Meet The Candidates: 2012 GOP Thread

I am doing well, been quite busy lately too...glad to know all it's all good.

As for not wanting to buy back your bet, well, we all miss on opportunities now and then and learn from our mistakes. Rest assured the money will be put to good use.

The Catholic church is an institution that has self-destructed. It is bleeding parishioner on a daily bases and the 65 million figure doesn't really give you an indication who is catholic by name and whether they agree with the Obama care and the birth control provision. I believe the entire church's stance is to support Obamacare except for birth control.

One more thing, what is the statistics on the birth control provision when it comes to catholic men vs women? How does your wife feel about it?I'm glad to hear you're doing well too!

I can promise you the Catholic Church has not self-destructed and bleeds no one....Unlike the HHS mandate which forces religious institutions to directly violate their core moral beliefs or be "bled" to death by obscene fines. Whether individual Catholics support birth control isn't the issue, the issue is the HHS mandate directly attacks a religious institution and forces it to pay for procedures (including sterilization and abortion drugs) that are contrary to its beliefs. All U.S. bishops have come out publicly against this mandate, so the Church is solidly unified against it. My wife is 100% in support of the Church against this.

I'll make sure your wager funds go to support Catholic Relief Services. :)

Slingin, if you think a contraception mandate, which by the way DOES NOT mandate religious institutions pay for, which favors a huge swath of female voters is going to sink Obama's reelection chances, you're sadly mistaken.

Slingin, if you think a contraception mandate, which by the way DOES NOT mandate religious institutions pay for, which favors a huge swath of female voters is going to sink Obama's reelection chances, you're sadly mistaken.The mandate includes sterilization and abortion drugs also...but again not the point. This is not how the Catholic Church sees it. It's a 1st Ammendment issue.

You and I won't agree on this and we don't really matter in the grand scheme of things (we off-set each other in Nov.). Most folks aren't aware or are only vaguely aware of this issue, but it will be hammered by the Church and as I mentioned before if it swings even 10%, hell even 5% that could be up to 1M Obama votes switched, a 2M vote swing against Obama.

The mandate includes sterilization and abortion drugs also...but again not the point. This is not how the Catholic Church sees it. It's a 1st Ammendment issue.

You and I won't agree on this and we don't really matter in the grand scheme of things (we off-set each other in Nov.). Most folks aren't aware or are only vaguely aware of this issue, but it will be hammered by the Church and as I mentioned before if it swings even 10%, hell even 5% that could be up to 1M Obama votes switched, a 2M vote swing against Obama.

I simply believe, as it relates to this issue, there's a huge gap between the Church and it's constituents.

I simply believe, as it relates to this issue, there's a huge gap between the Church and it's constituents.

It's very difficult for me to mitigate SS33's option vs facts (http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/) and more facts (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/us/politics/americans-divided-on-birth-control-coverage-poll-finds.html). Unless catholic voters fall well outside the norm of a typical voter I don't see an issue, only wishful thinking.

It's very difficult for me to mitigate SS33's option vs facts (http://publicreligion.org/research/2012/02/january-tracking-poll-2012/) and more facts (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/us/politics/americans-divided-on-birth-control-coverage-poll-finds.html). Unless catholic voters fall well outside the norm of a typical voter I don't see an issue, only wishful thinking.12th and saden you're right in lockstep with the Administration. Great news, please keep letting Obama know he's doing the right thing and to stay-the-course on this....but here's what's going on outside the Beltway:

Obama's grand miscalculation with Catholics | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obama-grand-miscalculation-with-catholics/)

Important points: "Obama was ahead among Catholics by 9 points in early March, and is now trailing by 5 points. The Pew survey finds that, among Catholic voters with an opinion, 47% would today vote for President Obama, and 52% for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. That same margin, were it to hold on Election Day, would mark a swing of 18 million voters away from Obama."

"And among every other category of women, the issue turns out to be a loser, while also carrying a very tangible cost among Catholics: Twenty-nine percent say they are now less likely to vote for the president because of this issue, more than double the 13% who say it makes them more likely to support him. "

Also this from NYT, check questions 73 & 74.
New York Times/CBS Poll - Document - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/03/13/us/politics/20120313_poll_docs.html)

Again, this isn't about whether contraception is OK, it's about whether a religious institution should be forced to violate its beliefs.

And no one's buying the "employee going to the insurer direct" compromise/nonsense, the insurer will simply be burying the cost into the Church's premiums.

Slingin, if you think a contraception mandate, which by the way DOES NOT mandate religious institutions pay for, which favors a huge swath of female voters is going to sink Obama's reelection chances, you're sadly mistaken.

