1. Good, marriage "is" defined as one man and one women. Hopefully we can get a congress and senate in place to make this the law of the land.

2. End abortion, stop killing babies. Enough said.

Regarding the tax cuts, Heres an idea lets get congress to STOP SPENDING our money. Tax cuts don't cost anything. We need to cut the usless programs which people claim they can't live without. Here's a novel idea; how about the 47% who pay nothing except the tax on thier booze and cigarets pay their fair share.

Robert, I know it would be impossible to change your mind... and I do respect your straightforwardness...here are a couple of quotes to ponder.

Libertarian perspectives on abortion "A fetus does not have a right to be in the womb of any woman, but is there by her permission. This permission may be revoked by the woman at any time, because her womb is part of her body... There is no such thing as the right to live inside the body of another, i.e. there is no right to enslave... a woman is not a breeding pig owned by the state (or church). Even if a fetus were developed to the point of surviving as an independent being outside the pregnant woman's womb, the fetus would still not have the right to be inside the woman's womb."

Libertarian perspectives on marriage "Any government involvement in marriage violates the separation of church and state because marriage is a set of religious ceremonies and regulations. Churches, as private associations, have complete ability to define the requirements for marriage, and any consenting adults should be free to take part in any such ceremonies they wish. If those individuals enter into a contract to define their marriage, then the government must enforce the laws binding that contract. The government has no legitimate reason to recognize marriages or civil unions with any benefits or taxpayer money.  But until these benefits are phased out, the government must not restrict which consenting individuals take part in those benefits."

@Scot Beaton,

Regarding your perspectives on what Libertarians perspecitves are, are just that.

Many of us are delighted with the choice of Paul Ryan, many of us are disgusted that abortion is still used as a means of birth control. Many of us are tired of welfare with no work requirements. Many of us are tired of the bad economy and we don't continue to blame George Bush. Many of us are upset that more people per month are getting approved for Social Security disability payments than are finding jobs.

Obama is going to get creamed this november 6th. He has always had the black vote but with his approval of gay marriage, many religious blacks will stay home and not vote.He has upset Catholics big time ( don't need to explain that one) and will not carry their majority this time. He has upset soccer Mom's because they are worried about feeding their family and having their husbands keep their jobs along with no pay raises for the past 4 years. He has upset Hispanics who are Catholic and against gay marriage. And he has upset Jew's with his obvious anti Israel views.

Scot, your coments are just weird.

Robert... I'd rather be weird than live on the edge of ternary or creating a one note authoritarian society. The Far Right-Christian-Conservative has hijacked the GOP and the GOP will lose this election. Robert I'll give you weird -- ponder this statement -- Robert the disagreement I have with you is how much time either one of us are going to spend in purgatory. Some advice... get off the creepy Michele Bachmann, Rick Santorum, Sarah Palin bandwagon. God does not like people who judge others... LGBT should be allowed all the same rights including marriage -- and women don't need government telling them what they can and can not do with their bodies.

SCOOBYDOO... "Obama is going to get creamed this November 6th. He has always had the black vote but with his approval of gay marriage, many religious blacks will stay home and not vote." Not true the "black vote" will bite their tongue -- hold their nose and vote Obama -- and many in the GOP will do the same and vote for Mitt Romney's Far Right-Christian-Conservative ticket... but there are more Democrats than Republicans. Whats disturbing -- down right fighting is how many votes Obama will buy... this election.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/04/22/americas-ever-expanding-welfare-empire/ 
America's Ever Expanding Welfare Empire -- by Peter Ferrara, Forbes Magazine

I'm an marketing guy -- I have worked for about every major Advertising Agency in town -- the GOP myopic social agenda the alienates independent voters will kill any GOP chance this election taking back the White House.

SCOOBYDOO note: U.S. Political Party Identification of Jews 2012 -- More than two in three Jews, 68%, either identify as Democrats or lean toward the Democratic Party. 28% of Jews are either Republican or lean Republican, and 4% are independents with no partisan leanings. Again -- they will bite their tongue -- hold their nose and vote Obama.

Scot, i am a Christian, not a Catholic, so am saved by the blood of Christ and do not bow down to made places such as purgatory. Regarding your highjacked statement; what's wrong with morals and honest living? Abortion is death, killing, the ending of anothers life. My God tells me that there is a time for death, consider war and execution of convicted criminals. But where does your god say its ok to kill a baby? Someone found not guilty of amy crime. And by the way gays do have the same rights as we do. I have no more right to marry another man sthan they do. What they want is "special rights", above those which every other citizen has. One more thing to add Soctt, dosn't tolerance include Christian views? You socialist tend to forgoet that one.

