Monday, 6/11/12, Public Square

14 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

14 responses to “Monday, 6/11/12, Public Square

  1. With all this talk of family values, you think legislators might start focusing on families instead of uteruses?

    • Wow – Pakistan offers 12 weeks and the USA offers Zero – Nada – Zilch?

      Excuse me if I am wrong – but isn’t Pakistan filled with those evil Muslims our Radical Christians keep yammering about?

      It seems the Muslims care more about their families than these Christians do – huh?

      • bobwhite

        I think, actually, Christians are a very big problem at least in the US. And I’m a Christian! I also find much in the Bible to condemn Christians about; and even more in our churches. I wish Christians would take what Jesus had to say, seriously.

      • Bob – don’t get me started on my feelings towards these Evangelical Christian Republicans. I graduated from one of their Fundamental Baptist Colleges in 1975. This was a few years before Reagan invited Jerry Falwell into the inner circle of the GOP. And in that gesture – Reagan started the implosion of the Republican Party.

        Also – since my college graduation – I have found most of these Evangelical Christians to be a somehwhat Dog and Pony Show type of Christian.

        My theory is – the bigger the monuments with the golden cross in front – the more sinners are inside that merely get patted on their hate-filled heads and told that the ‘other guy’ is the problem – not them.

        But this strategy works wonders for the collection plate – and those mega church preachers sure do dress nice and drive those fancy-ass cars.

  2. What do the words ‘family values’ mean to republicans?

    • Before talking about ‘family values’ – can we first determine what a family is?

      All I ever hear from Republicans is this idea of family is ONLY a heterosexual couple – married and with 2.5 children all with blonde hair and blue eyes.

      I don’t see family as being one cookie-cutter thing – do you?

      I’ve known families that are made up of non-blood related people who have come together and made a committment to be a family. And it works for them….

      I’ve known families that are the Republican-version of a family – and it does not work for them..

      So – bottom line – is a family really JUST one thing – that heterosexual married couples with 2.5 children?

      The proof is in the pudding…….as my grandma used to say..

      • As for own personal definition of a family? — Any group of people that are seeking the security, companionship and the unconditional love that being in a family offers.

        I could care less if you’re blood related or not.

        I could care less what color your skin is or what your religion is or whether you’re heterosexual or homosexual.

        What I do care about is that everyone needs – and deserves – to be loved and to be a part of a family.

        For all these unwanted children being born and placed in foster homes – wouldn’t you think these Republican Christians who keep yammering about ‘family values’ would start adopting some of these kids and give them a family?

        No – alot of these Christians will go outside the country and buy (excuse me – adopt ) some kid from foreign countries. I recently learned that Guatamala is one of the more popular countries to get a kid of your choosing. I personally know of alot of Christian Republicans (all white people) who have chosen this route – they even have a support group.

        I’ve often wondered – are these people adopting the kid because they truly LOVE the kid and want to give a kid a home – or is it another dog and pony show?

        Motivation tells alot about a person. For example – I have a dear friend who is a devout Catholic. She is the type that when she gives something – she wants everybody to know what she gave and to whom it was given. The same is true when she does something for someone in need. She makes sure that everybody knows it was HER that did the deed.

        In my opinion – that is not true giving – is it?

        Motivation tells alot about a person – doesn’t it?

  3. Since the average family’s net worth took a downturn of this drastic proportion – then I wonder – did Romney’s net worth also fall – or did he get an uptake in his wealth?

    http://economywatch.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/11/12170847-report-shows-carnage-downturn-caused-to-families-net-worth?lite

    • Obama’s recent comment that the private sector is doing fine – is sure being made into something that I think Obama did not mean.

      When I hear that companies are sitting on trillions of dollars in cash and corporations are making record-breaking profits – then I agree with Obama – the private sector must be doing fine.

      But I wonder – if we took away all those special Bush tax cuts and government subsidies – how well do you think the private sector sitting on those trillions would really be?

      • As compared to the public sector is all he meant. Obama’s whole point was about needing to hire more teachers, policemen, fire fighters, people to do maintenance and improvement work on infrastructure. Hiring public sector employees is a sure bet to improve the economy at the state and national levels! That’s also why the republicans are acting like economic idiots. They don’t want the economy improved.

        During the Reagan, Bush1 and Bush2 economies we had much milder recessions and all three added public sector jobs to stimulate the economy and keep Americans employed and paying taxes instead of needing help from the government trough. They know how it’s done, they’ve done it successfully time and again. But this time it wouldn’t serve their purpose, it wouldn’t accomplish their goal of making Obama a one-term president so to hell with America and Americans. They have a goal and it doesn’t involve doing anything that will help!

        It Romney is elected the very first thing he will do is exactly what Obama is saying needs to be done — add public sector jobs. If Romney has a republican majority in the House (which seems likely) he will get it done and we’ll see the economy bounce back. Under Romney, however, it won’t last. Because soon into his second year or so he’ll enact those even bigger tax cuts for the wealthiest, he’ll cut even more social programs for the most vulnerable and only the haves and have mores will be doing fine. He’ll start a war here and there and the poorer people will be employed to put their lives on the line so the military industrial machine can reap profits.

      • You are giving Romney more credit than I am willing to give him – because I do not think Romney plans to put on more public sector jobs. Romney likes it just the way it is – his buddies are doing fine. They’re the ones sitting on those trillions of dollars in cash and they could care less about America and their fellow Americans.

        I truly think the Republicans are out to destroy the middle class (Reagan started this damn War on the Middle Class).

        But that goes with Romney’s church teachings. After all – only Mormons will be allowed on the top level of Heaven and all non-Mormons will be the servants to the Mormons.

        I’ve done research on Mormonism – and it is not looking good for anyone other than a Mormon – preferably a wealthy one, at that.

        But – I want to be in the front row seat to see all these Fundy Evangelical Christians when they are told that they will only be allowed as high as the second level of Heaven because they are not Mormons. THEN I want to see the faces of Pat Robertson, Falwell’s kid, Franklin Graham adn the rest of these smug Evangies when they are told that THEY are the servants to the Mormons.

        That might just make all this nonense worth it……LMAO

      • Romney cares a great deal about himself! He’ll say and do anything it takes to be elected, and if elected he will protect his legacy. I’m not saying he will worry about Americans, but in the beginning I think he would be forced to be sensible or he would be stuck with the reputation of the president who finally took America down to where she couldn’t ever recover. He might be able to do both — use some sense to stabilize the economy before he begins raping and pillaging the poor and middle class.

        I hope it’s nothing we see! I don’t want to be able to say “I told you so.” But if he is elected I feel strongly he will add government (public sector) jobs. And his constituency will praise him. It will be like today never happened, like neither Romney nor any of them ever criticized adding public sector jobs as a way to stimulate the economy.

      • If Romney cared about his legacy – he would not be going around bragging about his Bain Capital pillaging. Just listen to those ads where working people lost their jobs and their pensions when Bain Capital came in and used the tax system and government subsidies to pump the value of these companies up and then bankrupted them – on purpose – so that Bain could walk away with millions.

        Anyone who is proud of that type of vulture capitalism – does not seem to care about any legacy – IMHO.

        Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry had Romney nailed to the wall as that ‘vulture capitalist’.