was elected in his first term as president the then Prime Minister of Russia, Vladimir Putin gave a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland in January of 2009. Ignored by the West as usual, Putin gave insightful and helpful advice to help the world economy and saying the world should avoid the Soviet mistake. …
…Reading Putin’s speech without knowing the author, one would think it was written by Reagan or another conservative in America. The speech promotes smaller government and less taxes. It comes as no surprise to those who know Putin as a conservative.
Vladimir Putin went on to say:
“…we are reducing taxes on production, investing money in the economy. We are optimizing state expenses.
The second possible mistake would be excessive interference into the economic life of the country and the absolute faith into the all-mightiness of the state.
There are no grounds to suggest that by putting the responsibility over to the state, one can achieve better results.
Unreasonable expansion of the budget deficit, accumulation of the national debt – are as destructive as an adventurous stock market game.
The liberal left in America will ignore this opinion piece as an inconvenience to their plans and the success of their current political idol. But the rest of America might want to consider the incredible opportunity to dominate on the economic world stage that the re-election of President Obama has given the Russians.
America, having adopted the old economic model of the soviets through the re-election of President Obama, will now see a further decline in our economy. Our recent election represents an act of stupidity that shocks a world once grandly inspired by the wisdom and common sense of President Ronald Reagan. Putin warned the American people: “During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”
Tongue in cheek? No matter…it’s absolutely true! No thinking person would want to repeat the economic failures of the communist economic system or the stubbornness the Soviet leaders clung to for decades. But the American progressives has shown himself to be a very slow learner. They repeatedly fail when it comes to learning the economic lessons of history…even when they hear it from the horses mouth!
Mr. Putin is a sly fox. Given the weakness shown in Obama’s open mike assurances the Russian president is likely poised to play Obama like a balalaika over the next four years.
As Mr. Lerma laments, “Bye, Bye American Pie”.
Great find Tina, I was wondering where conservative could go to live out the American Dream. Never thought it would be Russia.
From the linked Pravda article.
“During the time of the Soviet Union the role of the state in economy was made absolute, which eventually lead to the total non-competitiveness of the economy. That lesson cost us very dearly. I am sure no one would want history to repeat itself.”
President Vladimir Putin could never have imagined anyone so ignorant or so willing to destroy their people like Obama much less seeing millions vote for someone like Obama. They read history in America don’t they? Alas, the schools in the U.S. were conquered by the Communists long ago and history was revised thus paving the way for their Communist presidents. Obama has bailed out those businesses that voted for him and increased the debt to over 16 trillion with an ever increasing unemployment rate especially among blacks and other minorities. All the while promoting his agenda.
“We must seek support in the moral values that have ensured the progress of our civilization. Honesty and hard work, responsibility and faith in our strength are bound to bring us success.”- Vladimir Putin
The red, white and blue still flies happily but only in Russia. Russia still has St George defeating the Dragon with the symbol of the cross on its’ flag. The ACLU and other atheist groups in America would never allow the US flag with such religious symbols. Lawsuits a plenty against religious freedom and expression in the land of the free. Christianity in the U.S. is under attack as it was during the early period of the Soviet Union when religious symbols were against the law.
Let’s give American voters the benefit of the doubt and say it was all voter fraud and not ignorance or stupidity in electing a man who does not even know what to do and refuses help from Russia when there was an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Instead we’ll say it’s true that the Communists usage of electronic voting was just a plan to manipulate the vote. Soros and his ownership of the company that counts the US votes in Spain helped put their puppet in power in the White House. According to the Huffington Post, residents in all 50 states have filed petitions to secede from the Unites States. We’ll say that these Americans are hostages to the Communists in power. How long will their government reign tyranny upon them?
Russia lost its’ civil war with the Reds and millions suffered torture and death for almost 75 years under the tyranny of the United Soviet Socialist Republic. Russians survived with a new and stronger faith in God and ever growing Christian Church. The question is how long will the once “Land of the Free” remain the United Socialist States of America? Their suffering has only begun. Bye bye Miss American Pie!”
Mercy on us … you and Peggy … communist dupes?
The only thing Pooty “optimizes” is his access to graft. He and his formerly commie bosses, now captitalist oligarchs, have beggared Russia … and he can be as sly as he likes … he has no resources … none at all.
The stats are there to support the Pravada illiteracy statement.
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/13/hicks-civic-illiteracy-won-the-white-house-for-obama/
Civic Illiteracy Won the White House for Obama
By: Marybeth Hicks
11/13/2012
You see, more than a year ago I wrote the book that explains it all. Its called Dont Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid: Confronting the Lefts Assault on Our Families, Faith, and Freedom, and in it, I proved our young adults already have been molded to be the first generation of American socialists.
Its not some wacko conspiracy theory. Its just research that shows the influence of our education system, media and pop culture have instilled in most young people a lack of understanding about economics and free markets, as well as a misconception about the proper role of government in our daily lives.
Heres some of what I learned and shared in the book:
Going back more than six years, its clear our nations college students are largely civically illiterate. According to surveys from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, college freshmen typically flunk a 60-question civics test with an average score of just better than 51 percent; college seniors flunk it with a score of around 53 percent.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, our countrys high schools taught less about the constitution in 2010 than they did in 2006, a trend that continues. In fact, in 2010, only 67 percent of high school seniors studied our founding documents, meaning about a third dont study our government in the year before they are eligible to vote.
