Real Catholic Speaker of the House: American Political Landscape Shifts

[Fantine]

I don't understand why people always have to attack each other like this. I'm watching MSNBC right now, and some conservative guest just referred to Harry Reid as a cockroach. Seriously? Why can't people stick to the issues and stop making these sort of personal attacks?

Ding, ding, ding! Because if they really looked at the overwhelming majority of issues Pelosi and Reid supported, they would have to admit they had a great deal of merit???:

 

[JoabAnias]

I don't understand why people always have to attack each other like this. I'm watching MSNBC right now, and some conservative guest just referred to Harry Reid as a cockroach. Seriously? Why can't people stick to the issues and stop making these sort of personal attacks?

You mean like you did about Michael Voris and Life Site News in another thread?

Its verbal violence. Thats all there is to it. Its abuse.

 

[JoabAnias]

Doesn't change the fact that the Pelosi policy was contradicting the teaching of the Church in a disproportionate way. If she was really honest with herself she would have known better. Its not like enough people didn't try to tell her including her own Bishop.

 

[Fish and Bread]

You mean like you did about Michael Voris and Life Site News in another thread?

Its verbal violence. Thats all there is to it. Its abuse.

I was making a joke, perhaps one with an edge to it, but still a joke. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed as though you were very serious when you referred to Nancy Pelosi as a Catholic in Name Only. Why is it not alright for me to crack a joke, but it is alright for you to call someone a fake Catholic? How do you know what's in her heart?

 

[Fish and Bread]

Wuerl: Why I Won't Deny Pelosi Communion

 

[JoabAnias]

I was making a joke, perhaps one with an edge to it, but still a joke. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed as though you were very serious when you referred to Nancy Pelosi as a Catholic in Name Only. Why is it not alright for me to crack a joke, but it is alright for you to call someone a fake Catholic? How do you know what's in her heart?

I didn't pick up on your levity at all in that other thread, even from the wink, but thanks for that recant. I stand corrected about your intent in the other thread.

As far as the name calling you mention here, I agree with you, for once. I'm not joking at all when I call it abuse and verbal violence. And its bad form to do so even as a joke.

As you probably know its called detraction which is a deliberate attempt to mar someones reputation or calumny if its a lie and both are sinful and if either are ones intent I pray they can find remorse within themselves.

When I say Nancy is CINO I have good reason and can support it with church canon. I believe she is latae sententiae for her denial of the Bishops admonishments to her. More than once she was officially and publicly corrected for misrepresenting the Churches teachings.

I am not saying she is Catholic in name only to harm her reputation. My interest is in justice and truth and actually her own salvation because I do not believe anyone can stand at their particular judgment and rationalize knowingly implementing policy that increases the deaths of the innocents and implying through her actions to unsuspecting Americans that is somehow an acceptable ethic.

There is a difference between the truth, justice and slander which you referred to. Such detraction and calumny are simply a void of integrity and it should matter not to us which side that comes from. That individuals opinions are discredited imo.

Neither, when I say her Bishop do I refer to the Bishop in DC but her Bishop which is where her home address is and where she lives. Weurl is not in that position.

As the good Bishop said in the article you quote:

Pelosi, as a San Franciscan, "isn't part of my flock!''

He also said:

"Catholic politicians should oppose abortion and not take communion if they do, but said local enforcement is necessary".

Abp. Niederauer on Speaker Pelosi's comments on abortion

CNS STORY: Catholic legislators must protect life, pope tells ...

Archbishop Corrects Nancy Pelosi: Free Will, Conscience and Moral Choice - Politics & Policy - Catholic Online

and on and on and on.

They have tried to pastor her into a change of heart but to no avail. She is obstinate and indifferent to the voice of her own and all other Bishops nation wide.

She continues to deny or contradict Church teaching on matters of morals.

At least she is out of the position to do any more major damage. Thank God.

She should deny herself communion but obviously doesn't have enough integrity and sadly that may be to the continued detriment of her very soul.

 

[Davidnic]

Ding, ding, ding! Because if they really looked at the overwhelming majority of issues Pelosi and Reid supported, they would have to admit they had a great deal of merit???:

But you can't put them on a foundation of murder, and that is what they support. They may not admit it as such but they do. State sanctioned, institutionalized murder of the defenseless masquerading as human right.

And yes, that does taint every other opinion they have. Because if they think it is alright to do that then even if outward expression of positive moral things seems similar, it is not from a common place that is good.

Same goes for the other side on issues as well. That's the problem.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

What an interesting thread.

I will say that Pelosi was either very ignorant to the CCC or she was a successful liar. She never did seem to get the whole abortion thing right.

I also wonder what the Pope told her in their little meeting... though I am afraid Pelosi got very little out of it. That led me to think she is Catholic in name only.

My prayers for Pelosi and now the new Speaker of the House.

 

[Fantine]

Here in OBOB, I often here repudiation and criticism of the evangelical belief of salvation--once saved, always saved.

Living in the Bible Belt, Catholics (and others) often get tired of hearing the questions, "Have you accepted Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior?" and "Are you saved?"

