The typical conservative Christian persecution complex in action.

Fixed it for ya.

I am acquainted with a lot of Christians whos concerns over persecution center on others who are being persecuted, not themselves. Look around…

Make a note of it: Someone on Face The Nation (Gov. O’Malley?) just handed progressives a phrase to totally undo the Right’s attempt to frame the ACA’s mandate as a huge tax increase: “The freeloader tax!” You know, that tax that potentially affects about 1% of all Americans…

To be clear, I want single payer, but ACA with all its flaws needs to be defended on its strengths, and including more people is a good start.

I’m all for the freeloader tax, it will help keep my healthcare costs down.

If this is implemented, then my family will simply not buy any more chicken from non-factory farm sources.

We purchase turkey or chicken for home use through small farm free range or organic sources now, but will extend that to eating out or shopping while out of town. Food costs are secondary to health, for us.

What I would like to see (and don’t have the knowledge to do) is an approximation of:

How much over and above normal supply and demand pressures gas prices have risen in the last year due to speculation, and,

how much this overage and the resultant rise in gas prices have hurt the purchase of goods through the consumer/middle class economy (excluding Wall Street) as a result.

That might get the administrations and the CFTCs attention, I’ll bet that it’s substantial.

It is confusing. Before its status was revoked by the IRS, the Foundation was a 501(c)3. Contributions are tax-deductible when made to a 501(c)3 but not to a 501(c)4. However, both are considered charities.

A 501 (C)(4) is a “charity” that can conduct limited partisan political activity, tax deductions for contributions not allowed. The “charity” designation applies more to the fact that the governing structure cannot allow “profits” to be paid to employees or the governing board.

Most PACs are 501 (c)(4) entities, to give an example, and they can (obviously) contribute to partisan political causes or candidates.

501 (c)(3) entities cannot take public partisan positions, or contribute to partisan political causes.

Yes. Cocaine is an alkaloid that can increase serotonin levels in the brain and chocolate contains similar alkaloids.
EDIT: And as the plants both evolved on the same continent, it’s not very surprising.
Actually it’s the same plant. My bad.

That seems about as accurate as all of the Democrat hating in this thread:

Coca may refer to any of the four cultivated cocas which belong to the family Erythroxylaceae, native to western South America.

Theobroma cacao also cacao tree and cocoa tree, is a small (4–8 m or 15–26 ft tall) evergreen tree in the family Sterculiaceae (alternatively Malvaceae), native to the deep tropical region of the Americas. Its seeds are used to make cocoa powder and chocolate.

No one is outlawing contraception.

No, just making it more difficult to obtain for those who, via limited means, need it the most.

No one has a right to free healthcare.

Not universally in the US, by statutory entitlement, but that does not make it morally correct when measured against the vulnerability all humans have when it comes to health, and, in this case, effective reproductive prevention.

If you are arguing that health is a privilege, not a right, I don’t think that you will find many who agree with you at FDL, and many who will point out that if it were a right in the US all of us in this country would have a great deal more peace of mind (except for the bottom lines of the HC industry). What is that worth?

…in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare…

If universal health in some form is not effective in promotimng the general Welfare of the citizens and the country, what is?

Bottomline line is the Holy See does NOT like what is happening in the U.S, re the filing lawsuits against their pedophile priests(employees) and LBGT rights. The birth control crap was just a game used to deflect from their anti-life ideology.

Look, I hate to say this because it’s a sore point with Roman Catholics, but this Church has even asserted after-the-fact control over the Blessed Virgin Mary, denying that Jesus had brothers despite ample evidence supporting that fact in the Gospels and the Book of Acts.

With all this going on I don’t think our first black president wants to be historically tied to legalizing drugs.

I have to agree, in that the forces behind the Partnership For A Drug Free America would hammer him endlessly for exposing our children to drug dangers.

Also, no President can legalize any drug, that requires legislation being passed for the President to sign.

But, at some point Obama could direct the DEA to reclassify cannabis from a Schedule I drug (no medical value – this Sch. I move was done by Bush I) to a lower classification that allows medical use, and then he could push to let states individually decide the issue of recreational use. I hope that he does this in his second term, if he gets one. No electable Republican would EVER do this.

But, one thing that I do not think that Obama is cognizant of is why so many folks on online forums push the question forward. In my view it is because of two factors: a) common sense and fairness, noting that the state sanctioned recreational drug, alcohol, is more deliterious to both the individual and society than cannabis, and, b), more obscure, but still true, Obama is probably not aware of the fact that pot was smoked at virtually all of the anti-Vietnam War rallies, which led Republicans to hate the association and thus push for harsher marijuana laws, and people want that unfair curse lifted.

