Material Cooperation

The concept of material cooperation in the context of moral theology, particularly within the Catholic Church, is a nuanced and complex subject that addresses the moral implications of a person's involvement in the actions of others. This doctrine distinguishes between different levels of cooperation with evil acts, emphasizing the importance of intention and the degree of involvement.

Material cooperation is considered when an individual's actions contribute to another's immoral act without sharing the intent. It is further divided into two categories: immediate and mediate. Immediate material cooperation is direct and usually considered morally wrong, except under duress. Mediate material cooperation, on the other hand, is indirect and can be morally permissible if it is sufficiently remote from the evil act and there is a proportionately grave reason for the cooperation.

The Catholic Church's teaching on this matter is particularly relevant in healthcare, business, and other institutional settings where individuals and organizations must navigate complex moral landscapes. For example, a Catholic hospital must carefully consider its partnerships and services to ensure that it does not materially cooperate with actions contrary to its ethical directives.

Moreover, the principle of material cooperation also takes into account the potential for scandal, which refers to the possibility of leading others to do wrong through one's actions. This aspect underscores the need for prudence and discernment in decision-making, ensuring that any form of cooperation does not undermine the moral teachings of the Church or its witness in the world.

In summary, the Church's teaching on material cooperation provides a framework for individuals and institutions to evaluate their involvement in the actions of others. It encourages a careful assessment of one's intentions, the nature of the cooperation, and the potential consequences, always aiming to uphold the moral good and avoid complicity in evil. 

Understanding these teachings can guide Catholics and others who seek to align their actions with their moral convictions, especially in situations where the lines of moral responsibility are not clear-cut. It is a testament to the Church's commitment to moral integrity and the dignity of the human person, even in the most challenging circumstances. 

 

President Biden Drops Out of Race

In a significant turn of events, President Joe Biden announced at 1:45 PM on Sunday his withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as his successor for the Democratic nomination. This decision comes after a series of developments that raised concerns within the Democratic Party about his candidacy.

President Biden's decision marks a rare and historic moment in American politics. It is uncommon for a sitting president to withdraw from a reelection campaign, especially so close to the election. The announcement has sent ripples through the political landscape, prompting a wide range of reactions from party members, political analysts, and voters alike.

The move follows a challenging debate performance and growing sentiment within the party regarding the President's ability to lead and campaign effectively. In a statement, President Biden expressed that stepping down is in the best interest of the party and the country, emphasizing his commitment to fulfilling his duties as President for the remainder of his term.

Vice President Harris has expressed gratitude for the endorsement and has pledged to unite the Democratic Party and the nation in the upcoming election. The endorsement is seen as a strategic move to consolidate support within the party and present a united front against the Republican nominee.

This development has undoubtedly set the stage for an intense and unpredictable race to the White House. With the Democratic National Convention approaching, the party must now navigate this unprecedented situation and rally behind a new candidate. The coming weeks are expected to be a critical period for the Democrats as they reorganize their campaign strategy and messaging in light of President Biden's withdrawal.

The implications of President Biden's withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race are multifaceted and have the potential to reshape the political landscape in the United States. This unprecedented move by a sitting president not to seek re-election has several immediate and long-term consequences.

Political Implications:

The immediate political implication is the opening of the Democratic nomination process. With President Biden endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic Party is likely to rally behind her to present a united front. However, this could also lead to an open contest, inviting other potential candidates to vie for the nomination, which could either strengthen the party through a robust primary process or expose divisions within its ranks.

Financial Market Reactions:

Financial markets tend to react to political uncertainty, and President Biden's withdrawal is no exception. The announcement has already caused some fluctuations, with investors weighing the impact of this political shift. The stability of financial markets will depend on how quickly and effectively the Democratic Party consolidates its position and whether a clear frontrunner emerges.

Defense and Foreign Policy Considerations:

The withdrawal could have implications for defense and foreign policy, particularly concerning major defense contractors and the military-industrial complex. Companies like Lockheed Martin may anticipate changes in defense policies or contracts depending on who becomes the next president.

Impact on the Republican Strategy:

For the Republican Party, President Biden's withdrawal necessitates a recalibration of their campaign strategy. They must now prepare to face a new Democratic nominee, which could be Vice President Harris or another candidate who emerges from the primaries. This change introduces a new set of dynamics into the race, as the GOP will need to adjust its messaging and tactics.

