If through negotiations on the payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, etc, Obama can get $300 billion in net federal deficit spending increase, then unemployment rate will continue to come down through the summer - we'll be talking in the Fall of an Obama re-election blow-out.

Team Obama will try to "pay for" the increased spending through "out-year" adjustments in order to get the net 2012 increase in net deficit spending.

GOP is in a political box of not allowing tax cuts (more so) and unemployment benefits (less so). They will try to reduce overall federal deficit spending elsewhere - probable attempt big cut to federal workforce and to programs for the poor like WIC among other things.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Maybe believing that abortion is wrong, but thinking that contraception is ok, is a good combination.
I agree with those who have said that it's about taking responsibility for your actions.

Obviously there is very little excuse for unwanted pregnancies nowadays. I know no birth control method is foolproof, but I can't understand why the right wing is so opposed to it.

Originally Posted by radind

Originally Posted by summer in the fall

Those were the statistics I used. Of the religions in South Korea, Christianity is the dominant one. And if you know anything about South Koreans, they are extremely evangelical. So it is a rising number (as opposed to the declining number in Western countries who are non-religious or affiliated only in name).

Best...

except for the religion of None

Then perhaps you want to have a philosophical discussion on religion or play another game of semantics.

Originally Posted by playwrite

--
GOP is in a political box of not allowing tax cuts (more so) and unemployment benefits (less so). They will try to reduce overall federal deficit spending elsewhere - probable attempt big cut to federal workforce and to programs for the poor like WIC among other things.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/pay...MW_latest_news

Pay-freeze politics trip up payroll-tax talks

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Opposition to a pay freeze for federal workers tripped up talks about extending a payroll-tax cut Tuesday, exposing deep divisions between Democrats and Republicans about how to fund the soon-to-expire break.

this might be another (and counter-intuitive) piece that is boxing the GOP in from squashing Team Obama's effort to inject more dollars into the economy (and keep positive employment trend going to assure re-election) -

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/inv...its-2012-02-07

Investors demanding larger government deficits

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Investors around the world are concerned about the U.S. government’s deficits. They are worried that they aren’t big enough.

and it looks like the business mass media might be finally getting it -

But there’s also danger in acting too rashly, the CBO said. In fact, the actions the Congress has already taken to reduce the deficit could cripple the economy, and possibly ignite a short recession a year from now.

If Congress goes ahead with the deficit reduction plans already in motion, the CBO projects that economic growth would be mediocre at about 2.2% this year before braking to 1% next year. Growth is expected to be negative in the first quarter of 2013.

- if that meme gets going it will futher box-in the GOP

Originally Posted by summer in the fall

But my Child of Socrates, you really should have added the latter part of this quote...

Sorry. The flippin' sig box will only accommodate so many characters. ::sigh::

Originally Posted by Earl and Mooch

Right now, Romney's Facebook missives (which my wife subscribes to) are framing this as a religious liberty issue.

I consider it as much a matter of religious liberty as the Catholic pharmacists who sued their employer a few years ago, claiming the right not to be required to dispense birth control. My answer to that is to find another line of work. When I was working as a cashier at Roy Rogers a couple of decades ago, there is no way I could have refused to ring up coffee and kept my job.

There you go. Great example. Another is the use of my tax dollars to purchase right-wing political books for the public library. I don't agree with the views expressed in those books. However, the overriding principle of intellectual freedom applies. One of the first things I learned in library school was that at least 20% of your collection should personally offend you.

The comments on Andrew Sullivan's blog (he didn't actually write them, David, since he's on vacation this week) really do a great job of illustrating my earlier point: you cannot control what other people do with the money you give to them, whether it's through taxation or voluntary donation. Maybe part of someone's Social Security check is going up their nose. Maybe some of those donations people give to the Red Cross pad some office flunky's pocket and don't really go to helping anyone.

So what's the alternative? Withhold all charitable giving because one person somewhere might be abusing it? I don't think so. You put accountability measures in place and hope to minimize the abuse as much as possible.

