Free Republic

“You realize that two people can have a legal, presentable, and binding document without having a “Government” stamp/signature on it... don’t you?”

Self-contradiction there... if it is ‘legal’ its purpose is to hold up in court - that’s Government recognition.

“You seem to believe that without a government stamp tax then nothing is legal or lawful or provable in a court of law?”

LOL. So you will try up your own contracts to do exactly the same thing as what a legal marriage license does and go through all that both to save the $50 filing fee?!?!?

“Then read up on how marriage contracts (heck, even Wills) were drawn up in pioneer America, pre-1750.”
Um, these are contracts, legally binding - intended to hold up in front of a government agent aka judge in a court of law.

Methinks you are trying real hard to split hairs. if you want to consider your real marriage what the priest did, fine, but government and legal recognition hinges on goign to the courthouse.

It would be great if we could just convince gay couples that a gay-church priest is all they need to be ‘married’ but thats not what they want. They want the courthouse seal of approval.

“You won’t find anywhere in the constitution that government should incentivize or take any ‘interest’ in procreation”

LOL. Marriage definitions and laws have been here for millenia, and the constitutions of almost all our states explicitly mention children, family and marriage. Our Federal constitution has a 10th amendment, leaving this matter to states.

The basis of the CONCEPT of limited Government as expressed in our Constitution REQUIRES foundational institutions that support liberty. The FIRST of these is family. To support family we require Marriage in law, or children are harmed. If we raise the next generation as barbarians, our Federal constitution will be worthless.

As long as Property exists, it will accumulate in Individuals and Families. As long as Marriage exists, Knowledge, Property and Influence will accumulate in Families.
John Adams, letter to Thomas Jefferson, July 16, 1814

Children should be educated and instructed in the principles of freedom.
John Adams, Defense of the Constitutions, 1787

“I really didn’t think this issue mattered.”

America wont be America in another generation if we lose the family.

... maybe its lost already since the young’uns are for SSM. Crazy that they keep supporting the things that do them the most damage.

4. Children have a right to their own father and mother.

That right is violated by SSM and the brave new world of "Hey, any family is EQUAL to any other family, and saying otherwise is bigotry"....

“Aside from making sure I don’t marry my sister, or first cousin, I can find no reason for the state to be involved at all.”

It’s sad that so many don’t undertstand the societal interest and need to support family formation in law, in order to protect children. It’s an unfortunate consequence of decades of media/academy attacks on culture, to the point where even conservatives dont understand the importance of them.

And btw, devils advocate question: Is marrying your first cousin any more wrong or dangerous than gay relationships. if you have the right to marry anyone, why not that?

“My priest ordained my marriage. Not my mayor.”

Clearly you DID register your marriage with the civil authorities if you went ahead and filed taxes as married, bought a house as ‘community property’ etc.

“So it would be okay if the government criminalizes divorce, or mandates marriage?”

Since marriage as an institution is created as a contract between procreators for the benefit of the children issuing from that marriage/procreation, the answer is readily apparent:
- As marriage is a contract, it must be voluntary. sometimes things happen where procreators are induced to marriage to make it honorable for the children aka ‘shotgun wedding’,
- Divorce involving children perhaps should be more difficult than modern law allows, and in the past was a lot harder; today its easier to divorce than break a car lease. Many children have been harmed by divorce and family breakup; the statistics are very clear on that. btw ‘criminalize divorce’ is a non sequitor - its a contract, there’s nothing criminal about it. However, divorced men who fail child support can get wages garnished or arrested. Which is odd because deadbeats are not technically criminals. So note, divorce or no divorce men are STILL on the hook. Thus, what no-fault divorce does is diminish a man’s right to see his own children.

SSM just further pushes the concept of marriage away from being an institution for furtherance of the next generation and more a ‘gimme bennies’ about tax breaks. etc.

I’m sorry, you are surely an intelligent person,
and smart enough I hope to realize that the statement I reacted to and called ‘stupid’ really didn’t make sense.

