www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall kerry wrong for catholics. com

In the second debate, good and evil was plainly laid out before us at the end. We either choose life or we choose death. I choose God's side and so life it is! Personally, I will not go against God's Word.

As Zenovia posted:

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE FOR OCTOBER 8, 2004 - FROM WASHINGTON, DC


Organization: Religious Freedom Coalition
To:"RFC" <support@rfcnet.org>

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE - WEEK ENDING OCTOBER 8, 2004

HOUSE AND SENATE IN RECESS UNTIL NOVEMBER 16th

IMPORTANT INTERNATIONAL SECTION TODAY!

THE PRESIDENCY

FORCED ABORTION

President George W. Bush has withheld $25 million in funding from the UN Population Fund (UNFPA)
because of that agency's support of forced abortions and forced sterilizations in Chinaand other nations.
The President transferred the funds to a State Department program to fight human trafficking and
prostitution. Previously the President had transferred $9 million that was to go the UNFPA to the US
Agency for International Development for a reproductive health program. So far this year President George
W. Bush has move 11 percent of the $300 million Congress allotted to the UNFPA to other US agencies
who do not promote abortion. What would John Kerry have done?

ABSTINENCE GRANTS

On October 5th President George W. Bush announced $100 million in new grants for abstinence-focused
programs as part of the $15 billion Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief. Of the eleven organizations receiving
grants nine are faith-based. The grants will help these faith-based organizations teach children in AIDS
plagued nations such as Ethiopia, Haiti, Tanzania and Zambia to avoid behavior putting them at risk for
HIV. Previously the President has said, "I think our country needs a practical, effective and moral message.
In addition to other kinds of prevention, we need to tell our children that abstinence is the only certain way
to avoid contracting HIV. It works every time."

What would John Kerry have done?

Sounds right on to me. PaniRose

Next month, I hope we have an election, not just a plebescite. Many policies and issues effect the long-term well-being of our nation. We must all be prayerful and thoughtful about the implications of our ballots for the sake of all the living.

Actually, I came to the exact opposite conclusion. I realized that when Pres. Bush responded in the debates, he was speaking above the mentality of most. He responded to issues, when most of the people were not fully aware of what the issues were. Pres. Bush's problem is, that he assumes people know more than they do.

For example, when Pres. Bush said that the Democrats want a litmus test for the judges he appoints.

How many people know that there is a committee in the Senate that decides who and what should be brought to a vote? Do they know that Pres. Bush's conservative judge appointee's would be elected by a majority of both Republicans and Democrats in the Senate? Do they know that it is (I believe) two liberal Senators that are hindering them from coming to a vote? Do they know that those two Senators, are hindering the 'will' of the people.


Kerry on the other hand, just lies and lies and lies, with no conscience whatsoever to hinder his verbal fluency.

As for intelligence, I don't think it's that easy to get into Yale and Harvard.

Zenovia

Unfortunately, Rose, the ballot will not give us a choice of good vs. evil, or life vs. death, only, essentially, Kerry vs. Bush. Please don't suggest that those who select one or another of the given choices are actually choosing good or evil, life or death.

Zenovia, I think that most folks know more than you give them credit for. They probably even know what Bush actually meant regarding litmus tests.

As to getting into and through Harvard or Yale.
There has been a strong preference for children of alumni and donors. This preference continues, although it is less strong than in years past. In fact the SAT's were invented by Harvard's president Conant to provide a quantitative basis for showing who is likely to succeed at the university, to break the grip of the the New England elite, and to give kids of working class folks a chance.

And at these schools there is a saying: pay the fee, get a C - aka the gentleman's C. It is rare to be dismissed for academic reasons; getting out with a GPA of 2 represents bottom performance. Overall, his getting into and out of Harvard and Yale proves precious little about his intellect.

Oh, and it would be nice, if you make an accusation of lies, and lies, and lies, to provide some documentation.

Mike,

Let's keep in mind that US Senators - including Kennedy and Kerry - have no authority over what penalties are instituted in their state with respect to public health matters, and even their influence as to such is severely limited in a state where the Governor (as is the case in Massachusetts) is of the opposite party as them, particularly since the administration of public health is within the purview of the state executive.

Additionally, the fine is levied against the health care provider, not the individual receiving the immunization. Further, I doubt that it is even enforceable. "At risk" is a judgement that relies not only on such objective factors as age, but on subjective factors, such as reports to a health care provider - by the consumer - of "risk factors". Since the vast majority of flu vaccinations are provided in public health venues, rather than by individual practitioners, most providers are not sufficiently familiar (if at all) with the presenting consumer to do more than rely on their verbal assertation of being "at risk". The likelihood that any attempt to impose civil or criminal penalties on this basis would withstand a court challenge is highly unlikely.

Flu Clinic May Be In Violation [masslive.com]

I reiterate - the Commissioner works for Governor Mitt Romney, a Republican, not for Senator Kerry.

