yjacket

It's not obstructionist politics, it's about understanding the true nature of our government. Philosophically the parties (R/D) exist for only one reason, to get their people elected to office. If you are a liberal and run as an R and play well with the party bosses, then they will support you. Once you understand that someone who is an R does not a conservative make and someone who is a D does not a liberal make you can finally begin to understand the problem. As a wise man once told someone running for office, which party should he run in the response was "Run in the party you can win it", i.e. it's less about what your policies are vs. which party you are in. So you darn right I will shot those in the R party who are leading the charge claiming to be "conservative" yet at the same time shoving down ObamaCare lite. Yeah, I'm ticked at it and I hope they lose their seats over it. But I doubt that will happen b/c elections are more like team sports. People root for their team regardless of whether their team actually ideologically represents them. Again people are so blinded by whether a congresscritter has an R or D by his name that they don't actually take the time to actually find out if the reps ideology matches with their own.

Lol . . .oh please balance the budget in 10 years. Come on anatess, you are smarter than that. A Congress only sits for two years and one Congress cannot bind another Congress, i.e. the 115th Congress can't pass a law that says the 116th Congress can't do xyz. All that's needed to revoke the 115th Congress's decree is (here it is again) a majority in the House and Senate (again you only need 50 votes to pass in the Senate not 60). Paul Ryan and Tom Price knows, unequivocally that a balance budget in 10 years will never happen. You either balance it in the current Congress or you don't, there is no other choice. This is probably my biggest beef with most so-called Conservatives. They like to talk the talk, but they never walk the walk. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_of_the_United_States "Conservatives" like to think that hey we are for a bill that passes the budget in 10 years . . . that means we are for less government. Or they say we cut 10billion from the deficit look at how fisically responsible we are. They are in general a bunch of hypocrites, they are democrate-lite. I dare you anatess, please name one thing that Congress has done when the Rs were in power over the last 20 years that actually, reduced government? But b/c Paul Ryan has an R by his name everyone crows about how "conservative" he is. If he had a D but his name he would be a right center D and everyone would hate him. http://www.thenewamerican.com/freedomindex/ Paul Ryan 58% and their index is solely based on whether votes align with the Constitution or not. So much for "conservative" Ryan. Rand Paul-93%. Big, big difference. One actually fights for the Constitution and limited government, the other only gives lip service to it. I don't care what Paul Ryan says (as he like to talk the talk), but what he does belies where his true allegiance lies. And no I don't watch Hannity, I can't stand him-he is pretty phony too on actual limited government-but he is better than most.

I generally think Trump is outside the box (the only reason I voted for him), but the rest can go pound sand. And oh looky here anatess http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/15/trump-helped-write-obamacare-replacement-bill-speaker-ryan-says.html You're buddy Ryan claims Trump wrote the bill. I love the politics of it. Ryan wants to shove some piece of crap down everyone's throat, gets backlash, then shifts the blame to Trump. Yeah as if Trump wrote this bill . . .give me a break. Trump for the most part has stayed out of the weeds, except to support Ryan, which is probably done more for internal politics. Personally, I think if the truth be known, the Rs don't want to repeal Obamacare, they want to let it sink on it's own.

On Paul Ryan and Tom Price being conservatives . . .let's talk in a couple of years. Just like how I love people claim Ryan is a conservative yet how many monster budgets has he pushed? The more things change, the more things stay the same.

You started off good in the OP, but then basically changed to defending Paul Ryan (don't know why you have a love affair with him). Defending Paul Ryan who is defending this bill and then saying the bill is crap is hypocrisy. The main point being that this bill is absolutely 100% representative of Paul Ryan's true feelings on health care-i.e. he is not a conservative. And if this is his idea of negotiating, he needs to go back to kindergarten Negotiation 101. You never begin negotiations with what you think the other side will accept, you start of at the most extreme point possible and still have the other side talk. He has failed that miserably, the Democrats don't want to talk about this bill (so he failed to talk with them) and a significant portion of his own party doesn't want to talk about it (so he failed with them). Starting off negotiations at the "middle ground" is a surefire way to fail in getting what you want-and that is what he did. If he actually wanted to negotiate, he would have put forth the Rand Paul bill and then let the Democrats come to him, rather than this junk. In fact, he is doing the opposite of negotiation, he his trying to ram it down the throats of Conservatives-again he is a RINO.

The pro-Mormon-culture-anti-Mormon-teaching folks confuse me the most. It's the same with parenting. The Mormon culture and mormon teaching go hand-in-hand. If you want the culture then you have to teach the teaching. Just like, if you want to have children who are respectful like they were back in the 50s, you have to teach your children like they did back in the 50s. When the teaching goes away, the culture will go away-culture is downstream of teaching.