Of *course* we want our laws to conform to the Constitution. I never said otherwise. There is however nothing in the Constitution saying “dont let your personal views be used to make laws”. that insinuation is what I call(ed) stupid.

Too often the failed claim of ‘you cant legislate morality’ or ‘you cant do X’ ... well,read the 10th Amendment. The states have the power to make their own decisions according to that.

“There are a lot of “marriage equality” postings on Facebook”

Just tell them that it is interesting that they are for polygamy and if they say know call them anti-poly bigot and poly-phobe.

“Why shouldn’t I be able to marry my sister? I love her, well not in “that way,” but who is to say this is wrong? Besides, I have economic resources she needs. It’s all good. /s”

I know you have the sarc tag, but I was thinking ... for elderly siblings, between the companionship and the tax/inheritance benefits, it probably would be appealling for a lot of elderly siblings.

Remember, with SSM, the idea of marriage because you can procreate is out the window - so why restrict it to sexually active partners? Could be *any* two people.

“Polygamy has been practiced by various human civilizations for hundreds of years whereas “gay marriage” has been a recent invention barely one generation old. From a legal viewpoint, it makes more sense to legalize polygamy than to invent a new definition of marriage involving same gender partners.”

Correct.

It’s also correct that the arguments being made for gay marriage - ‘Equality means you can marry who you want’ - are clearly arguments that lead to affirmation of not just polygamy but incestuous relationships, all outlawed in state law. Gay marriage will inevitably lead to these being tested in courts.

Even this lib justice is smart enough to realize that SSM opens a pandora’s box in the courts. I dont think the Supremes will want to declare SSM a right. They better not, it makes a mockery of the Constitution to rule so.

“There is nothing to declare victory over. nothing. “

Correct. Instead of preening ‘how great are we’ - tell the truth, that this was a fraction of what is needed to stop big govt. Boehener is emphasizing how Republicans are the ‘minority’ which is at least more honest ...

Now look at the Democrat response ...

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi later dismissed the speaker’s comments in a statement saying, “If they don’t have the Congress lurching from manufactured crisis to crisis, then they’re passing gimmicks that do nothing to address the urgent priorities of the American people.”

... wait, its the Democrats who are manufacturing the crisis!

Yes, Boehner did score a field goal. Bravo to actually making Dems pass a budget and to holding firm to the one actual spending cut implementation since getting elected. And a bonus was exposed Obama for a total hysterical over-reacting liar. Nice.

But what about defuding Obamacare? Boehner and the leaders in the Senate could have gone to the mat and stripped Obamacare funding from the CR. They whiffed on that.

the idea that the Constitution forbids states laws on marriage, or the whole body of family law, is errant nonsense.
And moreover, adding gay marriage ADDS TO THE LAW - it will add more legal burdens more complexity, more rules, and get govermnent MORE involved.

“When we start to make laws based on our personal beliefs, rather than our Constitution, then we go down the road of Lefties, Dictators and Terrorists.”
What a stupid comment. The Constitution is a framework for government to ALLOW us to ‘make laws based on our personal beliefs’. that’s what laws are. If we arent basing laws on what we think should be, we are idiots.

“To advance the legal case that a marriage between two people of the same sex is no different than a marriage as God defines it, the US Justice Department will base their arguments before the Supreme Court that a child does not need, nor have a right to a mother. [5]”

Which is why we have been making all the WRONG arguments about gay marriage. Its NOT about what the bible says, that is completely unconvincing in a secular culture that doesnt want ‘bible thumpers imposing beliefs’, its about THE CHILDREN.

degrading marriage, and gay marriage is putting us on the slippery slope to basically destroy marriage as we know it, as any argument about “Marriage Equality” would take us to polygamy and the rest...

Government has an interest in making sure our civilization continues into the next generation. the breakdown in the family harms our civilization.
marriage preserves family structure.
ergo, govt does have an interest in marriage.

This thinking is nuts, but the derangement continues because we failed to understand / explain why marriage really exists and what it is for ... it’s for civilizing procreation and protecting children that issue from that procreation.