Public Perception and Democratic Process:

The decision also has implications for public perception and the democratic process. President Biden's letter to the American people outlines his reasons for withdrawing, which may influence how the public views the transparency and accountability of political leaders. An open and competitive primary process could engage the electorate and enhance the legitimacy of the eventual nominee.

Historical Significance:

Historically, President Biden's withdrawal is a rare occurrence that will be analyzed and discussed for years to come. It sets a precedent for future presidents and candidates, and it will be a significant case study for political scientists and historians examining presidential elections and party dynamics.

President Biden's withdrawal from the 2024 race has created a moment of uncertainty and opportunity in American politics. The implications of this decision will unfold over the coming months, influencing the direction of the Democratic Party, the strategies of the Republicans, and the choices of the American electorate. The 2024 presidential election is poised to be a historic and transformative event, with potential outcomes that are still difficult to predict. 

President Biden's unexpected withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race is poised to have a profound impact on the Democratic primary debates. The debates, which are a cornerstone of the primary process, offer candidates a platform to present their policies, challenge their opponents, and connect with voters. With Biden stepping aside, the dynamics of these debates are set to change significantly.

A New Focus for Debates:

Without the incumbent president in the race, the debates will likely shift focus. Candidates will have more space to outline their visions for the future without contrasting them directly against Biden's record. This could lead to a broader range of topics and more in-depth discussions on policy issues.

Increased Intensity and Competition:

Biden's endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris positions her as a frontrunner, but it also opens the door for other candidates to step up their campaigns. The debates will become a critical battleground for candidates to differentiate themselves and gain traction among voters. This could result in more intense and competitive debates as candidates vie for attention and support.

Greater Scrutiny on Vice President Harris:

As the endorsed candidate, Vice President Harris will face increased scrutiny during the debates. Her performance, policies, and ability to lead will be under the microscope, and she will need to use the debates to solidify her position as the new leader of the Democratic Party.

Opportunity for Lesser-Known Candidates:

The reshuffling of the race provides an opportunity for lesser-known candidates to make a name for themselves. With a more open field, these candidates can use the debates to introduce themselves to a national audience and potentially disrupt the established order.

Impact on Debate Strategies:

Campaigns will need to reassess their debate strategies in light of Biden's withdrawal. Without the need to directly challenge an incumbent, candidates may adopt different tactics, focusing more on presenting their platforms and less on attacking the record of the current administration.

Influence on Voter Engagement:

The unexpected turn of events could lead to increased voter interest and engagement in the debates. The new developments add an element of unpredictability to the race, which may draw more viewers to the debates as they seek to understand the implications of Biden's withdrawal.

Implications for Democratic Unity:

The debates will play a crucial role in fostering unity within the Democratic Party. Candidates will need to balance competition with the need to present a united front against the Republican nominee. How they navigate this challenge will be key to maintaining party cohesion.

In conclusion, President Biden's withdrawal from the race introduces a new era for the Democratic primary debates. The upcoming debates will be instrumental in shaping the future of the Democratic Party and its chances in the 2024 presidential election. As the political landscape evolves, the debates will serve as a pivotal forum for candidates to articulate their visions and for voters to make informed decisions about the future leadership of their country.  

As the nation processes this news, attention now turns to Vice President Harris and her campaign. The political dynamics of the 2024 election are shifting, and the outcome remains uncertain. What is clear, however, is that this election cycle will be one for the history books, with its unexpected twists and the potential for further surprises on the road to November.

President Biden made the right decision. He is simply not well enough to handle the heavy responsibility of the presidency of the United States of America.  Those pushing for him to stay were inconsiderate and were pretty much engaging in elder abuse.  The man is not well. We all could see this, especially during the presidential debate.  He endorsed Kamala, but she shares his vision and record which is not very popular now.  It is most likely that the Democrats will lose the presidency.  

We pray for Mr. Biden and wish him the best.  