Based on National Assessment of Education Progress tests, the formal assessment exams given to students across the nation to gauge what theyre learning, American students exhibit an alarming lack of proficiency in government and economics.
As of 2006 (the last year for which statistics were available when I researched the book), only 36 percent of high school seniors could name the governments primary source of income. (That would be taxes, kids.) Only 33 percent could explain the effect of an increase in real interest rates on consumer borrowing, and a scant 11 percent could analyze how a change in unemployment rates affects income, spending and production.
And of course, its not just young adults who are civically illiterate. In 2008, the Intercollegiate Studies Institute administered a basic 33-question civic literacy test to a random sample of 2,508 American adults. Respondents had a range of educational attainment from high school diplomas to advanced degrees.
Questions came from past institute surveys, as well as from nationally recognized exams, such as the U.S. governments citizenship test and the National Assessment of Education Progress test. Respondents also were asked questions regarding their level of engagement in other activities that may or may not contribute to civic literacy.
The average score for all Americans who took this straightforward civic literacy test was 49 percent, or an F, proving the apple doesnt fall far from the civically illiterate tree.
Which brings us to last weeks presidential election. Exit polls revealed that a stunning 42 percent of voters said Mr. Obamas response to Superstorm Sandy was important when making their decisions about whom to vote for in the election.
Thats about what youd expect from a civically illiterate electorate.
I’ll bet you got the biggest F in civics, which explains your duped, dumb and snide posts all the time. Try contributing something constructive instead of just attacking others for their views and beliefs.
Civility would be a welcomed change from you.
Now, read the stats presented in my second post and present a civil argument or, to adopt your style, just shut up!!
Here is a good place to begin. Why don’t you tell us why you think the scores are going down instead of up.
“As of 2006 (the last year for which statistics were available when I researched the book), only 36 percent of high school seniors could name the governments primary source of income. (That would be taxes, kids.) Only 33 percent could explain the effect of an increase in real interest rates on consumer borrowing, and a scant 11 percent could analyze how a change in unemployment rates affects income, spending and production.”
Award winning “duped” statement.
http://vimeo.com/53757095
or
Asserting that Obama’s policies are anywhere close to those of the Soviet Union is civic illiteracy. We are still far from the social democracies that characterize, oh, every single first-world country currently in existence. Peggy and Tina, you want to skip past the comparisons between us and France, Germany, the UK, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Italy, Belgium, and Finland, all of which have more socialist policies than any enacted or proposed by President Obama. To leap over all those countries to declare that the U.S. is becoming just the old Soviet Union is ridiculous to any thinking person, and you are both demonstrating an embarassing level of ignorance, not only of history, but about the modern world, in making such a leap.
It’s baseless, nonsensical fearmongering. Which, by the way, has been your party’s primary tactic in the past two presidential elections. How is that working for you?
Chris: “It’s baseless, nonsensical fearmongering. Which, by the way, has been your party’s primary tactic in the past two presidential elections. How is that working for you?”
Don’t agree. Your party was/is the fearmonger champs. A vote for Romney would have been for someone who killed a woman who got cancer years after her husband lost his health insurance all though she had insurance when she got cancer. Oh, and don’t forget the “War on Women” where women would be forced to pay for their own birth control and abortions or they’d die because of the lack of health care.
Both stories were lies. So please give us one example where our party came even close to the fear your party used.
“To leap over all those countries to declare that the U.S. is becoming just the old Soviet Union is ridiculous”
A. Look up the word “becoming”
B. Offer some evidence that we are not moving in the direction of total government control. (We have given you many examples of continuing government expansion and control.)
As for skipping past the other countries many of them are further along in the Thelma and Louise number off the economic cliff…they merely prove my point. Others have suffered the same hard lessons of their socialist policies and have chosen to lower taxes to spur economic growth. Unfortunately their citizens have become fat and lazy mentally and it’s hard to get them to actually work so the struggle continues.
Tell me again…where will the money to fund all of the social programs come from when the left has completely destroyed the private sector? I know you won the election, which must prove you are right, but you seem always to skip over this question.
Telling people the hard truth is not fear mongering. Once again, you can’t spend more than you take in and create a healthy economy. You can’t bring more revenue to the government by punishing and restricting the wealth makers in the private sector. If government promises more than it can deliver they create an unsustainable situation and it will crash in one form or another (Which is what happened in the old soviet union.)
Fear mongering is telling people that Romney/Ryan will throw their grandmother over a cliff, that the opposition party is racist…that republicans have no plans regarding illegal immigration beyond deportation. There are too many specific examples targeted to the party and to individuals to list…the democrats do nothing but fear monger and promise goodies. Your party has already begun its smear campaign to destroy Marco Rubio before he has a chance to run in 2016. The Democrats are not a party, they are a syndicate and they operate exactly like the mob. Control through intimidation, reward those who comply, destroy all non-compliant enemies.
Peggy, the first example you used was an ad which was put out by a SuperPAC, not the official Obama campaign. I found it very dishonest and disgusting, and I think the president should have denounced it. However his official response was to neither endorse or denounce. I agree that it was wrong.
The “War on Women” is very real, as demonstrated by many of the ridiculous comments GOP candidates made regarding rape during this campaign. Furthermore, no one argued that the government should pay for women’s abortions–you just made that up. We did argue that society would be better served if insurance plans covered contraception. This is backed up with studies showing that this reduces the rates of unintended pregnancy, STDs, and abortions.