“We had to destroy marriage in order to save it.”

“
No deal. Over the cliff will do more to restore some sanity.”

100% WRONG. A bad deal would be wrong, but the cliff would mean massive tax hikes WHICH OBAMA AND THE LEFT WOULD LOVE TO HAVE.

We should be saving the tax rates we can PERMANENTLY. If its protecting everyone below $500,000 / yr income that is good enough so long as we cut the spending as well and make it permanent.

Only a PERMANENT EXTENSION is worth it.

“I’m ready to crash and reset.”
That’s what marxists say.

Some extremists relish the illusion that everything will fall apart and the world wil be cleansed in damnation.
It wont. Reality is more boring than that.

There is a difference between the two parties. There is a difference between ‘better’ and ‘worse’. Evil happens when those who know good do nothing to stop evil; worse happens when you and I find excuses not to work for the better.

Since nobody’s perfect, you have all the excuses in the world to throw rocks at people trying to do good and whining about their imperfections and claiming they dont do anything for you. That’s the way of powerless extremists, always whining, never solving.

“Give him all the tax hikes he wants”

With due respect - Stupid idea. “do it by simply taking a 4 year vacation” throws away political power and gives the Dems a monopoly, a disgrace to all who Republicans and anyone who cares about our country.

We are stuck between two bad ideas. “blow it up” and lose or “throw in the towel” and lose.

there is only one smart way - the Pyrric Victory way. The President will get his victory. He has to. The President + the Democrat Senate plus the media mean that they can set certain terms and win the PR war.So the GOP will in the end have to give something and show Obama ‘won’ on the top tax rates. BUT ... the key is to extract the maximum amount of political advantage from it.

Let him have his rates on the rich, but for a price. Protect the maximum number of taxpayers and cut the most spending possible. That’s the goal. If a deal raises taxes on above $500k income only, and cuts spending by $2 trillion, its a deal that works.

Clinton won the PR way in the 1995/1996 budget battle, but GOP won on substance. The GOP needs to learn to win via ‘death by thousand cuts’ always demanding small advantages for each thing Obama wants.

What we SHOULD be doing is stop giving bad advice to Republicans and start saying the obvious: IT’S THE SPENDING.

“The repubs don’t represent me ,, haven’t since 1994.”
All the more reason for them not to take your bad advice to give it all to the Democrats.

“The R version differs only on how fast it wants to travel to the same destination.”

I’d rather hit the ground at 4mph than 100mph.

So the GOP is *too* compromising, yet fewer blame Obama for NOT compromising?!?

I want a deal that cuts the most spending and raises the least in taxes. That’s the best approach. Is there hope for that? Obama wants the opposite.

Are the American people standing upside down?

“a conservative Democrat”
“Never heard that term before................is that even possible?”

An extinct species... Killed off by the progressives in the Democrat party.

What you all don’t understand is that the game is over. The moochers, looters and inner city tribal parasites outnumber the producers. You cannot beat Santa Claus. You are under the delusion that if we just had an articulate, dynamic conservative that could sway the sheeple with logic, reason and facts, we could start winning elections again. It’s too late. “

Sad but true.

Too many people are saying “Boehner is awful, we need someone better”

NOBODY has explained: HOW ANYONE WOULD ACTUALLY SUCCESSFULLY BEAT OBAMA AND REID AND CHANGE POLICY DIRECTION IN DC.

Nobody. I’ve heard ‘let it burn’ and other BS, but not a single good idea from anyone, pundit, etc. that explains how we could actually GET A REAL DEAL OUT OF OBAMA TO CUT TAXES AND SPENDING.

I’m all ears.

If he doesnt give an inch, taxes go up by $4 trillion and the Democrat-media complex make him the scapegoat for all that is bad in the country. A simplistic “dont give an inch” view is self-defeating.

The real answer is there is no good option. The GOOD option was to defeat Obama!

“He looks like someone who’s just made a deal with the devil.”

Huh .... I wonder why.