And you're advocating for it to be even more broken. If you want to fix it, rather than push your phony-boy conservative Paul Ryan, why not advocate for a plan that actually does what you want-the Rand Paul bill? That's the thing I don't get . . .people get more tied up in personalities than in actually doing the right thing. I'm not tied up in PR, or Trump, or whoever, I care for the right solutions, which is primarily less government, less regulation and more individual responsibility.

Negative it wasn't broken prior to ObamaCare. Don't believe the false mantra. ObamaCare was all about providing insurance to people who either couldn't afford it or didn't want it. And that isn't a broken health care, that's how it is supposed to work. Nobody has a right to health care, the person with Stage 4 cancer does not have the right to receive treatment. As for right now, Health Care will always be broken b/c of the federal government. Because the federal government got involved, it will now always mess with it and it will always cause more and more problems until people beg, yes they will beg for single-payer b/c health care is "broken". And then to solve the problem of massive funding problems it will be a massive tax . . .just like Europe. Welcome to the socialist dream . . .where no one can get ahead. Fundamentally, you cannot provide healthcare to millions and millions of people from the federal government level without massive welfare and taxes to pay for it. The fact that you don't see this as a conservative is deeply troubling . . .it means conservatism is dead if you can't even agree that the federal government should get out of health care.

Anatess, I'm glad that you have a pretty good grasp of America, it's politics, etc. but you are just flat our wrong on this one. You absolutely do not need 60 votes in the Senate to pass legislation. And no, that is not how it's supposed to be. You only need 60 votes to end debate (if the debate continues), which are two completely different things. You only need 50 votes to pass legislation in the Senate; that's it, no more, no less. The Rs could turn this into a great win for them. Repeal Obamacare, then blame the Ds for being obstruction b/c they won't vote to end debate even though a majority of the Senate will pass the bill (and if they did it right, they could easily turn enough heat to flip some Ds.) You are just flat out wrong. The Rs again do not need to compromise to replace ObamaCare. And if the Paul Ryan, establishment non-conservatives types actually cared about repealing it, they could easily frame the discussion around the Ds, instead of this putrid pile of garbage. And secondly, Paul Ryan isn't even in the Senate. The right process (since you are so concerned about the process, but continue to ignore the wolves in sheep clothing), is for the House to pass it's version of Repeal, then the Senate gets to vote on it, if they don't vote on it then you have revise the bill. But you start off at the best negotiating position (i.e. full Repeal), not some stupid ObamaCare lite that will make the entire situation much, much worse. And if on some small chance you can't get full Repeal through the Senate, then you do like Trump said, blame the whole stinking mess on the Ds-rather than pass some half-baked legislation. You can take my words to the bank, the ultimate goal is a single-payer system provide by and managed by the US government. It will end up being a withholding on your W2. And Ryan is more concerned about making that happen (he is part of the Insiders afterall) than about limited government. See, if this fails, like it will, like it's designed to to, both the Rs and the Ds can say, See we've tried it the right way and it just didn't work, so lets have a single-payer.

Only shocked if they live in the US or western Europe. Travel to pretty much any other country in the world and you will find the exact opposite. Pick your poison, Latin America, Africa, India, Asia, SouthEast Asia, they are all "racists" the way the term is used today. My guess is that if you look at the total world population that has been brow-beat into the slightest offense at the drop of anything mildly racist is probably about 700million ... maybe 1billion. For the rest of the 6 billion inhabitants of the Earth, they don't give a rip about being thought of as racists, bigots, etc. and they take extreme pride in their heritage and culture. Only in the US and Western Europe are we taught that taking pride in your culture is uncouth. Even their language is against so-called equality. Spanish has male and female, everything in spanish is either male of female, and I'm sure other languages have the same.

Lol . . What part about the Republicans control the House, Senate and White House do you not understand? There is no need for any Democrats. They do not have to compromise at all!! Yes the Senate has the "filibuster", but that is really just a myth-the Senate only needs 50 votes, not 60. So the Ds filibuster, so they filibuster for 1 day, 2 days, big flipping deal. The longest filibuster in history was a little over 24 hours. For someone who claims they study this stuff . . . . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate Yes you are asleep. They work 8 days in April, there was already an election 4 months ago! The new Congress was put in 2 months ago. The people already spoke on what they need to do! Now, if it was this time next year (or even late this year)-fine I can buy that excuse to "connect with the people". The people spoke on what Congress needs to do . . .REPEAL OBAMACARE. For them to show up, for a month, do pretty much absolutely nothing with a new President, then leave go home and sit on their butts is the height of hypocrisy. https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/browse?congress=115&status=28,29,32,33 An 8 whopping bills! 2 are about promoting women, 1 is a GAO bill. Only one bill actually appears to do anything for less government. And one bill grows government https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/115/hr39/summary And like I said 17 members of the Freedom Caucus voted against it-those guys are about the only true patriots and Conservatives in Congress. Clearly you do not understand how incredibly corrupt the system is, so yes you are asleep and clueless as to how the system actually works. Paul Ryan is anything but a conservative, he's a democrat in Republican clothes. Lol, letting the right-wingers do the research for me . ..that's a good one. I see things as they really are, not as I hope or wish them to be. And the naked truth is that Trump was never supposed to win the election (he is an Independent outside of the political parties and machine), the Machine will do everything they can to frustrate him and this is what it looks like. Expect more of this. If the Rs keep it up, they will lose one branch of government in 2 years.

