Sinned wrote:In this case I was just trying to inject a little tongue in cheek humour and no, I don't have a problem with you. I think that except for MOH problem we are very similar in nature and are tolerant enough to get over our religious differences. You are welcome to visit me anytime though the distance be great. And I enjoy your posts and photography.
No worries Dennis. We're cool.
Pdxfashionpioneer wrote:Jenn: Politifact found that Trump was untruthful over 90% of the time. Hillary Clinton, under 30%.
While I'm not really saying one way or the other, it's a general belief that "politicians lie", you know the old joke by how you can tell when they are... when their lips are moving.
But seriously, all jokes aside while I'm not claiming Trump to be a 100% honest man because I don't really know (I don't live inside his head), I don't believe anyone can say with absolute certainty that Hillary Clinton is an honest woman. Even those that know her intimately can not vouch for absolute certainty of her integrity. Only Hillary Clinton knows her own trustworthiness. And let me say here that this is NOT singling her out, it's simply human nature to lie and Clinton is not above human nature. I'm not saying this makes her a bad human being... I'm just saying she's human and prone to lie.
Nobody knows Clinton's heart and soul better than Clinton herself. However being such a major player in all things politics, that in itself is an indicator of conniving personal interest, which again is not singling her out, as virtually all politicians are self serving above all else. Personally I believe by looking at the outward evidence and the "pulse" I get from the national situation, Clinton's overall position was more a power grab from a woman who want's to be first in everything. Which in itself is not an immoral or "bad" position to take. There is nothing wrong with anyone looking out for number one, but in Clinton's case, the word from the wires seems to indicate she has little interest in serving the country and more of an interest in serving her own interest and ego. Which again, also seems to be the Trump position (lets face it). But to paint one as a hero and villainize the other, regardless of who that "other" is I feel is somewhat short sighted and biased. To put it another way, I'm not saying Clinton is Satan's spawn, but she ain't no saint either, and I'm not saying Trump is a saint, but he ain't Satan's spawn likewise. (That title [Satan's spawn] goes to Pence
)
Then again, I live in a region where I'm exposed to a constant diet of anti-Clinton rhetoric so my view on this could be somewhat clouded I will admit.
crfriend wrote: Imagine the scenario above putting a Dan Quayle into the driver's seat (or Pence or Kaine, both fairly hard-line religious types). All of a sudden the general populace would have to really pay attention.
Jenn and many of people I know have expressed extreme concern of Kaine's overly religious views, to somehow to compare him to Pence. While I will admit to being someone ignorant of the details of this I also remain somewhat baffled by all of the anti-Kaine rhetoric I constantly hear. I personally recall no major Earth shaking events when he served as Virginia governor, aside from the fact he served over the crash of 2008, which was taxing (pardon the pun) on I'd say many state legislatures. Judging from his Wikipeida article it seems like he is a slightly moderate- yet party line serving Democrat. Nothing too extreme at any rate. Sure he's a Catholic and has his religious convictions, which again according to the article seems to put him at odds with the general positions of his own party, particularly on the matter of abortion, but I'd hardly call him the Democratic version of Pence. In fact, I'd say that the fact that he is such a devout Catholic as well as a Democrat probably even's him out a fair amount.
I'd jokingly say that Kaine is to the Democratic party as I (Moon Shadow- a "man-witch") would be serving as a Republican- I'd certainly be considered a moderate. But there's another word for moderate Republicans- and they've come to be called Libertarians, which I have considered myself for a while now. Although in recently I've been thinking about shifting my political loyalty to the Green Party, but the jury's still out on that.
* * *
Changing gears now....
One thing I am hopeful for with a Trump administration is hopefully the elimination of the health care mandate (fine/tax/whatever). I despise the nuts and bolts of the ACA. I would have preferred a national medicare system, even if it came with a Social Security sized income tax. As it stands I already pay over $400 per month to my employer based private insurance. Logic would seem to indicate that if the $400 per month I pay combined with with the amount my employer pays can provide for my healthcare and turn a profit then the government should, in theory be able to accomplish this for less as the government- again in theory, operates "not for profit". It would be really nice to have a health care safety net in the even of job loss or disability, to know that you have a health care plan that will always be there regardless of what hurdle life throws at you.
But no. Instead we have a health care plan that more or less penalizes people for getting laid off/fired/etc. It's nice to know that in the event of such a blow we also get to look forward to paying the I.R.S. extra money out of pocket. To provide a private- for profit industry funds at a time when personal funds may be quite low.
But my biggest issue with the mandate is simply a matter of principle. As far as I know, this is the first time in American history that we have ever been legally required to purchase a private product from a for profit industry
simply for being a citizen. Now I know, someone's going to come on here and say "but Moon Shadow, you have to buy car insurance in many states to register a car"... True... but you're not required by law to own a car. As I said above, the health insurance mandate is the first time we are required by law to purchase a private product simply for being alive.
It's asinine, and it's a 150% cluster-f__k (sorry Dennis- but it is
)
And now, despite millions of additional people becoming insured, we are still seeing skyrocketing insurance rates. Scrap it... get rid of it.. start over, hell, I'd just assume go back to what we had before over this.
We need national medicare or the old voluntary- for profit system. No in between. No mandated paying of unelected insurance fat cats. That's basically taxation without representation.