” His conscience will never be clear, ...”

Why do you say that? HE DIDNT RE-ELECT OBAMA. 60 million Americans did. they are the ones responsible for this mess.
If more voters voted Republicans, we’d have a Republican budget. As it is, Mourdock losing, Akin losing, Tester winning ...Anyone who didnt vote Republican voted for higher taxes and more spending.

Hey presto, it’s amazing - that is what we are going to get.

And this too:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/12/congrats_barry_us_falls_out_of_top_10_most_prosperous_nations.html

Ya know, when we said that re-electing Obama would be a disaster, we meant it, and Boehner is not omnipotent and cant fix that particular fact. He, like us, has to live with it. I’d get drunk too if I were in his shoes!

“I am upset about the SS COLA because it affects my federal retirement check. “

Moocher. ... I kid, I kid.

Seriously, we are one trillion in deficit / year. We cant afford what we spend and this is actually just a tiny nick compared to the meat ax we need to take.

They should be keeping the whole sequester, cut ALL the govt across the board 10%, raise all the SS and medicare elibility ages, AND means-test them all, AND repeal Obamacare, AND abolish the DOE and 50 other agencies, AND repeal every new spending idea since 2000. Only then could we balanced the budget.

I’m not counting on SS. Nobody should. Its a worthless system outdated and wrong and we should let people escape from it. make it voluntary, and give people an account that THEY own, not Congress. They might as well pay me in zimbabwe dollars by the time i’m ready for it.

Voting fraud is my answer.”

You didnt notice the large number of conservative malcontents not even bothering to vote or support the Rs?

You didnt notice the massive media malpractice of liberal bias that turned Obama’s failures into Republicans fault?

You didnt see the startling exit poll that showed more people blamed BUSH than Obama for our current economic malaise? (After 4 years?!? And Obama’s stimulus was passed in 2009 and was supposed to be the cure-all?!? WTF!?!)

You didnt notice Romney’s campaign incompetence of failing to defend his character against Obama’s lies (’he killed my wife!’), attack obama’s incompetence at home or abroad or tie the horrible Obamacare bill to our economic misery?

Not to mention the ground game screwup, the Akin/Mourdock foot-in-mouth errors, debates run by Obama cheerleaders, and the intervention of Hurricane Sandy and Gov Christie hugging pres O. ...

And the #1 Reason: MILLIONS MORE DEPENDENT ON GOVERNMENT THAN EVER BEFORE JUST VOTED FOR “MORE OF THE SAME” AND AGAINST A GUY WHO CALLED 47% OF US MOOCHERS (um, never mind that it was mainly true, how do you ever get votes by insulting the voters...)

I mean seriously, Romney had a great Debate #1 but was otherwise only a bit better than the two worst candidates we ran in recent decades (McCain and Dole) - while Obama, horrible President, managed to ramp up the votes from the moocher class with the best data-based ground game of any campaign.

No fraud - it was worse than that. We actually had voters dumb enough to vote for this.

“To do nothing, is better than to capitulate.

Raising taxes in a recession is, in and of itself, very bad policy.”

Your contradiction is simple: to do nothing IS to raise taxes - by $4 trillion.

And since neither party wants middle class taxes increased, it is fairly simple that a ‘deal’ that saves the 98% and leaves the top 2% in the cold is better than nothing. This dynamic and the media is why this is now ‘popular’ - as the media has cast it as:
- either we get a deal where the top 2% alone get higher taxes OR
- we get a catastrophe of everyone getting higher taxes

If we keep the spending cuts and minimize the tax increases (maybe on millionaires $1m and above only), that’s not a great deal, but not a bad deal.
AND ... since Obamacare is raising taxes it is far preferred to have people notice “Hey Obama got his deal and STILL our taxes went up” as opposed to “Hey, Republicans screwed it up and look at our taxes going up.”

you mis-spelled OBAMA...

The USA has come to a very sorry state of affairs when one person of the likes of OBAMA can sell out the economic and traditional values of our Nation.