 

SCOTUS Unanimously Sides With Trump Against Colorado

The Supreme Court of the United States has unanimously reversed the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court that had removed former President Donald Trump from the state's Republican presidential primary ballot. The Colorado court had ruled that Trump was disqualified from running for office again under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which bars anyone who has engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution from holding any federal or state office. The Colorado court found that Trump had incited the violent attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, in an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court disagreed with that interpretation of Section 3. The majority opinion, written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, held that only Congress has the authority to enforce Section 3 against federal officeholders and candidates and that states cannot unilaterally exclude anyone from the ballot based on their own judgment of insurrection. The majority also noted that Congress has not passed any legislation to implement Section 3, and that it has not declared anyone to be disqualified under it since 1898. The majority argued that allowing states to decide who is eligible for office under Section 3 would create a "state-by-state patchwork" of decisions that would undermine the uniformity and stability of federal elections.

The majority opinion was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Barrett also wrote a separate concurring opinion, in which she agreed with the majority's conclusion but suggested that there may be other ways to enforce Section 3 besides congressional legislation, such as a declaratory judgment by a federal court or a challenge by an opposing candidate. She also expressed some doubt about whether Section 3 applies to former officeholders at all, or only to current ones.

The three liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, also concurred in the judgment but wrote a separate opinion to criticize the majority for going beyond what was necessary to resolve the case. They argued that the majority should have left open the possibility of other means of enforcing Section 3, such as those suggested by Justice Barrett or by a federal statute that authorizes private lawsuits to challenge violations of voting rights. They also pointed out that the majority did not address the merits of the Colorado court's finding that Trump had engaged in insurrection and that they did not rule out the possibility that Congress or a federal court could still declare him ineligible in the future.

The Supreme Court's decision means that Trump will remain on the ballot in Colorado and in two other states, Illinois and Maine, that had also sought to exclude him under Section 3. Trump is currently leading the polls among Republican voters nationwide and has announced his intention to run for president again in 2024.

It is very rare for the Supreme Court of the United States to get things right. However, they have been on a roll lately. The decision to keep President Trump on the ballot in Colorado and other states was a good one. Trump was removed from the ballot under a false pretense, namely that he was the creator and instigator of an insurrection.  To date, he has not been charged nor found guilty of such a treasonous act. How can he be penalized for something he was never even found guilty of?  Those who attempted to remove the former president from the ballot are acting on an ulterior political motive. It is sad and scary that some courts even entertained this. 

What do you think? Post your comment below on Disqus. Be sure to follow the rules so your comment can be posted.

References:

- [Supreme Court of the United States: Trump v. Anderson](https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-719_19m2.pdf)

- [USA Today: Trump stays on Colorado ballot: What to know from Supreme Court ruling](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/03/04/supreme-court-decision-trump-colorado-ballot-takeaways/72841402007/)

- [CNBC: Supreme Court: States can't block Trump from ballot](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/03/04/supreme-court-rules-in-trump-colorado-ballot-case.html)

- [The Hill: Supreme Court keeps Trump on Colorado ballot: Read the ruling](https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4506668-supreme-court-keeps-trump-on-colorado-ballot-read-the-ruling/)

- [Denver Post: U.S. Supreme Court rules Donald Trump is allowed on Colorado's ballot](https://www.denverpost.com/2024/03/04/supreme-court-ruling-donald-trump-ballot-colorado-case/)

Senator John McCain Dead at 81

A day after discontinuing treatment for a brain tumor, Senator John McCain has passed away at the age of 81. Senator McCain was an American hero who was even captured during his service for our nation. He was tortured but survived.

McCain later on became a long-time Republican senator who often took on an independent voice within his party. Twice he attempted a run for the presidency but was defeated by Presidents Bush and Obama in 2000 and 2008. He referred to himself as the "maverick" and had faced skin cancer before and survived plane crashes.

His daughter made the announcement on Twitter:

I love you forever - my beloved father @SenJohnMcCain pic.twitter.com/Y50tVQvlVe

— Meghan McCain (@MeghanMcCain) August 26, 2018

As with any politician, McCain has had some controversy and has been accused of being a traitor by fellow Republicans for siding with Democrats. Some African American activists have not been fans of McCain either after he voted against the creation of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. day. Nevertheless, McCain served his nation both in the military and public service. Many have offered kind words, including Presidents Trump and Obama who tweeted:

My deepest sympathies and respect go out to the family of Senator John McCain. Our hearts and prayers are with you!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 26, 2018

Our statement on the passing of Senator John McCain: pic.twitter.com/3GBjNYxoj5

— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) August 26, 2018

May John Sidney McCain III rest in peace.  He was a true American hero!