Scot, forgot this one. Why is is ok for the government to tell me what i have to do with my money, but not ok for them to tell people what to do with their sexlives and bodies?

Robert, thanks for your response -- I was having fun with the purgatory comment -- you could be in big trouble you're only left with two options. Question, Catholics are not Christians -- where did you learn that -- FOXnews. Now that you have brought up Jesus Christ, I feel obligated to defend his principles. As you get to know me, your going to find out I'm a real stickler for facts.

New Testament: Jesus Christ did not denounce or promote homosexual behavior. The only place Jesus really addressed or even hinted at sexuality is found in Mathew chapter 19:11-12 Jesus replied "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. For some are eunuchs because they were born that way; others were made that way by men; and others have renounced marriage because of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it." A eunuch is a man who has no desire or ability to have sexual relations with a woman. Jesus addressed three types of eunuchs. -- 1) Those born that way. --That's people who are born homosexual. -- 2) Those made that way by men. -- Those castrated or those sexually abused people who choose to be homosexual as a result of this abuse rather than because it is their natural sexual affinity.-- 3) Those who elect not to have a sexual relationship for the sake of the kingdom. -- For example a priest or nun. This group makes the decision on their own. -- to be continued...

-- So here, Jesus states that not everyone will marry according to the custom as male and female. He also said that not everyone can accept this. He says that those that can accept it should accept it. Robert can we accept what Jesus said? I can.

Old Testament: Genesis the story of "Lot's House" has been misinterpreted into teachings that God denounces homosexual behavior. Not true the story refers to homosexual rape. It clearly doesn't have the remotest connection to same-gender love or relationships. Or Leviticus 18:22 & 20:13 "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination. If man lies with a male as with woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death." Again this is not God's denouncing homosexual behavior... but related to the worship of Ishtar the pagan goddess of love and fertility. It was a condemnation of such practices... pagan rituals such as mandated sex between males or temple prostitution... that this Levitical law was written. It certinaly does not make any reference to same-gender sex within the context of a committed and loving relationship.

So Robert -- a friendly suggestion learn the teaching of Jesus Christ from the Bible and not from the Sean Hannity show on FOXnews. P.S. "gays do have the same rights as we do" your quote, Robert they don't -- please in the future try not to minimize their lives.

Robert, "You're socialist tend to forget that one." your quote, Love your name calling -- first weird and now I'm a socialist -- I'll except weird -- but a socialist... please read my biography in the Rochester Patch http://rochester.patch.com/users/scot-beaton

Robert, have you ever taken the time to read Rick Santorum book -- If elected president of the United States, he would have done everything he could have to turn this country into a -- twisted version of a middle age Christianity theocracy -- like Islamic Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Robert is this really what you want America to become? Did I ever say "god says it's ok to kill a baby" -- NO -- but to reverse women's rights in the country would be wrong! -- that's why it's called Pro-choice.

Robert, I don't know what government tells me what I can and can not do with my money -- except 'Obamacare' -- I make money and pay a taxes just like everyone else. And please spare me you're not serious why would want to live in a country that would regulate what you can and cannot do in your bedroom.

@ Scot,

"I'm an marketing guy"

Some of us speak as if we are smarter than everyone else, but ? Have a nice day !

@Scot,

Please quit playing "make believe" , you fool no one my friend and make yourself look foolish. Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13 make no mention of Ishtar and those two verses are very clear in what they state. As well, the name "Ishtar" is not in the Bible so what is your point besides trying to defend yourself. Does not matter if the gay relationship was loving or not, it is condemned in the Bible, period.

SCOOBYDOO... you're going to get me on a typo -- that's all you have?
"I'm an marketing guy" -- I'll stand corrected I'm a marketing guy. P.S. as a kid I grew up with a handicap called dyslexia -- actually stated drawing before speaking -- what is pretty cool though is Einstein had it too. SCOOBYDOO, you do prove a point the only bullets you have in an intelligent discussion is to name call and bully. Have a nice day too.