“Boehner is scared to death of Dec. 31 coming with no deal. Why he is scared is of no consequence,”

We weaker GOP caucus in the House and more liberal Senate in January. PLUS the media has already pre-blamed the GOP for any failure. So even though many Democrats would like to go over the cliff, Boehner does not want to do so.

“Speaking a few hours after Obama and Boehner met at the White House, these people said the president was now seeking a higher tax rate beginning at incomes over $400,000, “

Actually, Boehner may be playing some good poker ... IF he keeps the debt ceiling card in his pocket.

Here’s why: SPENDING IS THE REAL PROBLEM. Boehner needs to minimize the tax increase while keeping the ball on the spending side.

We know that. We also know that the Democrats want and will demand their ‘tax the rich’ and they have the recent victory in the elections to feel their oats. Obama cannot and will not back down on insisting on raising taxes, he needs something.

But raising the bar to $1 million puts the top rate on the smallest group of Americans, and at the same time makes this even less of a real solution to the budget deficit.

IF Obama is backing up to $400,000, then that’s more than most had thought Boehner would get.

once we get this ‘deal’ done, we will find:
- Obama is taxing too much (Obamacare tax increases)
- he is spending too much
- the deficit is still one trillion

in effect, Obama will have ‘won’ and he will own the fiscal mess that will continue. THEN comes the hammer blow. Debt ceiling increase? What, without a real deal to fix entitlements, cut spending and get back on track? You kidding me? More painful negotiations, but GOP House will have more leverage and Democrats less excuses... “oh you want MORE tax increases? you just GOT your tax increases!”
LOL, they will run out of excuses and rich people to go after!

Is freedom relevant anymore?

What about fiscal responsibility?

What about the family as a unit of our society?

What about free enterprise?

Huh.
lots of conservatives thought it would give Obama a boost, but if they did interview the real seal team six, they’d get a different view.

Hmmm. if figures.

The commentary is pure fallacious thinking and poor logic.
Of *course* at a rally you will hear and see confidence. Who wants to go to a rally and not have that?
And frankly outside of Philly, Romney did have the majority of the vote. But PA goes Dem because the Dems rack up several hundred thousand margins in Philly.

So how does facebook ruin politics? It doesnt. You just have to be smart enough t know that just because it is the ‘consensus’ among your group, its not the view of everyone.

If a *CANDIDATE* cant get that, he’s a moron.

that said, a lot of Republicans were blindsided, I think mainly by the fact that we felt our ground game would be better and Obama’s ground game not as good as it was.

Worse, we did not understand why and how so many stupid people came out to vote for such a terrible and failed president. Now, maybe facebook is to blame for that shallow thinking ... but I doubt it. There was plenty of that in all the media, and the real shame was the failure of Romney and GOP to rebut was is really the worst kind of blame-passing possible.

And apparently a RINO too. “His political astuteness is questionable... ,” Apparently so!!!

If we talk about the real problem, of letting mentally ill people roam free to pick up a weapon and do something crazy, we at least are being more productive than the insane idea that gun control will stop this.

“No state income tax if Texas but our property tax is through the rood. The lowest I’ve ever seen is $2.10 per hundred dollar appraisal. A house taxed at $150,000 is $3,192.”

It’s HIGHER than that in other states.
Texas is nothing special wrt property taxes. Got oNJ, NY, Cali, or other states which tax income and property and sales - all higher.

Tim Scott would be a great pick.

DeMint type Tea Party conservative.

We cannot afford to lose a strong conservative and get another seat-warmer.

“Oh really? WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Kosovo, Nicaragua, Bosnia, Libya, and now Syria were all propitiated by Republicans?”

OF COURSE NOT!

Dole got into hot water in 1996 stating truthfully that Democrats got us into every major war of the 20th century.

But try explaining that to short-attention-span 20 year olds who dont know real American history and were indoctrinated by some exhippie teacher guy who calls all Republicans warmongers.