Source:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/25/politics/john-mccain-obituary/index.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/sen-john-mccain-independent-voice-gop-establishment-dies-81-n790971

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/us-senator-john-mccain-dies-brain-tumour-battle-073302052.html

Post Super Tuesday #GOPdebate: FoxNews

The first GOP debate after Super Tuesday took place in Detroit. It was conducted by Fox News. Trump participated despite the presence of Megyn Kelly as a moderator. The participants were Cruz, Trump, Rubio and Kasich.  Ben Carson did not participate and may drop out of the race altogether, though no official statement has been made by his camp.

The debate was similar to the last one by CNN with Rubio going after Trump heavily.  He mocked Trump, questioned him on his inability to truly answer questions being asked by moderators and cornering him on his record and contradictions.  The moderators as well questioned Trump heavily and at one point showed video clips of him contradicting himself.  Cruz joined in the attack on Trump and at one point the debate became a circus between Trump, Cruz and Rubio. Trump defended himself over the 'hand' attack made by Rubio insinuating that he was OK in the 'male department,' if you know what I mean.  Later on, Cruz was telling Trump to break and count to ten prompting Rubio to say that he hopes there is no display of Yoga here. Trump was cornered on 'Trump University,' the hiring of illegal immigrants and even the failed 'Trump steaks' and other businesses led by Trump. Rubio even attacked Trump regarding the products being made in China and Mexico.

While the three (Trump, Cruz, Rubio) went at each other during the debate, nothing was really presented in regards to platform. Kasich I believe won the debate based on his answers and maturity. The others looked like kids arguing with each other on stage.  Many political pundits have stated that tonight's debate made the Republicans look bad.






Source:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics/republican-debate-highlights/

http://www.foxnews.com/live-coverage/fox-news-gop-debate

http://www.foxnews.com/live-coverage/fox-news-gop-debate

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2016/presidential-elections-events-calendar

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/03/the-fox-news-gop-debate-transcript-annotated/

The Presidential Race Begins

The presidential race for 2016 is underway. First Ted Cruz announced his candidacy last month with the platform that we have to "restore the constitution," now Rand Paul, Hillary Clinton, and Marco Rubio have also joined.  Like Ted Cruz, Rand Paul is also running on the platform of "bringing America back."  Hillary Clinton is running for a second time after dropping out in 2008. She announced her candidacy via her website using a video that featured mostly women and LGBT couples.  It is clear that she is running on progressive issues.  Marco Rubio spoke in a general way mentioning that politicians have been stuck in the 20th century and putting emphasis on the economy, immigration and foreign policy. Jeb Bush who was a mentor to Rubio has yet to officially announce his candidacy.  It will be interesting to see if Rubio attacks him during the campaign.

This presidential race should prove interesting. There can be a first Latino president, first female president and the first time a former first lady may become president. While the debate will rage on regarding economics, foreign policy, education and the like, I think social issues will be heavily discussed in this election; particularly, same-sex marriage, religious freedom and abortion.










Source:
http://www.wndu.com/home/headlines/Sen-Rand-Paul-enters-race-for-Republican-presidential-nomination-298927081.html

http://www.baynews9.com/content/news/baynews9/news/article.html/content/news/articles/bn9/2015/4/7/rand_paul_ready_to_j.html

http://wbay.com/2015/04/07/republican-rand-paul-enters-race-for-white-house/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/apr/7/rand-paul-enters-presidential-race-vows-take-ameri/

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/03/23/a-time-to-reclaim-the-constitution-of-the-united-states-ted-cruz-enters-the-race/

http://www.france24.com/en/20150323-republican-senator-ted-cruz-announces-2016-presidential-bid/

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/24/us/politics/ted-cruz-2016-presidential-race.html

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/lara-brown/2015/04/13/hillary-clintons-2016-announcement-video-shows-shes-her-own-worst-enemy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/13/hillary-clinton-video_n_7055324.html

http://time.com/3819137/hillary-clinton-2016-video/

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/meet-gay-couple-featured-hillary-clintons-presidential-announcement/story?id=30275674

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/04/13/399233906/hillary-clinton-is-back-but-will-there-be-a-return-of-the-rodham

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/14/us/politics/on-the-road-hillary-clinton-stops-for-lunch-at-chipotle-and-goes-unrecognized.html?_r=0

Republicans Win Big

As expected, the GOP took the Senate. Many political pundits predicted that Republicans would take the Congress due to a wave of voter discontent at Obama's policies. In fact, many Democratic candidates tried hard to set themselves apart from President Obama in order to avoid being seen as part of his failure as president.