SCOOBYDOO, As you also get to know me, your going to find out I'm a real stickler for facts. When you have time read the link. A Few Myths and Simple Facts Regarding the Bible & Same-Gender Relationships. By Mark Elias http://www.opendoorcenter.com/myths_&_facts.htm

P.S. If you don't like that one I'll send you a hundred more.

Actually Scot I looked you up earlier and have been trying to figure you out. Your clearly some sort of gay activist. I can see this for your record of contributions. Does your wife Patricia know this? Your resister as a republican, but have no rational or moral conviction. You claim to know the Bible, but clearly worship a god of your own making; one that does not find disgust with a man who lays with another man, and one who's ok with murder so long as its an innocent child. Not much more to say Scot Beaton. I certainly would never hire your ad agency for a marketing event. But I'm sure there are enough degenerates out there to keep you busy.

Question: Why has the Grand Old Party... the Party of Lincoln that freed the slaves -- has become the Party of judgment of others -- and continues to ignore "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Robert: If you support this principle then you support equal rights for all -- including LGBT rights and the rights of women. I know this may be difficult for you to comprehend but there are married heterosexual couples that support LGBT rights. She also supports LGBT rights. Advertising clients don't know don't care what their sexual preference is. I did register as a Republican years back to run a race against Tom McMillin for state house. I had the endorsement of all the major papers, The Republican Liberty Caucus and the former State Representative -- lost the race because Tom is brilliant at riling up the far-right-wing vote in the Republican party -- if I'm still on a 'list' that is the choosing of the Republican Party.

Scot, why would you think I do not care about rights for women? I've said absolutely nothing about taking rights away from women. If you’re referring to my staunch anti-abortion views then you’re mis-guided. It’s not about a women’s right to chose, it’s about life or death. Simply put would a man have the right to end a pregnancy because he doesn’t want to pay for the child? Should I as a tax payer have the right to end a pregnancy because I do not want to pay tax money towards social welfare programs to support single mothers? Certainly not. So why should a mother who made a “choice” to have sex, either out of wedlock or without protection, and ended up pregnant have the right to kill her child?
Regarding my personal views on homosexuals, it’s just that, my view. You seem to be hard set that I accept your view. Why can’t you accept my views? In essence you’re saying that my view is wrong and yours is correct. How can you justify such a position? Historically if a person wanted to participate in homosexual activities they kept it to themselves. Just like heterosexuals. You tell me I have no tolerance, but they’re (and you) are trying to force me and the rest of society to accept their practices. I do not and as a free citizen of the United States do not have to. Remember that a person’s rights end the point they infringe upon another. So stop trying to push your agenda on me. I’m not trying to push mine on you.

Of course you're entitled to your opinion. I'm trying to keep the focus on the GOP.

The GOP now stands for a constitutional amendment that proclaimers marriage is only between a man and a woman. That's wrong -- goes against separation of church and state and discriminates against LGBT rights. This kind of bombastic platform position will cause the GOP millions of votes!

The Pro-Life Movement -- Robert I've been on the inside -- if you want their endorsement which also comes with a big political campaign check -- you have to sign off on this -- even in cases of rape and incest, even if she is only 11 years old -- they want a federal law that would mandate that girl have that baby -- Robert do you support that too? This kind of bombastic platform position will also cause the GOP millions of votes! Gotta make ads over and out -- thanks for your time.

Scot, lame argument; only an extremely small percent, about 4 per state annually are rape pregnancies. There are no sound figures noting underage rape pregnancies. I’m sure you’ll find a handful of sites from the Kill-the-babies group, which tout huge numbers of rape pregnancies of underage girls. To answer your question; There is still no justification for killing an innocent child. Rape is a terrible thing which victimizes women in a very personal manner. So how does killing a child which was conceived out of such a terrible event solve the matter? Does it un-do the rape? Is it a blood match? God places challenges on all of us, some easy, some incredibly difficult. Is He wrong?
And if our congress puts forth an amendment to make marriage between a man and a women, then so be it. You can vote out who you don’t like. That is unless Obama has his way, then you simply had to march to the beat of his czars.