From Think Progress -- Romney Campaign Spins Low Turn Out: Voters Staying At Home Secretly Support Romney:

With just 33,000 voters showing up to the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, Republicans may be quietly concerned about a lack of enthusiasm for their candidates — and especially front-runner Mitt Romney — after another primary state produces lower-than-expected turnout.

But not former New Hampshire governor John Sununu. The Romney campaign surrogate appeared on MSNBC this morning and offered a novel interpretation of the low figures:

SUNUNU: In an odd sense when turnout is down, contrary to what you are hearing, people are satisfied with the winning and the candidate that’s winning. They are satisfied with Mitt Romney.

Originally Posted by pizal81

Yeah, I disagree with the Catholics as far as contraception goes. I don't really understand the logic. I know they believe some falsehoods about sex being inherently evil thus celibate priests are somehow less sinful. The contraception fallacy must steam from that.

I'm not sure if it's sex in and of itself. Procreative sex is fine. Recreational sex, not so much.

Originally Posted by summer in the fall

Then perhaps you want to have a philosophical discussion on religion or play another game of semantics.

no games , no semantics

Paul Ryan is prepared to make sure that the momentum built last year in favor of entitlement reform continues through 2012, and insists that bold action is still yet to come.


After the release of last year's "Roadmap to America's Future," Rep. Ryan became a major power player in the Republican party, and has no plans on slowing his full-throated attack on the coming entitlement tide of red ink. "We only have two or three years before we get into a very, very ugly debt crisis," he said on a conference call today.
In a preview of his upcoming CPAC speech, Ryan laid out how his vision contrasts with President Obama's.

Now some folks are going to say Ryan has moved to the left since his last fiasco by getting Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) to co-sponsor his lastest proposal. However, given how fast the Dems distance themselves from this last Fall, I think Wyden may have been used to set the trap.

If the House GOP rolls this out in the summer, it won't matter if Marc Rubio is on the ticket or not - the GOP will lose FL and any other state with high percentage of retirees.

Originally Posted by The Rani

The right wing is opposed to birth control? I've never heard that one before.
As many people have noted on this thread, even most Catholics don't have a problem with it.

The Personhood USA movement that some of the Christian Right support would pull into question many contraceptives.

The beginning of human personhood is a concept long debated by religion and philosophy. In contemporary global thought, once humans are born, personhood is considered automatic. However, personhood could also extend to late fetuses and neonates, dependent on what level of thought is required. With respect to abortion, 'personhood' is a term used to describe the status of a human being having individual human rights. The term was used by Justice Blackmun in Roe v. Wade.^[16] However, the distinction in ethical value between currently existing persons and potential future persons has been questioned.^[17] Subsequently, it has been argued that contraception and even the decision not to procreate at all could be regarded as immoral on a similar basis as abortion.^[18]

Personhood protest in front of the United States Supreme Court


A political movement in the United States seeks to define the beginning of human personhood as starting from the moment of fertilization, with the consequence that abortion, as well as forms of birth control that prevent implantation of the embryo, could become illegal.^[19][20] Supporters of the movement also state that it would have effects on the practice of in-vitro fertilization.^[21]

The principal organization within this movement is Personhood USA, a Colorado-based umbrella group with a number of state-level affiliates^[22] which describes itself as a nonprofit Christian ministry^[23] and seeks to ban abortion, embryonic stem cell research and human cloning.^{[citation needed]} Personhood USA was founded by the anti-abortion campaigner Keith Mason in 2008 following the failure of an attempt by the Colorado for Equal Rights campaign to establish a state constitutional personhood amendment.^{[citation needed]}

Opponents of the movement regard it as an attempt by the pro-life movement to circumvent the Roe v. Wade U.S. Supreme Court decision by indirect means,^[24] without exceptions even in the case of rape or incest.^[22] Some medical organizations have described the potential effects of personhood legislation as potentially harmful to patients and the practice of medicine, particularly in the cases of ectopic and molar pregnancy.^[25]

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Originally Posted by summer in the fall

But my Child of Socrates, you really should have added the latter part of this quote...