To this well-reasoned argument, the loudest voice in the conservative movement responded by calling the messenger a “slut,” totally misrepresented her position, and indicated that he didn’t even understand how women’s birth control worked.
There were also several very restrictive bills put forward in the past few years by the GOP, one of which mandated a transvaginal ultrasound for women before they could get an abortion. This totally violates women’s constitutional rights.
It is the right that has cooked up phony “wars,” such as the “War on Christmas,” the “War on Religion,” and class warfare against the rich (class warfare against the poor is totally OK with most conservatives these days).
Another example of fearmongering is one that you yourself have put forward on this site. You cited Dr. Jill Vecchio’s claim that under Obamacare, doctors who recommend mammograms to women under 50 will be fined and possibly put in jail. Not only was this completely false, the law actually does the exact opposite, as it requires insurance plans to pay for mammograms for women starting at 40 years of age. It actually expands access to mammograms, rather than denying it.
This is just one of the many lies put forward about the PPACA, lies designed to scare voters. Has there been a more quickly spread lie than Sarah Palin’s “death panel” charge, which was proven false by every fact-checker in the country?
Mitt Romney lied when he said the health care bill would cause 20 million people to lose insurance:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/04/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-20-million-will-lose-health-insur/
He was rated “pants on fire” when he said Obama was ending work-to-welfare:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/aug/07/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obamas-plan-abandons-tenet/
He lied when he said Obama was suing to restrict military voting:
http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2012/aug/06/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-lawsuit-filed-president-obamas-ca/
He got another “pants on fire” when he falsely accused Obama of selling Chrysler to Italians who would build cars in China:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/30/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-obama-chrysler-sold-italians-china-ame/
He lied when he said Obama provided $90 billion in breaks to green energy:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/05/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-provided-90-billion/
He lied when he said Obama was putting a $4000 tax increase on middle class families:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/26/mitt-romney/romney-says-obama-plans-4000-tax-hike-middle-class/
He lied when he said regulations have quadrupled:
http://www.politifact.com/personalities/mitt-romney/statements/?page=2
He got a “pants on fire” for his “apology tour” nonsense:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/17/mitt-romney/mitt-romney-says-barack-obama-began/
And all of these lies were designed to scare voters. You asked for one example; I gave you ten.
Peggy, I just don’t know what you … or Tina … are trying to say.
Are you actually purporting Russia as a threat? Call them Commie Bosses; call them capitalist oligarchs … the fact is that the life expectancy of the Russian male has dropped from seventy-something to fifty-something, thanks to Pooty and his crew.
P.S.: Civics is the study of our government … and how this extends, or in anyway relates, to an assessment of any purported Russian threat similarly escapes me.
You can be coherent … if you try.
Tina: “B. Offer some evidence that we are not moving in the direction of total government control.”
I find this request almost too silly to grant. But for the record, I do not think that adding necessary regulations to the health care industry–regulations that, need I remind you, were dreamed up by the Heritage Foundation and recommended by both Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney until they sacrificed them on the alter of political convenience–is a move toward “total government control.”
“Unfortunately their citizens have become fat and lazy mentally and it’s hard to get them to actually work so the struggle continues.”
What is your basis for the statement “it’s hard to get them to actually work?” Last I heard there was an unemployment crisis in each of most of these countries. That means that people do want to work, but there aren’t enough jobs.
“Tell me again…where will the money to fund all of the social programs come from when the left has completely destroyed the private sector? I know you won the election, which must prove you are right, but you seem always to skip over this question.”
The premise of the question is ridiculous. The left is not destroying the private sector. Corporations aren’t even paying the tax rate they have now because of all the loopholes. Bringing jobs home and raising wages would help the private sector by increasing employment and pay, which would cause an increase in demand.
“Telling people the hard truth is not fear mongering.”
You’re not telling the hard truth; you’re making stuff up.
“Once again, you can’t spend more than you take in and create a healthy economy.”
But you don’t want to “take in” anything more. You believe, without evidence, that raising taxes on the top 2% would cause them to hire less. This despite the fact that the top 2% is doing better than ever, and they are still choosing not to create jobs.
“You can’t bring more revenue to the government by punishing and restricting the wealth makers in the private sector.”
No one is trying to punish or restrict them from doing anything, other than exploiting workers and skirting their taxes. And yes, if we crack down on offshore accounts and low wages, we will bring more revenue in.
“Fear mongering is telling people that Romney/Ryan will throw their grandmother over a cliff,”
Agreed, but so is telling people that Obama will kill their son who has Down Syndrome, as Sarah Palin did:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/sarah-palin-death-panels-and-obamacare/2012/06/27/gJQAysUP7V_blog.html
“that the opposition party is racist…”
Agreed, but so is calling the opposition president a racist, as Glenn Beck did, and as Rush Limbaugh continues to do:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/07/28/fox-host-glenn-beck-obama_n_246310.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/04/26/rush_limbaugh_obama_is_racist.html
I don’t believe your whole party should be tarred as racists, but I do think that if you don’t like it, you should take it up with those prominent members of your party who routinely say racist things, such as:
-Telling a Muslim teenager to “take a camel” because Muslims shouldn’t fly on planes like normal people (Ann Coulter)
-Defending Japanese internment (Michelle Malkin)
-Calling Obama a “halfrican-American” (Rush Limbaugh)
-Baselessly asserting that Obama’s healthcare plan is about “reparations” even though the plan says absolutely nothing about race (Limbaugh again)
-Ludicrously claiming that one instance of a black kid beating up a white kid on a bus is a harbinger of “Obama’s America” (Yep, you guess it: Limbaugh)
But instead of denouncing these racist comments and pointing out that they don’t represent all Republicans (and I know many Republicans who find them revolting), you’ve defended each and every one of them. And this is just the short list.