FYI - tie-in to stem cell topic. http://rochester.patch.com/articles/stem-cell-research-conference-at-ou-will-be-open-to-the-public

Scott, I read your comment about Jews who vote Democratic , of which I am proudly NOT ONE OF THEM. If, they had a brain, they would prioritize their issues and determine that the current administration has a great loathing for Israel (just look at the faces O makes around Bibi). They would understand that abortion should not be their number 1 issue, but rather the safety of this great nation, which translates to the safety of their children and grandchildren. They would understand that our only Democratic friend in the middle east...Israel, which CANNOT be divided in anyway, sahpe or form. They would understand that even the likes of FDR was no friend to Jews when he turned the St. Louis around and 1,000 Jews back to the gas chambers of eastern Europe. They would remember Jimmy Carther and F**K the Jews James Bakker. But, they do not. So, I would say that the Democratic Jews are just a bunch of fools once again, hell bent on destruction of their own kind. They demonize the jihadists who send their young to martyrdom, while they will send their own young to annihilation through their failure to recognize the dangers in this world.

Thankfully, this stupidity is not 100% genetic, although appeasement at the risk of one's own death appears to be a part of 75% of my MOT.

First of all, First term abortion is NOT about life or death, it is about a group of cells that CAN NOT LIVE outside of it's habit (same idea as a parasite although zygotes ARE NOT parasites). SECOND: If it is best for MY health, MY family, or what is best for the UNBORN zygote to have an abortion THEN I WILL. THAT is why it is called a CHOICE. Because the ZYGOTE CAN NOT CHOOSE. And third, NO ONE HAS THE RIGHT TO MAKE MEDICAL DECISIONS FOR ME EXCEPT FOR ME. So why the hell should the GOVERNMENT have the right to tell me what to do for MY HEALTH???? Fourth, SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE exists for a reason and those lines have been blurred for too many years. If a church does not want to marry gays, then don't marry them but the government has no reason to deny them marriage! And religious views regarding abortion, if you think abortion is murder then DO NOT GET AN ABORTION.

I agree, there is a very large and important difference between believing and judgement. The problem becomes when that belief in a law maker seeks to govern the lives of those who are not conforming with the beliefs of that law maker. That is the essential question here.

Are the questions posed in his beliefs, and his actions in law making, abridging the rights of other Americans who do not hold similar beliefs?

In such is the case, then one surely has the right and the obligation to speak against that lawmaker. One can believe in something for themselves without imposing that belief on other citizens. When one seeks to impose that belief as law on others who do not hold the same belief, and moreover when it is based on religion, then we have a serious problem. I say this as a life long Republican.

Specific religion has no place in American politics. We have become a quasi-religious party and it has, in my opinion, spawned an acceptance of intolerance which is contrary to the Constitution and the well being of the party. We must believe in the ability of people to make right decisions for themselves and keep government out of the most personal and private decisions of people's lives - even when we disagree with those decisions.

Laura Jones... thanks for your comment

Our Constitution deliberately omitted any mention of God in order to assign supreme governmental power to "We the People." Thus, they opposed the doctrine of the "Divine Right of Kings," which had enabled monarchs to wield absolute power in the name of God for centuries. It is imperative that the Founding Fathers' precious gift of church-state separation be cherished and upheld. This principle has given Americans more religious freedom than is possessed by any other people. And it has enabled the U.S. to avoid the types of bloody religious conflicts that fill the pages of history and are still seen in many parts of the world.

To elect those who continue to bully and demonized the personal views of others will continue to fuel the hatred that just took place in Wisconsin. Laura, P.S. I'm not a fan of either political party -- what's confusing is I thought the GOP was all about keeping government out of peoples lives?

midwest values? More like Somalia and the Salem witch trials all rolled into one. There isn't anything about Ryan, Romney, conservatives, or the Republican Party as it is currently constructed that reflects American values - anywhere. America used to wage war on poverty - not poor people. We cared about our neighbors, put our money where our mouth was, pitched in, and fought for what was right and moral - not profitable. Greed is not good, and the Republican Party is more like Somalia and the Salem witch trials rolled into one.

um... no. His are not midwest values, He has stated on tape that Ayn Rand was his greatest influence and the reason he got into politics, which he now falsely denies. Ayn Rand declared that selfishness was the ultimate virtue. That is not a midwestern value. She believed Jesus Christ was the most evil influence in western culture. That is not a midwestern value. She brought her lovers into her own house with her husband living there. That is not a midwestern value.