Dislike either of the two - and vote for or against whichever you choose (the choice between them, in my opinion, is a poor one anyway), but stick to using accurate facts.

Many years,

Neil

Zenovia,

I agree with djs. There may be a lot that the American public doesn't understand about the workings of Capitol Hill, but the machinations involved in the appointment of the federal judiciary is not one of them. Tracing back to at least the Kennedy-Johnson era, and increasingly through the Nixon era, there has been incredible airtime and press devoted to federal judicial appointments and the politics involved on both sides - executive and legislative. Frankly, I suspect that this is likely one of the issues on which the American public is most knowledgeable.

Many years,

Neil

For the posters that believe bearing false witness is the equivalent of lying, I submit the following:


Joe Enterprise Analysis Corporation


203 348-7001

http://www.eacorp.com/

----- Original Message -----

From: Mike Capous Sent: Friday,October 8th, 2004 9:15 PM

Subject: Democratic quotations, proof in writing...thank you Pat Pasciuto


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998


"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. we want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998


Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998



"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten time since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18,1998


"[WE] urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs." -
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD),
John Kerry( D - MA), and others Oct. 9,1998


"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998


"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton
Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999


"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs
continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by
Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001



"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of
delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002


"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002


"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and Developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002


"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002


"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002


"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working Aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002


"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct
10, 2002


"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002


"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction

... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003


Every one of these democrats now say that President Bush lied about Hussein storing weapons of mass destruction. They are alleging that he involved the country in war for no reason!

Really no need to duplicate your posts.

Well I'm not sure how the quotes provided give evidence of false witness / lying, but you make a bold claim:

Can you support either of these allegations that you are making?

Not that he would, but I suspect if the Pope came out and bound under pain of sin all those who voted for a particular candidate, that candidate's supporters would say, "but he didn't mean it quite that way." Sure politics is not as important as religion. :rolleyes: Just think, a few more days and it will all be over.

And that, ByzTn, is a point worth pondering.

Dear DJS,

The author that compulated the quotes by the Democrats, made the assertion that these Senators were now saying President Bush lied. It was not my words...believe me, I am not that knowledgable about the sayings of each and every Senator in Washington.

I have heard Democrats being interviewed on TV say that President Bush lied about Iraq and I did hear Senator Kennedy stating that Pres. Bush lied about Iraq. Now that was right before Senator Kennedy was ripped apart by Rumsfeld... if one should ever wonder why Rumsfeld has been attacked so fervently by the Democrats.

I also shockingly heard Senator Kerry state in a debate that he would make us energy efficient by drilling the oil reserves in Alaska. Now he said that in the debate with a straight face, and absolutely no qualms. Yet he knows that President Bush has been trying to pass legislation to have oil drilled in the Alaskan reserves for the past four years. The legislation to drill for that oil was hindered because of the Democrats and their environmental policies.

As for stating that Pres. Bush was a rich kid, one must give him credit for earning his forty million...of course had he not had his father, it might not have been so easy. But then again, Kerry has to be given the most credit. He made it in three minutes simply by saying "I do".

Well I don't know that much about Senator Kerry, but I will state what I do know. It seems his father worked in the foreign office and married quite well. Senator Kerry was able to spend his summers at his family estate in France.

I believe his cousin is a mayor in a French town. Considering this, we have to believe Senator Kerry's nurturing was as equally French as it was American. It appears his rich aunts on his maternal side paid for his private schools, both Swiss and American.

Senator Kerry, married well..twice. The second wife is the Heinz widow. One of the biographies on his families life style stated that her jet alone costs $35,000 an hour to run.

Add that expense to all the others in order for him to maintain the million dollar homes all over the world, and one easily realizes why he can't relate to the average person.

Zenovia, (A staunch member of the religious right)

Regardless, we have ascertained (via the the U.S. Chief Weapons Inspector of Iraq) that Saddam Hussein neither had WMDs in his possession nor the ability to create them.

Those who disagree with this assessment should take it up with the Chief Weapons Inspector.

Not to mention that Saddam Hussein and his country had no connection whatever to Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida, as has been alleged by those who, I suppose, easily succumb to this administration's subliminal messages.

I also find the brackets around the "We" in the only statement that Zenovia cited that had Senator Kerry's name attached to it, quite curious. If the entire word is in bracket, then in standard English that means the original statement included no such word.

Zenovia,

For the record, I am a Catholic who adheres to and believes in all of the Church's dogmata. In fact, if it came down to it, I would vote for Bush because I believe, overall, more lives would be saved under his administration that under Kerry's. Luckily, I don't turn 18 until January 2nd and therefore am exempt from such a decision. In any case, I don't 1984-esque mindthought that I think the Bush administration has come to master.

Logos Teen

Dear Teen Logos,

Sadaam Hussein is a WMD.

Paul