President Obama will not have a rough two years which are left in his presidency with a Republican Congress leaving him pretty much powerless. The American people have spoken and told Obama collectively that they do not approve of his policies and want change. From Obamacare to immigration, the dream act and Ebola, Obama has failed on these issues and made decisions which have angered the American people. Not all Democrats lost. Governor Cuomo retained his governorship in New York state and is pushing his progressive views there. The infamous "abortion barbie" Wendy Davis lost to wheelchair bound Greg Abbot who she mocked in a commercial.  He had over 59% of the vote in Texas.  

Republican Mitch McConnel is expected to be the new Senate majority leader and vowed to unite Congress in order to get work done in Washington, DC.  President Obama has yet to release any congratulatory message. Ballots were also being voted on throughout the union. Many states voted to pass a minimum wage increase and measures to make marijuana legal.  Florida knocked down a measure to legalized medicinal marijuana. Colorado disturbingly voted down a measure that would have amended its constitution to define an unborn child as a person. They legalized marijuana last year, but cannot define an unborn child as a human person.  This is troubling indeed!

Congratulations to the GOP for taking control of the Senate. Hopefully they will repeal Obamacare which has caused so much harm with religious freedom as well as push for more restrictions against abortion and defend marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Senate Results

House Results

Governor Results

Source:

http://www.cnn.com/?refresh=1

http://www.cnn.com/2014/11/04/politics/election-day-story/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

http://news.yahoo.com/senate-control-top-prize-midterm-election-080423144--election.html

Election Day 2014 - Voting

Voting is an important act and should be used wisely.

We can elect a good person or a bad one.  Our choice can have consequences that we will have to deal with here on Earth.  There is also the factor of having to answer when judgment day or death comes if our conscience and intellect were not properly utilized and we voted in people who brought about evil instead of good.

As citizens of the United States of America, we all have our individual reasons why we vote either way. However, we must not be selfish and only think of our needs or wants and instead vote for the candidate that will bring about the common good for all not just ourselves.

Many I am sure will take this voting opportunity to elect some one they feel will better the economy and bring more jobs since these are the main issues in today's America. Yes, those are excellent reasons to vote for we do need the economy to survive in a world that currently uses money to perform trades and transactions. We also want people to have employment so that they can earn an honest living and meet the expenses of society.  However, we must remember that politicians are known for making promises that are nearly impossible to complete and mainly do so to win over voters. So we cannot rush to judgment on promises alone.  I have yet to learn of a politician who did everything he or she promised.  In most cases, they have done the opposite!

We must be informed voters and understand each candidate's ideas and plans before making a choice. Some will vote for one candidate because he is older, stern and has more experience, while others may vote for another candidate because he or she is a fresh new face in politics or popular. But we must stick to the common good and how either candidate will bring about them.  We must ask ourselves certain questions in good conscience:

• Does the candidate value human life in all stages of development? 
• Does he or she believe life is sacred and precious and must never be aborted or euthanized for any reason? 
• Does he or she respect freedom of religion as the Constitution protects?
• Does the candidate value education for all? 
• Does the candidate value fair economics for all in every social and monetary class? 
• Does the candidate value the sacred institution of marriage between one man and one woman as God and nature intended? 
• Does the candidate value America's customs, its Constitution and laws above him/herself? 
• Does the candidate put America's protection first in a time of war, terrorism and disease?
• Does the candidate want to secure our borders and allow people to enter our country legally or does he or she want people to just come in and show no concern for them or citizens?

These are some of the questions we must ask when choosing a candidate to vote. God gave us conscience so we must put it to use and vote for a candidate that will bring about the common good, not just focus on one area or push his or her personal agenda. This is the moral and intelligent thing to do.

We cannot vote for a candidate based on his or her color, speaking skills, charisma, voting record, interest in helping the rich or the poor, his or her religion, etc. His or her color should not matter, nor his or her speaking skills since speeches are written by others not the candidate. Charisma is important to draw attention, but public office is a serious job and not for a performer. Voting record is important, but those votes are in the past and what matters is the candidate's current platform. A candidate should focus on all, rich and poor. His or her religion should not matter as long as he or she respects the Judeo/Christian values and views of this nation and does not impose his or her own personal views and beliefs on all Americans.