Obama is doing that on his own.

12th and saden you're right in lockstep with the Administration. Great news, please keep letting Obama know he's doing the right thing and to stay-the-course on this....but here's what's going on outside the Beltway:

Obama's grand miscalculation with Catholics | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obama-grand-miscalculation-with-catholics/)

Important points: "Obama was ahead among Catholics by 9 points in early March, and is now trailing by 5 points. The Pew survey finds that, among Catholic voters with an opinion, 47% would today vote for President Obama, and 52% for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. That same margin, were it to hold on Election Day, would mark a swing of 18 million voters away from Obama."

"And among every other category of women, the issue turns out to be a loser, while also carrying a very tangible cost among Catholics: Twenty-nine percent say they are now less likely to vote for the president because of this issue, more than double the 13% who say it makes them more likely to support him. "

Also this from NYT, check questions 73 & 74.
New York Times/CBS Poll - Document - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/03/13/us/politics/20120313_poll_docs.html)

Again, this isn't about whether contraception is OK, it's about whether a religious institution should be forced to violate its beliefs.

And no one's buying the "employee going to the insurer direct" compromise/nonsense, the insurer will simply be burying the cost into the Church's premiums.

Yet you continue to say "forced" against religious beliefs, when in fact the White House has already granted a waiver to Catholic institutions. Why do you keep repeating that is my question? Why? If an institution doesn't want to cover it, fine, they don't have to. Period.

Furthermore, Catholics aren't a monolithic voting bloc and the vast majority of catholic women have used or are using birth control. Female voters are informed and will base their voting decision on a range of issues, not just one.

12th and saden you're right in lockstep with the Administration. Great news, please keep letting Obama know he's doing the right thing and to stay-the-course on this....but here's what's going on outside the Beltway:

Obama's grand miscalculation with Catholics | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/05/22/obama-grand-miscalculation-with-catholics/)

Important points: "Obama was ahead among Catholics by 9 points in early March, and is now trailing by 5 points. The Pew survey finds that, among Catholic voters with an opinion, 47% would today vote for President Obama, and 52% for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. That same margin, were it to hold on Election Day, would mark a swing of 18 million voters away from Obama."

"And among every other category of women, the issue turns out to be a loser, while also carrying a very tangible cost among Catholics: Twenty-nine percent say they are now less likely to vote for the president because of this issue, more than double the 13% who say it makes them more likely to support him. "

Also this from NYT, check questions 73 & 74.
New York Times/CBS Poll - Document - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/03/13/us/politics/20120313_poll_docs.html)

Again, this isn't about whether contraception is OK, it's about whether a religious institution should be forced to violate its beliefs.

And no one's buying the "employee going to the insurer direct" compromise/nonsense, the insurer will simply be burying the cost into the Church's premiums.

That's a cop out. I am my own person and I have the ability to distinguish a bad policy from a good one. It's simply a bad policy for an employer to cover every medical necessity under the kitchen sink except for contraception. My decision to support the administration is based solely on the fact that birth control pills have uses besides preventing pregnancies. Further more it's bad governance to allow religious insinuation to discriminate against their employees under the auspice of "freedom" of religion.

To me that's what the questions boil down to is should the employer opt-out entirely or should the employees be allowed to opt-out of the coverage? If you want to prevent tainting of the insurance pool on religious grounds it's perfectly fine to let employees opt-out and save a little more money on their premium. It is not, however, fine to let the employer opt-out entirety and leave their employees that desire such coverage out in the cold. Why? Because it's bad policy.

Further more, if you look at question 76 you will notice that the whole issue isn't about religious freedom but about women's reproductive rights. I'm guessing most of these people aren't going to base their vote on religious freedom or a single issue. Also, what state are these catholic in and do they really matter in light of our electoral system? You can have all the Catholic in the red States for all Obama and et al care.

StiffRom 2012 will still have to bring it!

Yet you continue to say "forced" against religious beliefs, when in fact the White House has already granted a waiver to Catholic institutions. Why do you keep repeating that is my question? Why? If an institution doesn't want to cover it, fine, they don't have to. Period.

Furthermore, Catholics aren't a monolithic voting bloc and the vast majority of catholic women have used or are using birth control. Female voters are informed and will base their voting decision on a range of issues, not just one.


Isn't it ironic that the father of ObamaCare is their candidate? The man who pushed for a law that mandated that contraception be covered (http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2012/02/massachusetts-law-insured-birth-control-similar-rule-set-barack-obama/XzJavhOtrB8eS22b8zXMhO/index.html) in the Massachusetts Healthcare.


...it's bemusing to say the least. I can't wait for the debates.