Yes, Paul Ryan reinforces the clear contrast in this election. He represents the fawning dedication to the most cruel wealthy Americans (not all wealthy people) at the expense of the rest of us. He represents the idea of abandoning the least among us to serve the interests of the rich. His policies directly conflict with the Christian values we have followed for 80 years. Christ said we are judged by how we treat the least among us. He taught us that you can't serve Mammon (wealth and greed) and God. He taught us to love our neighbors and our enemies. He did not give believers the right to impose their beliefs on others but taught us to allow others to live their lives as you are allowed live yours.They talk about Judeo Christian values, but they support policies that directly contradict those values. They want to impose thing on people Jesus never mentioned, abortion and homosexuality, and ignore completely the core lessons He taught.

The GOP has been taken over by hypocrites and welfare queens who hate everyone but themselves.

"Here’s what fiscal fraud Paul Ryan (R-WI) said about Social Security in his State of the Union rebuttal. "This is a future in which we will transform our social safety net into a hammock, which lulls able-bodied people into lives of complacency and dependency." Turns out, when Ryan was an able-bodied young lad, he used that hammock to pay for his college education. (h/t FDL) http://firedoglake.com/2011/01/28/ayn-rand-fanboy-paul-ryan-used-social-security-hammock-to-put-himself-through-college/#

Able-bodied Ryan mooched off of Social Security, and Robme won't release his taxes because he didn't pay any. GOP - hypocrites and cheats. If 30 years of tax cuts created jobs - where are they?

Yeah, that's always a persuasive political discussion point: Call the other guy a dope and make a provocative claim without factual basis, such as "more money for the nonworking freeloaders."

Keep it classy. The campaign runs another 13 weeks -- lots of time for made-up stuff and presidential name-calling.

One thing about Republicans, they never let reality get in their way.

Yup, Ryan wants to cut the VA budget by 25%, those "non working free loader's" don't deserve a dime I guess. How dare they demand support for sacrificing for their country. Ayn Rand would be so proud of her follower Ryan, she taught Paul any service to others was insanity and anyone doing it a fool undeserving of support. Like 'Hope is coming," Paul is so self satisfied he can render judgement on anyone with less tahn him, unfortunately so will he be judged eventually.

Probably with excitement. he can debate someone with NO foreign policy experience and who has for 99 percent of his working career made his living in government or as a hack for Jack Kemp. At least Sarah Palin had some foreign policy experience, she lived next door to Russia. Thank you Mitt for this early Christmas gift.

I too will be excited to see the VP debate. Ryan too intense and cerebral for ole' Joe.
When Ryan starts talking fiscal policies of the current administration, Biden will be lost in the crowd.

Look forward to Joey Biden debating Paul Ryan, it is going to be painful to watch for those on the left.

Well, I think the voters will not go for the guy who wants to end Social Security and Medicare as we know it. Plus, Ryan is an Ayn Rand nut.

Mich. voter, so the pyramid scam also known as SS is such a great system it should never be altered? Who are you kidding. Its a waste of money with terrible returns. It needs to be fixed. Ryan has a plan, but the libs don't like it because it suggestes that they give up a bit of their money grab.

Whoa there. Not many people like it at all, on either side. The Ryan plan has some gaping holes in it for seniors. In no real way can vouchers provide seniors with even remotely the level of health care they need. It will not be possible for many of them to afford supplemental coverage either. The broken state of the system, when looking at the numbers, is also not quite as dire as stated by my party, It does need reform, but there are many other reasonable ways to go before the Ryan Plan in enacted and the system corrupted for good.

Robert - IF you think SS is a scam, lets talk about the banks, Goldman Sachs, and 30 years of tax cuts for billionaires and business. After 30 years of trickle down and deregulation, we ought to be rolling in jobs. Where are they? One thing about you conservatives, you never let reality or the facts get in your way.

Oakland, i'd say that everyone feels that Goldmans Sacks is not good for the economic system, but their reign spans noth democrates and republicans. No party specific to blame on that one. Regarding trickle down economics; this works great and has given us unemployment rates down to 3% which is considered full employment. It considers that a portion of the popoulation will not get a job regardless of job availability. Tax breaks for billionairs; i hardley so so. I'm in the top 2-3% because i put myself there. Funny how no one showed to help me when i worked my way through my undergrad, or my masters. No one helped me buy my first house and constructed all the improvemnets so i could sell it for a profit. No one works 70 hours a week or conducts all of my business travel today. And certainly no poor people have ever created a job. Opps, i forgot they do create government jobs by putting more demand on resources therefore creating the need for more "handout" workers paid for by tax payers.

Sorry you did not learn the lesson Dr. King tried to teach us. Why does the color of someones skin still matter to you?