Actually, though, all the MSM would have to do is give RP a little more time in the discussion and put Buddy Roemer up on the stage.

Um, the “MSM” really has nothing to do with who is invited and how many questions are asked of whom. These arrangements and conditions were set up by those promoting the GOP Reality Show.

Also, why bring any sanity? Aren’t Romney and Gingrich and Santorum doing a fine job of illustrating why it’s not in the best interest of any sane US citizen to vote Republican.

Yes, GE owns NBC, GE is a giant defense contractor. Yes. Try watching CNBC if you think GE has a problem supporting Republicans.

Aren’t NBC, CNBC, MSNBC et al now owned by Comcast? If so, what are you saying?

What makes the 1 percent happier than having a Republican president who’s on their side?

Having a Democratic president who’s on their side.

I’d pat you on the back for that one, but I might dislocate your arm…

Which Republican would appoint Elena Kagan or Sonja Sotomayor to the Supreme Court?

I believe that the flaw in CNNs polling is that they only asked Republicans, and not independents or Democrats. BIG flaw; many do switch for the purposes of the caucus. Of course, that gives sloppy CNN an out…

I guess I am the odd man in the discussion but I hope the payroll tax is defeated. I know the law transfers money back to the SS trust fund.

Regardless, you want a vote that will deny me a substantial amount of cash (I live simply, buddy) in my paycheck during the last six months before I retire next year. Swell…

Way to help a guy making $37,000. a year.

That said, it is usually during the Xmas break that there comes a time the pres. can force one thru. Pres. Obama has not done a recess appt yet if memory still serves this old man right.

This old man (70 years and counting) spent about 2 minutes doing a Yahoo search and found this:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/president-obama-announces-recess-appointments-key-administration-positions
For Immediate Release March 27, 2010

President Obama Announces Recess Appointments to Key Administration
Positions

Fifteen Appointees Have Waited an Average of 214 Days for Senate Confirmation

WASHINGTON –After facing months of Republican obstruction to administration nominees, President Obama announced his intent to recess appoint fifteen nominees to fill critical administration posts that have been left vacant, including key positions on the economic team and on boards that have been left with vacancies for months.
“The United States Senate has the responsibility to approve or disapprove of my nominees. But if, in the interest of scoring political points, Republicans in the Senate refuse to exercise that responsibility, I must act in the interest of the American people and exercise my authority to fill these positions on an interim basis,” said President Barack Obama.

“Most of the men and women whose appointments I am announcing today were approved by Senate committees months ago, yet still await a vote of the Senate. At a time of economic emergency, two top appointees to the Department of Treasury have been held up for nearly six months. I simply cannot allow partisan politics to stand in the way of the basic functioning of government.”

…the majority party of the Senate can end the filibuster any day they want to if they also control the White House, and it’s bullshit now.

Yes they could, but if Republicans win the Senate and White House and retain the House then they can pass laws to round up left-leaners such as many here, and there would be nothing that you could do about it – because after four years of a Republican President you’d have a 6-3 Supreme Court that would uphold such laws. The elephant in the room that seems to have sat on a lot of he Firebaggers here is that Democrats NEVER had the Senate. Can you please say, “Joe Lieberman” and throw in “Ben Nelson.”

Filibuster is also bullshit. Cheney cast the deciding 51st vote for the Bush Tax Cuts (revenue giveaway).

Last time I checked (you could have too), the Bush tax cuts, as well other travesties like Medicare Part D, were passed under reconciliation rules, which only require a simple majority.

Sometimes the anti-Obama rhetoric here resembles nothing so much as the posts at Mediate and Red State, albeit by better educated people. Of course, I’ll be flamed as an Obamabot, but ask me if I care?

Do I agree with all that Obama has done, or his ongoing attempts at bipartisanship, no. Do I fear for the US if any of the current crop of Republican candidates gets elected, DAMN RIGHT!

Again, the Supreme Court.

The Biblical book 1 Samuel tells how the tribe of Israel lost the favor of Jehovah (and the Ark of the Covenant) because of religious hierarchical corruption (including, I think, child molestation.)

It’s worse: The story begins in 1 Samuel and more or less concludes in II Kings; the violations included human sacrifice of children. No, the Lord God did not like it, and the end of that book concludes the end of the monarchial era of Israel.

It seems that the Roman Church has a hard time listening to admonitions about leaders becoming servants of all, rather than the trappings of kingship that surround the papacy. Prime example: papal infallability.

Of course it’s (wooly-headed) a coded racial message. The right works overtime on this stuff.