You can’t simultaneously complain about your party being called racist, and then defend prominent conservatives’ blatant racism. Choose.
Chris, Obama earned his title of Fearmonger in Chief since he couldnt run on his record and had to destroy his opponent with constant and false attacks.
The candidate of hope has become the candidate of fear: How Obama’s campaign is just about attacking Romney who he claims will turn the clock back 50 years for immigrants, women and gays.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223289/US-Election-2012-How-Barack-Obama-gone-cultivating-hope-cultivating-fear-reelection-campaign.html#ixzz2DP87B9WP
Chris: The “War on Women” is very real, as demonstrated by many of the ridiculous comments GOP candidates made regarding rape during this campaign.
The War on Women didnt exist until the Obama campaign drummed it up to get womens votes by creating a false narrative that the GOP was against them. A total lie, but won for the cost of month of safe sex to prevent pregnancy, but not STD protection. (As you stated.) Guess they couldnt get the War on Men campaign to take off demanding free condoms. At least it would have prevented STDs.
The rape statement made by the two candidates were their statements and not Romneys. Yet the fear monger hawkers yelled it from the roof tops as if hed said it and pointed their accusing fingers.looklook they all think alike.
Todd Akin admitted he was wrong and had misunderstood how the female reproductive system works. Richard Mourdock was expressing his Catholic beliefs. His words were turned against him and applied to Romney.
Mr. Mourdock at least exhibited consistency on the issue, being opposed to abortion with only one exception, to save the life of the mother. On God and rape, the candidate said he was sorry his comments were twisted by critics. God creates life, and that was my point, he said Wednesday. God does not want rape, and by no means was I suggesting that He does.
Nevertheless, Democrats jumped on the comments as further proof that Murdock is an extremist.
“Gov. Romney disagrees with Richard Mourdock’s comments, and they do not reflect his views,” said Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/23/richard-mourdock-abortion_n_2007482.html
Chris: Furthermore, no one argued that the government should pay for women’s abortions–you just made that up.
No, I didnt make it up. Romney said cutting funding for abortions at Planned Parenthood would be on the table as apart of his budget cuts, because of the 40% were borrowing from China. His objective was to balance the budget not undo Roe vs. Wade as the Obama campaign insisted.
Obama himself even ratcheted up the War on Women agenda by taking Romneys budget cut statement by telling women they wouldnt be able to get mammograms at PPH any more, which was a lie since they dont do mammograms. According to Obama women are not only going to be forced to have children they dont want with the lose of abortions on demand, theyre now going to die from cancer from loosing a mammogram service that never existed. If thats not fear mongering Chris I dont know what could top it.
Democrats jump on Romney for vowing to end funding for Planned Parenthood:
Democratic groups are pouncing on Mitt Romney for saying he would stop funding Planned Parenthood with dollars borrowed from China, accusing the Republican presidential front-runner of cutting preventive health care services to pay for millionaires’ tax breaks.
Answering a question Tuesday about how he would cut the budget, Romney told a viewer of KSDK-TV in Kirkwood, Mo., that he would administer a test to see whether a program qualifies for federal funding.
“My test is pretty simple. Is the program so critical that it’s worth borrowing money from China to pay for? And on that basis, of course you get rid of Obamacare. That’s the easy one. But there are others. Planned Parenthood, we’re going to get rid of that. There’s a subsidy for Amtrak. I would eliminate that. National Endowment for the Arts, National Endowment for the Humanities. Both excellent programs but we just can’t afford to borrow money to pay for those things,” he said.
Shortly after the interview aired, the Democratic National Committee sprung into action, releasing a 30-second web video with Romney’s quote, followed by foreboding music and a black screen with lettered warning: “Cutting preventive health services for millions of women to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”
The DNC paired the video with a release saying Romney would rather borrow trillions of dollars from China for tax breaks for the wealthy even though “0.01 percent” of the federal budget goes to Planned Parenthood.
Discussing the outcome of Tuesday’s primaries, in which Rick Santorum won two big southern states but Romney still walked away with the most delegates, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz argued Romney says anything he can to win over the GOP.
“He did everything he could to pander to the far right wing of his party with extreme and out-of-touch positions like vowing to get rid of Planned Parenthood, as he did today,” she said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/14/democrats-jump-on-romney-for-vowing-to-end-funding-for-planned-parenthood/#ixzz2DRC6ha3o
FactCheck: Obama, Planned Parenthood and mammograms:
At the second presidential debate, President Obama said that women rely on Planned Parenthood for mammograms. Actually, mammograms are not performed at the clinics; Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses conduct breast exams and refer patients to other facilities for mammograms. Individual clinics sometimes provide more than referrals, arranging for mobile mammography vans.
Obama said: When Governor Romney says that we should eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, there are millions of women all across the country who rely on Planned Parenthood for not just contraceptive care. They rely on it for mammograms, for cervical cancer screenings.