Bob grambo, I find your comments rascist

More "white bread" Bob ! Nice, very nice. The fact that the african american community votes 93% for other african americans tells us what exactly ?

Why does he have to pick someone of color or a woman?? Rascist is an understatement....

Amen Laura, but keep in mind that those who think the other way only pretend not to look at a persons sex and color. They in fact use these factors as their only reason to vote for someone. Almost forgot, they tend to place a lot of credibility on sexual identification as well. But charactor, conviction, morals, responsible, and any shred of decentcy, not a chance.

Chattering class - omg. Listen to yourself. bin Laden is dead, and GM is alive. This means you have neighbors who have jobs, which apparently breaks your heart. Farm subsidies, oil subsidies, wars, bombs, jails, and tax cuts are just fine, but they better not give food to your neighbor or help her kid go to college. Mean spirited and nasty - not my idea of America.

Golly g Dorthy, i guess i've been so wrong all of these years. I do need Obama to live my life for me and make all of my choices. That way i too can sit around doing nothing, not saving for my retirement, and simply complain when my government check is not enough. Good luck Dorthy, your foolish decisions have gotten us to the incredibly wonderfull economic picture we have today. Oh, but i keep forgetting its a jobless recovery. Anyway it must still be Bush's fault. Not the past 3+ years of obama, or the past 5+ years of a liberal senate.

What's your favorite flavor Dorothy , grape ?

No, it isn't Bush's fault. It's the fault of Reagan and Clinton. They're the ones that pushed banking deregulation and NAFTA. What is Bush's fault is the mindless tax cuts for billionaires and two eternal and unnecessary wars fought off the budget and on the credit card. Liberal Senate - what a joke. The GOP has filibustered everything. According to your logic, your whackadoodle House has been there for two year so they must be equally as responsible.

I love it when you and ScoobyDoo freak out. Means you have no facts, but then, that's never been a problem for conservatives.

Well said Sarah !

Yes, I agree with you Sarah. I am tired of the social issues that will NEVER get consensus on, I'd rather focus on the economy, which is Ryan's key issue. I need to find out more of his ideas on that but if he is for "changing Medicare as we know it" I am all for that. As someone who has been handling an elderly parent's medical care in a nursing home for a few years, it is a system in need of reform, too much going on in Medicare that is legal but is an abuse. I can't square away for example a psych nurse having a 3 minute conversation with me in a hallway, and charging Medicare a $150 consultation fee. Or an 80-year being recommended to have a fully paid by Medicare diagnostic colonoscopy without any other symptoms, or being given unproductive costly physical therapy sessions, again covered by Medicare. So many times I've heard, don't worry about it, Medicare will fully cover it, instead of is it medically necessary? Medicare is being used as a cash cow by various providers, and there seems to be no oversight or motivation to not have this occur. This in a country where people cannot afford to have basic health care insurance is unconscionable.

Well, off the soapbox, but this independent voter will give serious consideration to the Romney-Ryan ticket, if they stay away from social issues and focus on the economy and health care reform, including Medicare. I also like that Ryan is an experienced legislator, open to compromise.

Here you go cookiepro2.

Washington Post: "Paul Ryan's phony reputation as a deficit cutter ought to be the main target of Democratic attacks writes Matt Miller. Instead of letting him get away with calling himself fiscal conservative, he ought to be blasted for first presenting a plan that would add $60 trillion to the national debt, then tweaking it into a plan that would add $14 trillion, neither of which would ever bring the national budget into balance."

Salon: Andrew Leonard laments the Obama administration's raising the white flag by not prosecuting Goldman-Sachs at the same time Wall Street is shifting its campaign contributions from 75 percent Democratic in 2008 to 70 percent Republican in 2012:

Unfortunately, what seems clearly obvious to the normal person does not appear to translate into a slam-dunk court case, in the judgment of Department of Justice prosecutors faced with the daunting prospect of tackling the best-money-can-buy legal defense sure to be marshaled by Goldman. There’s surely a nugget of truth there — Wall Street did a very effective job in the 80s and 90s of ensuring that the rules governing their behavior were as lax as possible. But it still feels pusillanimous. And the cowardice completes a circle — because one of the key reasons why Goldman’s campaign contributions are now flowing to Romney is his promise to repeal the Obama administration’s primary effort to prevent future financial sector misbehavior — Dodd-Frank."