Sorry. The flippin' sig box will only accommodate so many characters. ::sigh::

That's OK. Even the scene from Akeelah and the Bee only used a fraction of it.

Cheers.

Karen Handel Resigns From Komen Foundation

So sad.

But hey, thanks Karen for turning one of the few entities trying to make a difference and save womens' lives into just another battle ground for your culture wars.

Next stop, Faux News contributor, I'm sure.

Don't let the door slam you on the ass on your way out, _itch.

I don't think Bernanke is actually on Team Obama but he does attempt to deal with reality and that will naturally be supportive since the other team is a bunch of nitwits.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...pmwQ_blog.html

Ben Bernanke: Growth now, deficit reduction later

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told legislators Tuesday that sharp spending cuts and tax increases scheduled to take effect in early 2013 could slow the recovery if federal officials do not take further action.
Despite the recent upturn in the jobs market, Bernanke acknowledged that “the pace of the recovery has been frustratingly slow” and warned legislators against impeding near-term growth in the name of cutting the long-term deficit, reiterating arguments he made before the House Budget Committee last week.


In his testimony, Bernanke described his modestly optimistic outlook for 2012, saying that Fed officials “expect somewhat stronger growth this year than in 2011.” According to last week’s jobs report, the United Staters added 243,000 jobs in January, bringing the unemployment rate down to 8.3 percent, defying many forecasts. Bernanke singled out the revival of manufacturing as a significant factor in leading the recovery. “US manufacturers have become increasingly competitive on global stage,” he said, crediting the country’s leadership in education, research, and technology.

But Bernanke raised concerns that a sharp, immediate push to reduce the deficit could harm the recovery in the upcoming months. In January 2013, he pointed out, the Bush tax cuts will expire, and the major spending reductions triggered by the Budget Control Act will take effect, absent any further action by Congress. As a result, “there will be sharp change in fiscal stance of the federal government. Without compensating action, it would indeed slow the recovery,” Bernanke told the committee members.

However, Sen. Pete Sessions (R-Ala.), the highest-ranking Republican on the committee, pressed Bernanke to answer whether the country’s current deficit was itself holding back the recovery and discouraging key market players. “They’re not reacting to the current level of debt. What they’re attentive to is the process,” Bernanke said, pointing to the political dysfunction that lead to the Standard & Poor’s downgrade of the US credit rating last year.
Instead, Bernanke recommended that legislators come up with a deficit reduction plan phased in over a longer period of time to reduce the risk of immediate shocks to a still-vulnerable economy while promoting a more sustainable fiscal path. “What we want to do is have a credible, strong plan so that the economy doesn’t hit a huge pothole,” he said.

Bernanke also defended the Fed’s policy of keeping interest rates at historically low levels. Last month, the Federal Open Market Committee announced that it expected to keep interest rates at near zero through late 2014. During the hearing, Republican senators raised concerns that the Fed’s strategy would lead to runaway inflation. Bernanke pointed out that inflation had remained relatively low throughout his tenure and expected that trend would continue. “Our projections are that inflation will be very subdued—probably below our 2 percent target in 2012 and 2013

Speaking of nitwits, look at the last paragraph with GOP concerns for inflation. Who votes for these guys??? Oh, I forgot, around half of our population are nitwits.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Which is a lot different than saying "the right wing is so opposed to it."
How many people do you know personally who think that contraception is a sin?
I know exactly one.
(And even that person doesn't try and apply his standards to others.)

wow, that's scientific!

My mom told me she regrets adhering to the Church's position on contraceptives

- I wasn't sure how to take that....