But now I realize, according to the Gospel According to Deacon Fournier at least, Catholics have a parallel.

A politician that is anti-abortion (I hesitate to call Congressman Boehner "pro-life") becomes a candidate for canonization by Deacon Fournier.

And, in a sad twist of Jesus' words, the implication is that the once saved always saved Boehner is free to "go and sin some more..."

Luckily the veto pen will prevent him from sinning against average Americans, much as he would like to.,

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Honestly, I do wonder many times how often it seems that the entire concept of Democrats vs Republicans is really an illusion..with both sides played against one another by others in the shadows who could care less.

 

[AMDG]

Luckily the veto pen will prevent him from sinning against average Americans, much as he would like to.,

Is this statement calumny or detraction or both? I think that this statement is calumny against the Speaker.

 

[Fantine]

Is this statement calumny or detraction or both? I think that this statement is calumny against the Speaker.

It's a matter of opinion, I guess....

I believe that cutting off unemployment benefits for those who are desperately struggling to find work in states with burdensome unemployment rates is a sin against them--you obviously don't.

I believe that reversing a health care law that Americans have struggled to get on the books for fifty years is sinning against them, although some minor modifications in one or two small areas might be warranted.

I think that corporate welfare paid for by hurting the needy is sinning against Americans.

I believe that poisoning our rivers and waterways in allowing energy corporations to rape our environment is sinning against America.

Obviously you don't.

 

[AMDG]

I believe that reversing a health care law that Americans have struggled to get on the books for fifty years is sinning against them.

You went through the months and months of this health insurance reform debate and you still don't get it? Okay, let me clarify it for you. The American people don't want it. They made that clear over and over again, but it seems that it fell on deaf ears. Politicians bribed and rammed it down the throats of America (and caused over a trillion dollars worth of debt over it.) The American people want the law repealed and replaced with something that they can actually get behind. The American people deserve better and from the fact all politicians that actually voted for this albatross lost bigtime shows that this election actually was about this expensive failed policy.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

I don't know anyone who doesn't want access to health-care, do you?


Without health insurance, you have no access other than showing up at the ER when its too late.

Americans want health-care reform. What they reject is the misinformation that was put out by people like John Boehner,
that the health-care bill would have death panels and give free health-care to illegal aliens.

Obam's failure was to communicate to the people what actually is in the bill.

Jim

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I don't know anyone who doesn't want access to health-care, do you?


Without health insurance, you have no access other than showing up at the ER when its too late.

Americans want health-care reform. What they reject is the misinformation that was put out by people like John Boehner,
that the health-care bill would have death panels and give free health-care to illegal aliens.

Obam's failure was to communicate to the people what actually is in the bill.

Jim

I think it is more a financial dilemna. Governemnt is fat and wastes lots of our tax dollars. Maybe if Ross Perot ran for President again.

 

[Davidnic]

Obam's failure was to communicate to the people what actually is in the bill.

There are ramifications too. I mean the government mandated changes that took effect but no way to pay for them except that the companies had to do it themselves. For self insured large employers that meant that premiums had to go up and so did deductibles.

So right now we had to put off having another baby that we had planned until we can save the money it will cost. Lily cost us nothing. And there are other changes to so my wifes employer can afford to insure everyone under the new requirements that mandate they insure more people.

So last year our insurance cost us our premiums, the lesser wage we accept because the insurance factors total compensation and co-pays. That was about 1,500 out of pocket. And that would not have changed even if each of us had something that required a hospital stay.

We ran the numbers. This year if we had a baby, each had minor issues, with the increased premiums and deductibles...our health care will cost us 7,000.

And that is a direct result of the expanded coverage in the bill. We went to the benefits open house looked at the numbers and our employer had no choice. We already had a hiring freeze and less part time help so the money could only come from us.

A serious illness (even just a moderate one) could now possible run us into 1/3 of our income. Last year...it would have cost nothing.

So people can claim the bill does not hurt people, sorry...it does. We looked at all the numbers and why it was changing. I fully expect in 2018 for most colleges (and other large self insurers who use the insurance company to only manage the accounts) to drop people into the public pool. The new mandates are just too expensive unless the federal govt pays something. And they can not afford it either.

This was fixing the floor because your roof was leaking without fixing the roof. They should have control medical costs before they started mandating coverage.

I support health care for all, but not when it punishes others and is done rashly and in great stupidity and then people claim we will like it when we see it.

Well, I see it. I see Lily needs to wait for a sibling, we need to wait for another child and our struggling with money is made worst because now the paycheck is smaller and even a moderate illness will cripple us financially when...before they "fixed it" our insurance was our safety net in case of disaster. Now it is a disaster.

 

[Fantine]

I agree that we should have looked to the models from other countries--all of whom provided health insurance to all their citizens at less per capita than we spent (from all sources) to insure 80% of ours.

There were two reasons why we didn't, of course.

#1 Republicans, who weren't on board for any kind of health care whatsoever, but who tried to make the reform as bad as they possibly could to reap political capital.