Obama used a similar line again on Oct. 18, telling a Manchester, N.H., crowd: Governor Romney said hed end funding for Planned Parenthood, despite all the work it does to provide women with mammograms and breast cancer screenings.
Women cant walk into a Planned Parenthood clinic and get a mammogram on the spot. The clinics dont have mammography equipment. Planned Parenthood performs gynecological exams, including breast exams, and refers women to other facilities to have mammograms performed, much like women are referred to radiological centers by their gynecologists or primary care physicians.
Chris: We did argue that society would be better served if insurance plans covered contraception.
Insurance plans? Were talking tax payer funded, public subsidized coverage, not an individuals private insurance plan. Do you mean ObamaCare, which will be a combination of both private and public funded?
I believe there are more who do not believe, society would be better served by using our taxes to abort unborn children. We believe killing a child is wrong and using our money to do so is unacceptable. Life begins at conception. It should not be treated like its a germ or virus where medical intervention is used to kill it unless the life of the mother is in danger. Human beings give birth to human beings, nothing else.
Our current laws say if you or I killed an eagle we could be fined tens of thousands of dollars and even serve years in jail, but killing a child is acceptable and serves our society. If you and others dont soon see how wrong this is Chris there will be no civilized society.
Chris: To this well-reasoned argument, the loudest voice in the conservative movement responded by calling the messenger a “slut,” totally misrepresented her position, and indicated that he didn’t even understand how women’s birth control worked.
One conservative voice using the word slut to describe a woman who not only could afford her own birth control but demanded tax payers to pay for them against many more who used words like, whore cunt against conservative women and their CHILDREN doesnt even tip the scale of misrepresentation.
Chris: It is the right that has cooked up phony “wars,” such as the “War on Christmas,” the “War on Religion,” and class warfare against the rich (class warfare against the poor is totally OK with most conservatives these days).
Im not aware of any phony wars going on against Christmas and religion by the right, but am aware that the left has succeeded in getting religion removed from public schools, buildings and military cemeteries.
Texas Lawmaker Calls for Congressional Probe Into Ban of Christian Prayers at Military Funerals:
A Texas lawmaker is calling for a congressional investigation of the Houston National Cemetery after he went undercover and determined that cemetery officials are still preventing Christian prayers at the funerals of military veterans.
The Obama administration continues to try to prevent the word God from being used at the funerals of our heroes, said. Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas).
Its unacceptable and Im going to put a stop to it as fast as humanly possible, Culberson told Fox News Radio. He attended a burial service at the cemetery undercover on July 8, when he says he witnessed volunteer members of the honor guard from the Veterans of Foreign Wars being prohibited from using any references to God.
The Obama administration had told the nation and me they were not interfering with the prayer said over the graves of veterans, he said. And I went undercover to personally verify that claim. VA officials have strongly denied theyve banned any religious speech and have offered support for Arleen Ocasio, the cemeterys director.
Culberson said the commander of the honor guard was told by cemetery officials to approach a grieving widow to reconfirm that she wanted the word God mentioned at her husbands graveside service.
He quite correctly said as a Texan and a man of honor and integrity, Im not bothering that poor woman at this most terrible time of her life. Were going to do the ritual, Culberson said. Right in front of me, the VA directly and deliberately attempted to prevent the VFW from doing their magnificent, spiritual ritual over the grave of this fallen hero.”
The cemetery is already the focus of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the VFW, an American Legion post and Houstons National Memorial Ladies. They claim the VA banned members of the organizations from using the words God or Jesus at burial services.
It makes my skin crawl that liberals are attempting to drive prayer out of a funeral ceremony for our heroes, Culberson said. Were going to fix this so that no Obama liberal bureaucrat will interfere with the funeral of a hero.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/26/texas-lawmaker-calls-for-congressional-probe-into-ban-christian-prayers-at/#ixzz2DRgSYIsW
Chris, Since you brought up Jill Vecchio again Im attaching her 7 series videos where she clarifies her statements. Ive looked at a couple of them and will preserve further discussion until Ive watched them all. Suggest you do the same.
Dr. Jill Vecchio ObamaCare Video Series 1 of 7
http://www.lowercostcoverageblog.com/2012/03/06/dr-jill-vecchio-obama-video-series-1-of-7/
Chris: He was rated “pants on fire” when he said Obama was ending work-to-welfare:
Not true Chris. Other fact checkers found Romney to be correct and your source wrong.
The Truth About Obama and Welfare Reform:
They have a point. Romney claims that under the new Obama policy, “You wouldn’t have to work… They just send you your welfare check.” In fact, no such changes have been made. As written, the policy merely gives states more leeway in their enforcement of work rules, subject to federal approval.
But — and I know this will come as a surprise — the Romney camp also has a point. If the revision wouldn’t single-handedly cripple the work requirement, it “has opened the door to changes in welfare reform that could destroy it from within.” So concludes New York University political scientist Lawrence Mead, one of the experts whose research paved the way for the “workfare” law passed in 1996.
He’s not alone. Romney’s critics cite Brookings Institution analyst Ron Haskins, who as a Republican committee aide helped draft the historic welfare reform measure — and who favors granting states more latitude. But he also told The Fiscal Times that if the administration “wanted to undermine the work requirement,” the new policy “is a way to do it.”
Early in his career, Obama said he was no fan of the 1996 law that imposed strict work mandates on recipients.