This election is an important one, but so has every other election. Let us vote for a good candidate who will protect all, the unborn, the born, people of all ages, races, gender, religion, orientation and social class. Let us vote for some one who will follow the law in a moral way and not try to legislate his views or try to rewrite social norms such as marriage and when a person should live and die.

God bless America and may the best candidate for our current time win and have great success in bringing about the common good.

Election day 2012

It is Election day 2012.  People are hopefully taking advantage of their right to vote.  Voting can decide whether we enjoy our rights as Americans or lose them.  

Voting is an important act and should be used wisely. We can elect a good leader or a bad one.  Our conscience and intellect should be properly utilized when voting.  Our choice will have consequences that we will have to put up with and answer to before God when judgment day or death comes.  

As citizens of the United States of America, we all have our individual reasons why we vote either way. However, we must not be selfish by voting for the candidate that will only service our needs.  Instead we should vote for the candidate that will bring about the common good for all not just ourselves. 

Many I am sure will take this voting opportunity to elect some one they feel will better the economy and bring troops home. Perhaps we might vote because of employment, education or even immigration.  Yes, those are excellent reasons to vote on.  

• We do need an economy to survive in a world that currently uses money to perform trades and transactions. 
• Yes, we do want peace and our troops home to be with their families and friends. 
• We do want employment, good education and want to fix the immigration situation.  

However, we must not forget that politicians are known for making promises that are nearly impossible to complete and mainly do so to win over voters. So we cannot rush to judgment on rhetoric or promises alone. We must be informed voters and understand each candidate's ideas and plans and if they are possible before making a choice. 

Unfortunately, some will vote for a candidate because he might be older, stern and has more experience, while others may vote for another candidate because he is African American, popular, and a fresh new face in politics.  But we must stick to the common good and how either candidate will bring about them. 

The current candidates for the presidency of the United States are Barack Obama and Mitt Romney.  Both offer different ideas on how to get the country going.  Both have good qualities about them and bad ones.  We must look at these and think carefully how either of these men will affect the nation as its president.  

• Does the candidate value life?  Without human life, none of the other issues would exist.   
• Does he or she believe life is sacred and precious and must never be aborted or euthanized for any reason? 
• Does the candidate value Religious Freedom? 
• Does the candidate value education for all? 
• Does the candidate value fair economics for all in every social and monetary class? 
• Does the candidate value the sacred institution of marriage between one man and one woman as God and nature intended? 
• Does the candidate value the nation's citizens and seek to genuinely assist those who are here illegally to become citizens and add to our nation's greatness?
• Does the candidate value America's customs, its Constitution and laws above him/herself. 
• Does the candidate always put America's protection first especially in a time of war and terrorism? 

These are some of the questions we must ask when choosing a candidate to vote for. God gave us a conscience so we must put it to use and vote for the candidate that will bring about the common good, not just focus on one area or present an ulterior motive. This is the moral thing to do. 

• We should not vote for a candidate solely based on gender, color, religion, speaking skills, charisma, voting record, interest in helping the rich or the poor, etc.  
• Color should not matter, nor speaking skills since speeches are written by others not the candidate. 
• Charisma is important to draw attention, but the presidency is a serious job and not for a entertainment. 
• Voting record is important, but those votes are in the past and what matters is the candidate's current platform. 
• A candidate should be focused on all, rich and poor.
• Religion should not matter as long as he respects the Judeo/Christian values and views of this nation and does not impose his own doctrines into the government process. 

This election is an extremely important one.  Our nation is going downhill fast and on the road to the situation Greece is facing.  Many of our rights are being restricted, in particular: religious freedom.    

Let us vote for a good candidate who will protect all, the unborn, the born, people of all ages, races, gender, religion, orientation and social class. Let us vote for some one who will follow the law in a moral way and not try to legislate his views from the Oval office and try to rewrite social norms such as marriage or when a person should live and die. 

God bless America and may the best candidate for our current time win and have great success in bringing about the common good.

Election 2012 Survey

Please take some time to answer the survey below.

Create your free online surveys with SurveyMonkey, the world's leading questionnaire tool.

Presidential Debate 2012

Tonight's debate was fun to watch.  It started off fine and got more interesting as it went on.  Both candidates were calm and poised at first until the questions began to flow.  Obama was visibly nervous and on the defense after Romney shot at him facts and refuted his points.  As the debate moved on, Obama looked uncomfortable and annoyed.  His arguments were incoherent and at a few instances needed help from the moderator.  There was one point where he even said "I think we should move on to the next question."