#2 Our doctors are overpaid. Our pharmaceutical companies are overpaid. Our nurses are overpaid. Our medical salesmen are overpaid. But let's face it, in towns of 100,000 or less, the hospitals and medical providers are the biggest employers. And with 10% unemployment, we couldn't say to a pharmaceutical company, "Take your $200 drug and shove it, if you want to sell to us you have to sell it for $75 like you do to Canada." Because it would have raised the unemployment rate.

If this seems mean-spirited, let's remember that airline pilots and airline employees, auto employees, computer personnel, etc. have all seen their income decline, sometimes precipitously, in recent years. Why should one industry's employees be exempt? I don't want them to endure any more pay cuts or wage freezes than others have endured...I just want to stop the blank check.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

There are ramifications too. I mean the government mandated changes that took effect but no way to pay for them except that the companies had to do it themselves. For self insured large employers that meant that premiums had to go up and so did deductibles.

So right now we had to put off having another baby that we had planned until we can save the money it will cost. Lily cost us nothing. And there are other changes to so my wifes employer can afford to insure everyone under the new requirements that mandate they insure more people.

So last year our insurance cost us our premiums, the lesser wage we accept because the insurance factors total compensation and co-pays. That was about 1,500 out of pocket. And that would not have changed even if each of us had something that required a hospital stay.

We ran the numbers. This year if we had a baby, each had minor issues, with the increased premiums and deductibles...our health care will cost us 7,000.

And that is a direct result of the expanded coverage in the bill. We went to the benefits open house looked at the numbers and our employer had no choice. We already had a hiring freeze and less part time help so the money could only come from us.

A serious illness (even just a moderate one) could now possible run us into 1/3 of our income. Last year...it would have cost nothing.

So people can claim the bill does not hurt people, sorry...it does. We looked at all the numbers and why it was changing. I fully expect in 2018 for most colleges (and other large self insurers who use the insurance company to only manage the accounts) to drop people into the public pool. The new mandates are just too expensive unless the federal govt pays something. And they can not afford it either.

This was fixing the floor because your roof was leaking without fixing the roof. They should have control medical costs before they started mandating coverage.

I support health care for all, but not when it punishes others and is done rashly and in great stupidity and then people claim we will like it when we see it.

Well, I see it. I see Lily needs to wait for a sibling, we need to wait for another child and our struggling with money is made worst because now the paycheck is smaller and even a moderate illness will cripple us financially when...before they "fixed it" our insurance was our safety net in case of disaster. Now it is a disaster.

What I bolded in red is the big issue here, IMO. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats have done anything to really affect the continuing increases.

I have an idea too... we should have a new line added on our tax returns to donate money to Lobbyists to push for the American people so Congress will hear us over the Corporations. These Lobbyists will work for us.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

I agree that we should have looked to the models from other countries--all of whom provided health insurance to all their citizens at less per capita than we spent (from all sources) to insure 80% of ours.

There were two reasons why we didn't, of course.

#1 Republicans, who weren't on board for any kind of health care whatsoever, but who tried to make the reform as bad as they possibly could to reap political capital.

#2 Our doctors are overpaid. Our pharmaceutical companies are overpaid. Our nurses are overpaid. Our medical salesmen are overpaid. But let's face it, in towns of 100,000 or less, the hospitals and medical providers are the biggest employers. And with 10% unemployment, we couldn't say to a pharmaceutical company, "Take your $200 drug and shove it, if you want to sell to us you have to sell it for $75 like you do to Canada." Because it would have raised the unemployment rate.

If this seems mean-spirited, let's remember that airline pilots and airline employees, auto employees, computer personnel, etc. have all seen their income decline, sometimes precipitously, in recent years. Why should one industry's employees be exempt? I don't want them to endure any more pay cuts or wage freezes than others have endured...I just want to stop the blank check.

Ain't that the truth. My neuro surgeon was paid over $10,000 for a 3 hour surgery this last June.

Reminds me of a line from John Travolta's movie "Phenomenon" where his doctor friend tells the surgeon that he knows why they wear masks (implying they are dishonest and thieves).

 

[JoabAnias]

I don't know anyone who doesn't want access to health-care, do you?

Without health insurance, you have no access other than showing up at the ER when its too late.

Americans want health-care reform. What they reject is the misinformation that was put out by people like John Boehner, that the health-care bill would have death panels and give free health-care to illegal aliens.

Obam's failure was to communicate to the people what actually is in the bill.

Your first question; No, we all want health care insurance. I do know lots of people who don't want it bureaucratized by the govt. Most people don't trust the government and even more, agree that too much government control of anything is a bad thing.

Can you back up your claim that Boehner put out such misinformation? There was a good case for rationing in the law. Most doctors said so too. I'd love to see some quotes in context though if you know of any.

Don't illegals already get free health care here by default? I thought they did. Are you saying people were representing the HC law as having that written in somehow? How was that exactly? Do you know the page #.

If only that was Obama's only failure. Have you read what the Bishops have said is wrong with the law? They are rather detailed about it. Can I give you the link and have you read it?