Even Bill Clinton, who had promised to “end welfare as we know it,” vetoed two reform measures before signing this one over the objections of liberals. An HHS official who resigned in protest called it “the worst thing Bill Clinton has done.”
So it’s possible that some people in the government have never made their peace with work requirements and would like to weaken them. That’s the suspicion of Douglas Besharov, a public policy professor at the University of Maryland, who in 1996 helped persuade Hillary Clinton to support the law.
“If the Obama administration believes in work requirements, why write something so broad?” Besharov asked me. “If I believed in the work requirements, I wouldn’t put in language encouraging states to lift them all.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/08/26/the_truth_about_obama_and_welfare_reform_115208.html
Chris: And all of these lies were designed to scare voters. You asked for one example; I gave you ten.
You did not provide one issue that didnt have valid points of truth from Romney. Im not going to take the time to address the rest of them. The ones I did address prove it was Obama and his team who lied and not Romney and his team.
My previous statements stand on their merit and yours are all false validating Obama earned his Fearmonger in Chief title.
Forgot to respond to this part:
“A. Look up the word “becoming””
Tina, the UK has had universal healthcare since 1948. Despite this, Britain has somehow managed to go over sixty years without morphing into a Soviet-style dictatorship. In fact, as I recall, they were our allies against the Soviets, as were many other countries with universal healthcare. To say that all of those countries are interchangable with Communist nations would come as news to them. Especially since the NHS was founded by Winston Churchhill, a very outspoken anti-Communist.
Your fears are unfounded. The U.S. is not becoming like the Soviet Union. At most, you could argue that we are becoming more like the European social democracies. You may think that’s a bad thing, but crying Commie is not a convincing argument, and makes you look rather ignorant.
I find it ironic that the same people who give credit to Reagan for ending the Cold War, seem to think we lost it.
I repeat, Chris, look up the word “becoming”. You might also want to consider the word “warning”.
Dictatorship isn’t the main argument it is the condition of the people, the condition of the economy that sets a country up for dictatorship.
We didn’t lose the cold war. We lost the culture war at home. Reagan was the last of the great communicators in terms of our culture of freedom and entrepreneurial spirit and innovation. We have imbued our society with dependency and sloth, greed and low morals and we stupidly believe the solution is bigger government and more programs.
Take another look at Europe Chris, it is falling apart at the seams under the weight of socialism.
I don’t have time right now for the remainder of your response.
Tina: “I repeat, Chris, look up the word “becoming”.”
I repeat: The UK has had universal health care for over 60 years, and it still has not “become” a Communist nation, nor have any of the other countries with universal health care. So you have no basis for your ridiculous claim that the U.S. is becoming a Communist nation.
Peggy, you are right when you say that the debate over contraception is not about types of contraception that prevent STDs. I wasn’t thinking when I wrote that.
You say: “No, I didnt make it up. Romney said cutting funding for abortions at Planned Parenthood would be on the table as apart of his budget cuts,”
If he said that, he lied, because the law already prohibits funding for abortions.
“His objective was to balance the budget not undo Roe vs. Wade as the Obama campaign insisted.”
I understand it must have been hard for you to keep up with your candidate’s ever-shifting positions on this issue, Peggy. When Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he was pro-choice. But during this campaign, he repeatedly said he wanted Roe v. Wade repealed, and would pursue that goal as president.
In a Sept. 9 appearance on “Meet the Press,” Romney said he would “appoint justices for the Supreme Court that will follow the law and the constitution. And it would be my preference that they reverse Roe v. Wade and therefore they return to the people and their elected representatives the decisions with regards to this important issue.”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48959273/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/september-mitt-romney-ann-romney-julian-castro-peggy-noonan-ej-dionne-bill-bennett-chuck-todd/#.UHyAKGl27L4
Yet on October 11, Romney told the Des Moine Register he would not pursue any legislation related to abortion: Theres no legislation with regards to abortion that Im familiar with that would become part of my agenda.
Within two hours of the article’s posting, a spokesperson for Romney contradicted him, telling National Review Online that Romney “would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/mitt-romney-abortion_n_1952780.html
Later that month, another Romney spokesperson said that Roe v. Wade was “not going to be reversed” under a Romney presidency. The next day, he said he was only speaking for himself, and not on behalf of Romney.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/30/mitt-romney-roe-v-wade_n_2042922.html
So Romney did say he would try to get Roe v. Wade overturned, although he later contradicted himself. Still, his desire to overturn Roe v. Wade remained on his website:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/19/planned-parenthood/planned-parenthood-says-mitt-romney-and-george-all/
So your assertion that it was only the Obama campaign that insisted Romney wanted to undo Roe v. Wade is incorrect.
“Obama himself even ratcheted up the War on Women agenda by taking Romneys budget cut statement by telling women they wouldnt be able to get mammograms at PPH any more, which was a lie since they dont do mammograms.”
Obama never said that women “get” mammograms at Planned Parenthood. He said that many women “rely” on PP for mammograms. That may sound misleading, but it is technically correct, as the Fact Check article you quoted confirms:
“In addition to mammogram referrals, the group says it helps low-income patients find grants and assistance to pay for mammograms, such as through the National Breast and Cervical Cancer Early Detection Program, which is for women at or below 250 percent of the federal poverty level. Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania also has a Breast Health Care Fund, which helps patients obtain mammograms. Individual clinics also may occasionally sponsor no-cost mammogram events for instance, on Oct. 19, Planned Parenthood of Nassau County, N.Y., plans to sponsor free mammograms at a mammography van at the health center. In south-central New York, a state program parks its mobile van outside two Planned Parenthood clinics.”