Hey here's a brilliant idea you idiotic Rs in Congress (that are really wolves in sheep clothing) how about you pass the same blasted repeal you passed something like 30+ times in the House. Or was all that just really political bluster and you guys are simply cowards (or worse Democrat lites).

So sad that in 3 years we went from no penalty to where people can actually live with a 30% tax just b/c you don't have health care and then want to sign up. The road to Serfdom. Just remember folks the income tax was first passed it was only 1% on income over 10k (over 1million today).

I guess I was wrong, you're not awake yet. . . maybe one day. The Republicans control both houses with a majority. They can do WHATEVER THEY WANT! Filibuster or not, they just need 50 votes in the House. And you believe Ryan's "process" crap (they are only working 8 days in April). . . oh well, I guess not enough people are awake yet. Very sad, people still actually think there is a dime's worth of difference between Republicans and Democrats.

Anatess, Welcome to the Dark Side. Are you awake yet? Are you aware yet? Are your eyes open so you can see? 2 sides of the exact, same coin. Republicrats and Demicans. Washington DC doesn't have two parties, it is one party and it is the Leviathan, the Deep State, people who are in power who's only objective is to get gain. Call it the Gadianton Robbers, The Powers That Be, the Illuminati, The New World Order. Call it whatever you want, but it's not conservatism. There are very, very few members of Congress who are actually small government conservatives. The Freedom Caucus is a good starting place and then cut that in half and that's about how many are actually freedom-loving. There might be a total of 10-20 members of Congress (House&Senate) who are actual conservatives, the rest are just big government cronies. Whether they are democrat or republican it doesn't really matter. The Rs give good lip service, but when push comes to shove they are just as war-hungry, just as much big government, deficit spending, less freedom, more State power and control than the Ds. Paul Ryan is part of The Insiders, the CFR, the globalists, he is one of them. No way, they would let the 2nd most powerful position in the government be filled by a person who actually believed in limited government! Trump was a big hick-up as they didn't expect him to win-Hillary was it-they misjudged him. The question is will Trump become one of them or not?

As if other charity organizations are so pristine and clean that they'll handle the money wisely? http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/03/10/wounded-warrior-project-reportedly-fires-top-executives-amid-spending-controversy.html Lol . . .play it again sam, play it again. One of those logical fallacies, the Church is a money-grubbing organization, I'd much rather pay to an organization that actually helps people. Good luck! Where there is money there is the high likelihood for corruption. If you think the Church is corrupt with the money, then by the same reasoning any organization you give it to will be corrupt with it.

2 words: John Rosemond. Read him, implement it, love it. It sounds like Backroads you've fallen into the modern trap that our current culture pushing on very good, well-intentioned mothers. And it goes something like this .. .the good mommy is the mommy who plays with her child, the good mommy is the mommy who always ensures that her child is happy, the good mommy does everything she can for her child, the good mommy is in effect a vending machine for her child-what the child wants the child gets. And quite frankly, it's a load of crap, it doesn't do anybody any good and has lead to more mental health problems for mothers and children than can possibly be imagined. You've got to nip this in the bud right now. You are not responsible for the child's happiness, he/she is and the sooner you implement strategies to enforce this the better off you will be. I remember growing up and my parents never got down on the floor and "played with me", from time to time my dad would throw us up in the air, tickle us, etc. we'd have family activities, but it was most definitely on his time not on mine as a child. Before you can know what you are doing and why you are doing it as a parent you have to know what your goal is as a parent. Is your goal as a parent to "savoir the precious moments b/c they go by so fast"? Or is your goal to raise, well-adjusted, happy, healthy, independent, hard-working, civil, respectful adults? And quite frankly the two don't go so well together. The first, leads to guilt on the parent (oh if I don't do xyz the time is going to go by and I'll never get it back, so I have to enjoy every moment). The second leads to an attitude that the child should pay more attention to the parent than the parent should to the child. If you know what you want to create as an end product by the time your child is 18, it will guide every step of your actions as they grow up. And don't feel guilty-we have an extremely messed up society that has utterly and totally confused and messed up marriage and the raising of children. So the messages you get either consciously or sub-consciously from society absolutely 100% do not mix well in the raising of proper adults and it takes a lot of fortitude and courage to go against the tide. 1st things 1st, Priority #1 set your relationship with God as #1 in your life, along with priority #1 make taking time for yourself an extreme priority (a drowning man cannot save others) priority #2 set your relationship with your spouse as the most important earthly relationship-never let children come in the way of that relationship. Priority #3 spent time educating yourself on how to properly parent and the biggest then that can be done in that area is a change of attitude. As in I'm the parent, you are the child, you do what I say to do, period! When you as a child request things of me, I will consider that request but more likely than not I will give you a healthy dose of Vitamin N (No!) but if I deem it okay, then I will say yes. And then along with that, let the child manage their own affairs (with corrective guidance from time to time as necessary). Do that and everything will work out just fine. And then you will be able to play pretend when you want to on your terms and then when you are tired of it or need a break, you say no and that's that.