Something most of us agree upon; Contraception is a very good thing. Something that is never addressed and very much ignored is, Obama basically lied to the Catholic leaders. He got their support through promises, then betrayed them after he got what he wanted. But then, I guess it's just those mean old Catholic leaders who are the only one's wrong in this case.

Here's the reality of the situation:

Among all women who have had sex, 99% have ever used a contraceptive method other than natural family planning. This figure is virtually the same, 98%, among sexually experienced Catholic women.

So once again it's the 99% against the 1%, perhaps?

Originally Posted by Deb C

Something most of us agree upon; Contraception is a very good thing. Something that is never addressed and very much ignored is, Obama basically lied to the Catholic leaders. He got their support through promises, then betrayed them after he got what he wanted. But then, I guess it's just those mean old Catholic leaders who are the only one's wrong in this case.

What exactly are you pushing for? You just acknowledged that the Catholic leaders are wrong.

Originally Posted by ziggyX65

I really wish the debate would center around a term other than "fair share" of taxes. I think as long as someone is paying what they legitimately owe, they ARE paying their fair share according to tax law.

I may think certain types and levels of income should be a bit higher, but that's different than whether Romney and others in his situation are "paying their fair share." IMO, unless they are engaged in criminal tax evasion, and they are paying what the law requires, they are. It doesn't mean support for the status quo.

Plus, the "pay their fair share" meme does sound a little too much like whiny class envy politics, and I don't think that's productive.

H-m-m-m. Paying what is legally owed and what is fair are two entirely different concepts. Arguing that special dispensation is due the earnings generated by wealth argues that work is less valued inour economy. That's a fairness argument. Even Hoover's Secretary of the Treasury, Andrew Mellon, weighed in against special benefits for captital, favoring lower rates for work ... the exact opposite of today. Andrew Mellon!

Originally Posted by The Rani

I think you know exactly how to take it.
Is your mom a right-winger?

If you have scientific data on the subject to share, please do!

She's to the Right of me. Which still keeps her to the Left of Karl Marx - who I believe is my secret baby-daddy.

I checked with my two older sisters. They agreed with mom that she should have not adhered to the Church's stand on contraceptives immediately after they were born. Hmmm, I beginning to see the picture.

Unfortunately, that's a 100% response rate and that's pretty scientific.

Another reality check:

Here's another thing that the GOP can run against and "Bail-out Obama" should rot in hell for -

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- An Obama administration lending program set up to funnel cash to small banks was expected to cost taxpayers $1.3 billion. Instead, it will turn a profit of $80 million.

How dare he turn yet another profit for us taxpayers!!!! That is so unAmerican!!!


Next thing you know, he'll save the US automanufacturers and 1.3 million jobs and get some commie like Clint Eastwood to tell us we're coming back in the second half!!!

Oh, wait, ah, ah, never mind.

http://www.5min.com/Video/Chrysler--...cial-517263677



Nay, we need forward-thinking leaders like this -

Let Detroit Go Bankrupt - M. Romney, 11/18/2008

Originally Posted by summer in the fall

What exactly are you pushing for? You just acknowledged that the Catholic leaders are wrong.

I thought I was pretty clear in what I wrote about the hierarchy being wrong in insisting on no birth control. Hierarchy is different than the leaders who were urged to come to the White House to be convinced, for their support of the health care bill, that the new rules would not affect their belief system. Obama basically used them in the pursuit of getting the bill passed. Now, the very thing that he promised them wouldn't happen, has now become a mandate.

Originally Posted by The Rani

I'm not sure if this was addressed to me, but that's not what I'm saying at all.
My comment about most people not thinking that contraception is wrong was addressed specifically to the comment "right wingers oppose birth control," which is false.
I agree with you that the government has no business telling a religious organization what is "right" or "wrong," and yeah if Obama said one thing then did another that's pretty much par for the course for his presidency.

I wasn't addressing my post to your comments. It was in response to a new found nemesis, the Catholic Church, by some on the left who can not or will not see that Obama was crooked in his dealings with the Catholic Hospital Association.