Meanwhile, Romney tied every point back to creating jobs and linked it to real people while challenging Obama on his record these past 4 years.  Romney was clearly prepared while Obama was aloof and lost.

Moderator Jim Lehrer was horrible.  He had a difficult time controlling the time and flow of the debate allowing both Romney and Obama to talk past the 2 min limit.

On the topic of government role, Romney stated that rights come from God who is the creator and that we are all the children of the same God.  He also stressed religious freedom indirectly attacking Obama's attack on religious freedom with his policies.   

We are endowed by our creator with our rights, I believe we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. That statement also says that we are endowed by our creator with the right to pursue happiness as we choose. I interpret that as, one, making sure that those people who are less fortunate and can't care for themselves are cared by -- by one another. We're a nation that believes that we're all children of the same god and we care for those that have difficulties, those that are elderly and have problems and challenges, those that are disabled. We care for them. - Romney 

Romney was on target in this debate leaving Obama looking for words with his constant use of non-lexical vocable use of "um" "uh."  The debate looked horrible for Obama who is known for being a good speaker. His train of thought derailed.

Even Obama supporters such as Bill Maher were disappointed in him, Maher posted on twitter:

i can't believe i'm saying this, but Obama looks like he DOES need a teleprompter
— Bill Maher (@billmaher) October 4, 2012

Obama made a lot of great points tonight. Unfortunately, most of them were for Romney
— Bill Maher (@billmaher) October 4, 2012

i must say, of all the Romneys i've seen, this Debate Romney is my favorite
— Bill Maher (@billmaher) October 4, 2012

CNN's Piers Morgan had this to tweet:

WINNERS: Romney, Trump LOSERS: Obama, Jim Lehrer, Big Bird #PMTdebate
— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) October 4, 2012

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on her program foolishly called the debate a tie.  She must have been watching some other thing, not what the rest of the nation and world were watching.

If Romney continues to perform like this, then he will be the next POTUS.




Source:

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/03/14207942-candidates-battle-over-tax-plans-in-first-debate?lite
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/03/politics/debate-transcript/
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-live-obama-romney-presidential-debate-2012,0,3871379.story

GOP Debate Jacksonville, Florida

Tonight's debate was a good one to watch.  Romney and Gingrich went at it with the former being more aggressive than in previous debates.  Ron Paul seemed to be the comic relief of the night by making comments that brought the audience to laughter.  I won't be surprised if he drops out soon.   


Towards the end of the debate, a member of the audience asked what role would religion play in making decisions as President of the United States of America.  Here are the replies from the candidates that I liked. 






Mitt Romney replied:


ROMNEY: Ron Paul makes very good point. I concur with that. I would also seek the guidance of -- of providence in making critical decisions. 

And of course, ours is a nation which is based upon Judeo- Christian values and ethics. Our law is based upon those values and ethics. And in some cases, our law doesn't encompass -- encompass all of the issues that we face around the world. 

The conviction that the founders, when they wrote the Declaration of Independence, were writing a document that was not just temporary and not just for one small locale but really something which described the relationship between God and man -- that's something which I think a president would carry in his heart. 

So when they said, for instance, that the creator had "endowed us with certain unalienable rights, among them life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," I would seek to assure that those principles and values remain in America and that we help share them with other people in the world, not by conquering them, but by helping them through our trade, through our various forms of soft power, to help bring people the joy and -- and -- and opportunity that exists in this great land. 






New Gingrich replied:




GINGRICH: I would say that there are three ways in which religion would affect me. 

The first is, I agree with Governor Romney. I think anyone who is president is faced with decisions so enormous that they should go to God. They should seek guidance. Because these are decisions beyond the ability of mere mortals to truly decide without some sense of what it is we should be doing. 

I would say, second, that we have a real obligation to recognize that, if you're truly faithful, it's not just an hour on Sundays or Saturdays or Fridays. It's in fact something that should suffuse your life, to be a part of who you are. And in that sense, it is inextricably tied in with how you behave. 

But I would say, third, one of the reasons I am running is there has been an increasingly aggressive war against religion and in particular against Christianity in this country, largely by...