So what Greg, what is your point. Paul's fathers death may have left his family with no income if his mother did not work. This is what SS is all about. His dad paid into it and nothing illegal was done. On the other hand we have literally millions of people hiring lawyers to get them signed up for SS disability when they are able bodied and should be working. I have an ex family member doing just that, was turned down a number of times, hired a lawyer that specializes in getting folks signed up for SS disability.

ScoobyDoo: The point is that Ryan wants to abolish Social Security and Medicare's life line - now that he's done using it to rescue his behind. The hypocrisy and double standard of Ryan "suckling on the teat" of his "government handout", and you have "hooray for me, and the hell with you". What's good for his goose, isn't good for your goose! They deserve everything they have and more, and you don't deserve anything.

Your slacker relative is anecdotal. There are fraudulent claims for SSDI just as there are fraudulent payments to war profiteers. Perhaps you would like to abolish the military too? It is certainly one way to assure cheating contractors never get a penny of your money again. Go ahead. Throw the baby out with the bath water.

Just the fats: Just a great post with the kind of facts that scare the left wingnuts. Now we will be taking about real policies and not deflection issues which is so much of whats left of Obamas campaign.

Bryan, thanks for the laugh!

Hey thanks for confirming that Mitt Romney isn't really a conservative--he's spent his entire political career saying whatever he thought the audience wanted to hear at that moment. The guy has more flip-flops than every beach in Florida. Hope you have a good gag reflex, Mr. Munson, you'll need it when voting for Romney. And if you think your vote for Ryan will influence Romney, notice how Mitt has already distanced himself from Ryan's economic plans.

Wiley Coyote, lets take a moment to revied what BO has done for us. Exploded our debt, even beyond what Bush did. Doubled down on Afganistan, Closed Gitmo, oh sorry no, balanced the budget, haven't had time for that, gone over the budget line by line to reduce waste and curb spending, oh yeah, no time for that, hmm lets see what else, transformed the tone in Washington, yeah he did do that, made it more polarized then ever. Forgot to mention the whole health care thing is in campaign, but it was so important to him that it was the first thing he tackled. I am not saying the conservatives are any better, but I sure wish you liberals would wake up and realize you got taken to the cleaners. But you won't cause you can't believe that you voted for a guy who is going to destroy the country my dad spent 4 1/2 years in the army in WWII defending.

What does any of what you or DJ there wrote have to do with Romney's "conservative" credentials?

Kool-Aid. Funny. My eyes are more wide open than yours, I'm afraid. You'll support anyone with an (R) by their name, regardless of principles, I'm sure. And in Romney's case, he clearly has none; witness his changing positions on gun control, abortion as just two examples of how he publicly shifts for whatever audience he hopes to court. And DJ, my dad spent years in World War 2 in combat. He never for a minute bought into the Republican party once they (you) began the southern strategy of courting one-issue voters who voted based on their hatred of desegregation and a woman's right to choose whether to have children or not.

The country has not been destroyed, although I might argue George W. Bush did more than enough to put this nation on the road to ruin with his foreign-funded wars, not to mention being the first president in US history to invade another country without provocation. And as someone who will not be covered by health insurance if I lose my job or when I retire, the ACA looks pretty good to me.

First of all, when you say "The Catholic Church" it implies you are speaking of the Vatican, which in this case is completely incorrect. The Vatican has not spoken out against Ryan's budget, but they have spoken out time and time again about the sin of abortion.

Anybody who claims to be a Catholic and votes for Obama is simply lying to themselves.

Dennis T... I apology for all the ink* -- but when one personally attacks you and your clients -- and even is crass enough to attack your wife -- this leaves me little choice but to blog back.
GOP made poor choices both President and VP -- which is too bad this election should have been a no-brainer. Social issues are only the tip of the iceberg -- Romany no matter how hard he tries will come off looking like the 1% -- op-ed piece 'Let GM Fail' -- sent the wrong message in the Midwest; and the opposition will distort Ryan's view of health care for seniors.
*ink is newspaper slang for too many words.

Scot, you attacked my God, everything else is fair game. But stick to the piont; take a look at your first post. You attack conservatives from the start, claiming that they have become the party of judgement. Who are you kidding you wouldn't be happy with any actual conservative because they might say something which offends your social groups simply by speaking the truth.

Robert... I'll let the Bible speak for itself -- all it did was quote it. Gotta make ads over and out -- thanks for your time.