“Insurance plans? Were talking tax payer funded, public subsidized coverage, not an individuals private insurance plan.”
The controversy was over both. Republicans not only wanted to block funding to Planned Parenthood, they wanted employers to be able to refuse to cover contraception in their employees’ insurance plans.
“Do you mean ObamaCare, which will be a combination of both private and public funded?”
As I understand it, the rule that employers must cover contraception in their employees’ insurance plans was part of Obamacare, so yes.
“I believe there are more who do not believe, society would be better served by using our taxes to abort unborn children.”
Our taxes do not go to fund abortion. That is against the law.
“Chris, Since you brought up Jill Vecchio again Im attaching her 7 series videos where she clarifies her statements. Ive looked at a couple of them and will preserve further discussion until Ive watched them all. Suggest you do the same.”
I honestly don’t have time to watch all of her videos, Peggy, and given her blatantly false statements in the past I don’t feel that it is worth my time to watch more. If she does correct her previous false statements about mammograms, let me know and I will reconsider.
“Not true Chris. Other fact checkers found Romney to be correct and your source wrong.”
Please, tell me which ones. The article you cited to support this claim does not cite any independent fact checkers.
“Im not going to take the time to address the rest of them.”
OK, but I’m still going to list the ones you did not address, for posterity:
-Mitt Romney lied when he said the health care bill would cause 20 million people to lose insurance.
-He lied when he said Obama was suing to restrict military voting.
-He got another “pants on fire” when he falsely accused Obama of selling Chrysler to Italians who would build cars in China.
-He lied when he said Obama provided $90 billion in breaks to green energy.
-He lied when he said Obama was putting a $4000 tax increase on middle class families.
Chris: “The UK has had universal health care for over 60 years, and it still has not “become” a Communist nation…”
Is it moving in the direction of freedom or socialism? Communal living or individuality?
Is the system they devised working well? Depends on who you ask but I have read so many stories of people receiving really bad care and people having to wait for months or years to get procedures done. The BBC (hardly a right wing paper) also reported:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18608969
Comments on the article were telling:
You might consider that it is the profit motive that pushes toward excellence in service and accommodation…the profit motive also serves as a self regulator. If a hospital or caregiver is terrible people will take their dollars elsewhere. As it turns out the profit motive also serves as an efficiency stimulator…people only make a profit when they run a well oiled operation that delivers good service at a reasonable price. When care givers have the freedom to say…we don’t do that but I will refer you to Dr Joe Cool down the street…they concentrate on what they can provide at a reasonable price.
Corporatism and social healthcare have ruined the private enterprise healthcare industry in America. Instead of seeing prices come down, as we do in other industries, prices continue to go up…mostly because government and certain healthcare insurers and providers made deals to force monopolies and control.
I notice that a lot of the people that abhor profits are the same people that go into professions where their own profits from wages and benefits are forced up through union pressure and intimidation and paid for by people making much less than they.
Profit is not a four letter word.
Chris: You say: “No, I didnt make it up. Romney said cutting funding for abortions at Planned Parenthood would be on the table as apart of his budget cuts,”
If he said that, he lied, because the law already prohibits funding for abortions.
Chris, Guess you missed my DNC video post above. Whether with direct or indirect funding PP is receiving
Federal funds to support their services. Doesnt matter if the funds pay for the building, the supplies or the salaries a portion or all of it goes to support abortion in one way or another. – The DNC “0.01 percent” of the federal budget goes to Planned Parenthood.
Shortly after the interview aired, the Democratic National Committee sprung into action, releasing a 30-second web video with Romney’s quote, followed by foreboding music and a black screen with lettered warning: “Cutting preventive health services for millions of women to pay for tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires.”
The DNC paired the video with a release saying Romney would rather borrow trillions of dollars from China for tax breaks for the wealthy even though “0.01 percent” of the federal budget goes to Planned Parenthood.
Chris: I understand it must have been hard for you to keep up with your candidate’s ever-shifting positions on this issue, Peggy. When Mitt Romney was governor of Massachusetts, he was pro-choice. But during this campaign, he repeatedly said he wanted Roe v. Wade repealed, and would pursue that goal as president.
In a Sept. 9 appearance on “Meet the Press,” Romney said he would “appoint justices for the Supreme Court that will follow the law and the constitution. And it would be my preference that they reverse Roe v. Wade and therefore they return to the people and their elected representatives the decisions with regards to this important issue.”
Chris, Its not hard to understand if you realize the difference between states right vs. federal limited powers per the Constitution. Abortion like health care are within the states scope of power to establish, but are beyond the power of the federal govt to mandate. Romney wasnt flip flopping, instead he was pointing out the difference.
Romney did not say he would overturn Roe v. Wade. Your Meet the Press post even says, will follow the law and the constitution. The law IS Roe v. Wade, therefore, Romneys statement was in support of it because it is the current law. Wikipedia makes his belief path very clear. , “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.”
Chris, Within two hours of the article’s posting, a spokesperson for Romney contradicted him, telling National Review Online that Romney “would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.”
Lets compare what Obamas spokesperson Ambassador Rice to Romneys staffer to see who was representing the facts, truth and beliefs of the individual they were representing. Now that would be a discussion worth having.