Photo of SOMALIANS brought to Ohio voting stations by the busload, 95% of whom did not speak English, and told to vote for Obama, straight Dem ticket- Here

‘Human Events’, report pollwatcher eyewitness to busload of Somalians at Ohio poll, spoke no English, told to vote Obama Here “

If its that easy WHY THE HECK NOT TELL THEM TO VOTE REPUBLICAN!

You have your ‘eye’ on one elected senator, a congresswoman who barely got re-elected, one guy who wont be elected soon, and a woman celebrity not elected now nor unlikely to be anywhere anytime soon.

That’s a ‘party’?!?

What he says is true.

Medicare part D has ‘worked’ as intended. Policy-wise, its not bad.

Except ... it grew the government and did NOT help the GOP politically. ALl the Dems did was move to the next target.

Just like with ANY issue, if you agree with a lib on A,B and C, they move on to crazier ideas X, Y and Z and demand you do those.

By growing the base for govt dependency, Bush aided the Dems not the GOP. Immigration reform will do the same.

“No one wants Bohners job to be Os bitch.”

Right. Why would a real conservative ruin their reputation that way?

“No deal will be made this year. Next year??”

Dems dont want a deal. They feel that they can do better next year. Boehner should be passing his ‘no tax hike’ bill.

GOP position should be simple:
EXTEND THE TAX RATES FOR ONE YEAR.
DEFER OBAMACARE TAX INCREASES ONE YEAR.
We get one more year before another cliff hits and in the meantime, use it to fix entitlements, reform taxes and cut spending.

Done!

60% of people under 30 voted Obama.
70% of Latinos voted Obama.
single women voted Obama 2 to 1.
And of course Obama won the folks who dont go to church and make under $50,000.

SO ... figure out how to get young poor single latino women who don’t go to church to vote Republican, and we’ll be a majority party again.

Ideas?

Americans Overwhelmingly Support Federal Spending Cuts Except for Programs from which They Personally Get a Check

In other news of of the obvious ...

Americans Overwhelmingly Support Govt Raising Taxes on Someone Else

Heck, why dont they just have a polling Question:
“Do you support a 10% across the board spending cut, combined with raising taxes on anyone who makes more than 3 times what you and anyone in your family makes, combined with a govt program that sends you $100,000 a year to your bank account? How does that sound?”

“If this happens in one more state I am going to assume there is a conspiracy. Maybe someone with deep pockets is buying off Democrats.”

Maybe a few Democrats see the train wrecks in California and Illinois and realize they need a brake on the crazy spending.

More likely ... its all about ‘me’.

OMG. Before the election, I said that “the sequel is always worse than the first version.”

And ... um .... I had no idea it meant it this way.

So the admin lackey who lied about our ambassador getting killed is now to be in charge of ambassadors?!?

Basically, Obama won with his ‘tax the rich’ theme.

Money quote:

“The harsh truth that fend-for-yourself economic libertarianism is a worldview mainly confined to the shrinking, aging white electorate is a reality Republicans prefer not to acknowledge.”

He also says that latinos were not voting for Obama over immigration, but because they support big government.

Letting something happen IS becoming a part of the disaster. That’s how.

It would be one thing if we held to a Republican position (eg ‘no tax hikes for now’) and a failure to come to agreement because Obama insists on some tax hikes meant tax hikes for all.

It’s another to simply have NO position other than “we want all the tax hikes to happen.” That would put Republicans in favor of middle class tax hikes. Great way to lose the House next election. That’s ‘stupid’ in my book.

“And why should they be? It was fiscal conservatism that lead to the 2010 election sweep, and the GOP failed to deliver on what they were primarily voted in for.”

How could they? We have the biggest spending in human history in the White House!

“Why isn’t Romney fighting in Ohio wher some of the counties had 108% of registered voters voting.”

Um, because if you are down like 2 million votes and Obama won with many other states putting him well over the 270 EV limit even without Ohio, fighting over one county wont add up to a hill of beans.

that said, the Ohio GOP should be on it like white on rice if there is something to fix in the vote count, local races might be impacted.