... largely by a secular elite and the academic news media and judicial areas. And I frankly believe it's important to have some leadership that stands up and says, enough; we are truly guaranteed the right of religious freedom, not religious suppression by the state. 






Rick Santorum replied:


SANTORUM: Faith is a very, very important part of my life, but it's a very, very important part of this country. The foundational documents of our country -- everybody talks about the Constitution, very, very important. But the Constitution is the "how" of America. It's the operator's manual. 

The "why" of America, who we are as a people, is in the Declaration of Independence, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights."

The Constitution is there to do one thing: protect God-given rights. That's what makes America different than every other country in the world. No other country in the world has its rights -- rights based in God-given rights, not government-given rights. 

And so when you say, well, faith has nothing to do with it, faith has everything to do with it. If rights come...

If our president believes that rights come to us from the state, everything government gives you, it can take away. The role of the government is to protect rights that cannot be taken away. 

And so the answer to that question is, I believe in faith and reason and approaching the problems of this country but understand where those rights come from, who we are as Americans and the foundational principles by which we have changed the world. 


(Source:  http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1201/26/se.05.html)




Romney makes a good point that the American Fathers had a strong religious conviction when formulating the Declaration of Independence.  Many Atheists and Secularists deny the Judeo-Christian foundations of this nation.  


Gingrich also makes a good point that leaders need to go to a higher authority in order to run a nation and make the right decisions.  No mere mortal has all the answers and wisdom.  He/she needs God for guidance.  He also makes excellent points that faith is not just something one does on a day of the week.  It is a daily commitment and conversion to God.  I'm glad he mentioned the attack religion is getting from secularism which is starting to take hold more visibly in this nation. 


Lastly, I think Santorum hit it out of the ball park, so to speak.  He says the Constitution is the "how" and the Declaration of Independence is the "why." He goes on to say that rights are given by God the Creator and not the government.  These rights are not negotiable.    

Voting

Voting is an important act and should be used wisely.

We can elect a good person or a bad one and our choice will can have consequences that we will have to answer when judgment day or death comes if our conscience and intellect were properly utilized.

As citizens of the United States of America, we all have our individual reasons why we vote either way. However, we must not be selfish and instead vote for the candidate that will bring about the common good for all not just ourselves.

Many I am sure will take this voting opportunity to elect some one they feel will better the economy and bring troops home. Yes, those are excellent reasons to vote for we do need economy to survive in a world that currently uses money to perform trades and transactions. Yes, we do want peace and our troops home to be with their families and friends. However, we must remember that politicians are known for making promises that are nearly impossible to complete and mainly do so to win over voters. So we cannot rush to judgment on promises alone.

We must be informed voters and understand each candidates ideas and plans before making a choice. Some will vote for one candidate because he is older, stern and has more experience, while others may vote for another candidate because he is African American, popular, and a fresh new face in politics. But we must stick to the common good and how either candidate will bring about them.

Does the candidate value life? Does he or she believe life is sacred and precious and must never be aborted or euthanized for any reason? Does the candidate value education for all? Does the candidate value fair economics for all in every social and monetary class? Does the candidate value the sacred institution of marriage between one man and one woman as God and nature intended? Does the candidate value America's customs, its Constitution and laws about him/herself. Does the candidate put America's protection first in a time of war and terrorism?

These are some of the questions we must ask when choosing a candidate to vote. God gave us conscience so we must put it to use and vote for a candidate that will bring about the common good, not just focus on one area. This is the moral thing to do.

We cannot vote for a candidate based on his color, speaking skills, charisma, voting record, interest in helping the rich or the poor, his religion, etc. His color should not matter, nor his speaking skills since speeches are written by others not the candidate. Charisma is important to draw attention, but the presidency is a serious job and not for a performer. Voting record is important, but those votes are in the past and what matters is the candidates current platform. A candidate should focus ..ing all, rich and poor. His religion should not matter as long as he respects the Judeo/Christian values and views of this nation and does not impose his own personal views and beliefs.

This election is an important one, but so has every other election. Let us vote for a good candidate who will protect all, the unborn, the born, people of all ages, races, gender, religion, orientation and social class. Let us vote for some one who will follow the law in a moral way and not try to legislate his views from the Oval office and try to rewrite social norms such as marriage and when a person should live and die.

God bless America and may the best candidate for our current time win and have great success in bringing about the common good.

about 8 months ago