From Wikipedia:
Abortion
In a 1994 debate with Senator Ted Kennedy, Romney said: “One of the great things about our nation … is that we’re each entitled to have strong personal beliefs, and we encourage other people to do the same. But as a nation, we recognize the right of all people to believe as they want and not to impose our beliefs on other people. I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time that my mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law, and the right of a woman to make that choice, and my personal beliefs, like the personal beliefs of other people, should not be brought into a political campaign.”[251][252][253]
During the 2002 governor’s race, Romney’s platform stated, “As Governor, Mitt Romney would protect the current pro-choice status quo in Massachusetts. No law would change.”[254] The executive director of Massachusetts NARAL at the time, Melissa Kogut, stated that in her organization’s endorsement interview with Romney, he was “emphatic that the Republican Party was not doing themselves a service by being so vehemently anti-choice.”[255][256]
The Boston Globe on July 26, 2005 quoted Romney saying, “I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate.”[257] At the May 2007 Republican Presidential debate in South Carolina, Romney stated that “Roe v. Wade has gone to such an extent that we’ve cheapened the value of human life.” He followed by saying “the people should make [the abortion] decision, not the court.”[242] Romney’s spokesperson has indicated that had Romney been the governor of South Dakota, he would have signed into law the controversial law banning abortion, but he would include exceptions for cases of incest or rape, which the South Dakota law excludes.[258]
In statements after leaving the governorship, Romney expressed opposition to “partial birth” abortion.[108][259][260]
Campaigning in the presidential primaries in 2011, Romney declined to sign a pro-life pledge sponsored by the Susan B. Anthony List to support legislation ending all taxpayer funding of abortion, sign a law to “protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion,” and nominate judges and appoint executive branch officials who are pro-life. Romney’s spokeswoman said he could not sign the pledge because it could have unforeseen deleterious consequences. Romney himself wrote that, “It is one thing to end federal funding for an organization like Planned Parenthood; it is entirely another to end all federal funding for thousands of hospitals across America…. That is precisely what the pledge would demand and require of a president who signed it.” [261] He promised that nonetheless he would support pro-life legislation should it come before him as president,[262] such as a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy.[263][264]
During the general election campaign in October 2012, he said that as president, “There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m familiar with that would become part of my agenda.”[262] The following day, his campaign spokeswoman said that “Gov. Romney would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections for life.”[262]
While Romney would prefer to see passage of federal legislation or of a constitutional amendment that would outlaw abortion, he does not believe the public would support such measures;[265][266] as an alternative, he has promised to nominate Supreme Court justices who would help overturn Roe v. Wade, allowing the states to individually decide on the legality of abortion.[267]
Throughout the 2012 presidential campaign, Romney vowed that he would eliminate all federal funding for Planned Parenthood if elected.[268]
Chris: Please, tell me which ones. The article you cited to support this claim does not cite any independent fact checkers.
Ok Chris Ill bite and do one. Lets try, Mitt Romney lied when he said the health care bill would cause 20 million people to lose insurance.
CBO: Obamacare Could Make 20 Million People Lose Employer Based Insurance
The Congressional Budget Office and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation have prepared a new analysis of the ramifications of President Obama’s health care law on employer-based insurance. Outlining multiple scenarios for the ramifications of the act, based on the level of employer buy-in to shifting their employees to the exchanges, the CBO and JCT find that the number of Americans losing employer-based coverage could be dramatically larger than previously estimated.
Their analysis finds that approximately 3-5 million people will lose their employer based insurance under what they view as the likeliest outcome of the law, noting that “because of the ACA, about 3 million to 5 million fewer people, on net, will obtain coverage through their employer each year from 2019 through 2022 than would have been the case under prior law.”
Up to 20 million people could lose this employer-based insurance in 2019 under a more drastic scenario:
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2012/03/15/cbo-obamacare-could-make-20-million-people-lose-employer-based-insuranc
While Politifacts rates this as mostly false it does allow for possible projected truth. Also, since the 20 million is based on employer provided insurance I dont think they considered the spouses and children who will also lose coverage along with the employee.
Chamber of Commerce claims 20 million people will lose their current coverage because of health care reform:
Our ruling
The U.S. Chamber said, “Obamacare could cause 20 million people to lose their current coverage.” It’s a claim that is oft-repeated and much exaggerated.
The chamber employs a worst-case projection by a nonpartisan research agency. The agencys other forecasts are lower, but you wouldnt know that from watching the ad. And unlike Priebus, the group does not specify that the type of insurance potentially affected is a specific type of insurance — “employer-based” insurance.
Plus, this 20 million estimate only counts people who receive coverage from their employer — and not those who might receive better coverage elsewhere.
Most importantly, this figure does not represent uninsured people who will get coverage because of the law.
We rate it Mostly False.
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/may/21/us-chamber-commerce/chamber-commerce-claims-20-million-people-will-los/
Here is the actual CBO report where it clearly states the projected 20 million is within the range of lose.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-15-ACA_and_Insurance_2.pdf
There, I did one more and proved Romney did not lie as you indicated. Take off your liberal filter Chris and open your mind to the possibility that his statements were fact based and the liberal biased media altered the facts to use them against him. Im very surprised that someone like you who constantly demands the truth all of the time believed what you were being fed instead of doing the research yourself.
The rest are up to you to prove or disprove. Ive done my job, you can do the rest on your list if you really want to know the truth.