Robert... No leave it in would mess up the flow-- we both know it's never personal -- the emotion of one's opinion only proves we're human. I enjoyed the debate too -- thanks for your time

SCOOBYDOO another typo meant cost not cause the GOP millions of votes!

Sooo, you studied theology where? Scoobydoo? pray tell, what exactly was your thesis for you doctorates in Divinity studies? Which university did you attend while earning your doctoral degree in Divinity studies? Did you get your Masters at a seminary? before engaging in your doctoral studies?
No insults, just answer the questions please.

Thank you

@Lianne Mathie,

Understanding what is in the Bible and what is not in the Bible does not require a doctorate does it Lianne ? But being a production worker at a small sporting goods supplier makes one smarter than everyone else does it. Just answer the question please. Good Day

SCOOBYDOO... WOW you're forgiven for your rudeness... name calling... belittling someone's employment... I really hope you are not what has become of my father's Republican Party.
Homosexuality and the Bible by Walter Wink -- Professor of Biblical Interpretation, Auburn Theological Seminary, New York City.
Sexual issues are tearing our churches apart today as never before. The issue of homosexuality threatens to fracture whole denominations, as the issue of slavery did one hundred and fifty years ago. We naturally turn to the Bible for guidance and find ourselves mired in interpretive quicksand. Is the Bible able to speak to our confusion on this issue?
The debate over homosexuality is a remarkable opportunity, because it raises in an especially acute way how we interpret the Bible, not in this case only, but in numerous others as well. The real issue here, then, is not simply homosexuality, but how Scripture informs our lives today.
Some passages that have been advanced as pertinant to the issue of homosexuality are, in fact, irrelevant. One is the attempted gang rape in Sodom (Gen. 19: 1-29). That was a case of ostensibly heterosexual males intent on humiliating strangers by treating them "like women," thus demasculinizing them.
to be continued...

(This is also the case in a similar account in Judges 19-21.) Their brutal behavior has nothing to do with the problem of whether genuine love expressed between consenting persons of the same sex is legitimate or not. Likewise, Deuteronomy 23:17-18 must be pruned from the list, since it most likely refers to a heterosexual prostitute involved in Canaanite fertility rites that have infiltrated Jewish worship; the King James Version inaccurately labeled him a "sodomite."
Several other texts are ambiguous. It is not clear whether I Corinthians 6:9 and I Timothy 1:10 refer to the "passive" and "active" partners in homosexual relationships, or to homosexual and heterosexual male prostitutes. In short, it is unclear whether the issue is homosexuality alone, or promiscuity and "sex-for-hire."
continued at http://www.bridges-across.org/ba/winkhombib.htm

@scoobydoo, is that code for Jesus? Since you like to get on the Patch and pontificate about morals and the Bible, I just wanted to be sure you had SOME bases for being such a expert on theology and the Bible, since you did not care to persue those studies, or answer my question. I will just have to assume you are some crank that hides behind a false name and doesn't stand by his morals, as you are too embarrassed to let the world know who you really are. Sorry, I don't like lectures on morality by people named scoobydoo, a cartoon.

If we had complete separation of church and state, marriage would be a church institution, not anything for the state to be involved in.

So you think that only religious people get married? Really? It's just not so. Marriage is a social development as well as, for some cultures, a religious one. Many people get married in civil ceremonies, not religious ones.

I'm saying that Marriage is an institution created by God.

A "marriage" without God at the center is not a marriage.

Legal marriages are not the same as an actual marriage.

Everything good was created by God.

"Another driver of the Jewish vote is fear of the Christian right. Although the percentage of American Jews who cite abortion or separation of church and state as their top voting issue is low—a combined 7 percent, according to the AJC poll—those Jews who do care about cultural issues lean massively to the left. According to the 2005 “Jewish distinctiveness,” study, Jews are the most pro-choice ethnic or religious group in America, by far. Almost 80 percent of American Jews think it’s fine for a woman to have an abortion for any reason, which is close to twice the percentage for Americans as a whole. Jews are also the religious and ethnic group most supportive of giving birth control to teenagers and most hostile to school prayer. And this cultural liberalism produces deep hostility to the Christian right. According to a 2012 study by the Public Religion Research Institute, American Jews feel almost twice as sympathetic to American Muslims as they do to the Christian right." more at http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/14/romney-lost-the-american-jewish-vote-by-picking-paul-ryan.html
by Peter Beinart