It sucks what you are going through; however I would suggest that unless it is adultery or abuse don't even think about divorce. And if it is one of those two-tread very, very carefully. My prayers are with you. The below are general comments specific to the general topic area of divorce. ---- I severely disagree with DoctorLemon; the facts simply do not show this. In fact, the facts and statistics show exactly the opposite. Single mother-hood and divorced motherhood is quite frankly a blight on this land and as a people and a culture it is a great evil that we exalt single-motherhood and divorced motherhood to this mythical martyrdom/heroism. http://www.children-and-divorce.com/children-divorce-statistics.html http://www.photius.com/feminocracy/facts_on_fatherless_kids.html https://singlemotherguide.com/single-mother-statistics/ The idea that "I was raised in a single/divorced household with my mom and look everything turned out great!" needs to be shot down. The statistics bare it out, the Word of God bares it out, modern Prophets and Scriptures bare it out. The nuclear family is absolutely, no ifs and or buts the best way to raise well adjusted, hard-working, emotionally stable children. Husband and Wife are absolutely critical in the raising of children. Amazingly enough, the most important relationship in the raising of children is the husband and wife relationship. If husband and wife put more time into being father/mother vs. husband/wife, then they will eventually end up losing both, i.e. they will lose their relationship with their spouse and they will screw up the raising of their children. We have an epidemic in this country of the nuclear family getting blown up and we see that children today are less respectful, less resourceful, less independent, have more emotional and mental problems today than at any point in the last 200+ years. 70% of divorces are initiated by women. Sorry, but no women can't do it all, just like men can't do it all; it takes both male and female to come together to form a family and then to in their role as husband/wife create children and become father/mothers and to raise the next generation. Sometimes divorce is necessary-but I guarantee no were near the level of necessity that it is in today's culture. If it is abuse, that's a problem that very well may need some sort of resolution; if it's adultery-then I'd suggest one take a real good honest look at the marriage prior to the actual adultery itself. Because more likely than not the marriage was on life-support long beforehand and the actual adultery itself is just a symptom of a non-functioning marriage prior to the act. And to admit that a marriage is on life-support prior to adultery requires some deep introspection. In otherwords, adultery becomes the excuse rather than looking at the root cause of the marital dysfunction. In a good marriage, neither husband nor wife will do that to the other. I would also suggest that the principles of the Gospel are the foundations of a happy, healthy marriage. The Atonement of Jesus Christ is crucial. Learning how to ask forgiveness, give forgiveness, have faith in the marriage, become united as one. The Bible teaches us so many very wise principles upon which marriage is founded. I would suggest listening to the following: http://podcast.rosemond.com/?name=2017-02-25_jr_021817.mp3 I would also suggest that children are entitled (one of the few times I will use the word entitled with children) to be raised in household consisting of both husband and wife-father and mother. I understand there are times when a child will be raised in a single parent home for a time (death/divorce), but even if that happens the child is entitled to be raised in a nuclear family-I think for a child to be raised for a significant period of time (i.e. 5+ years) without both husband/wife, mother/father is an absolute travesty and does more harm to society than we can possibly imagine. ----

I've seen that; there are things I like about it and things I don't like about it. I do like that the video combines the struggle with SSA and the Gospel and generally approaches it from a gospel sense. My own personal view, I like how the Church uses the term SSA, I personally do not like how some members identify themselves as homosexual. There is a difference between having SSA and being homosexual; one is identifying a problem that one has and the other is taking SSA and identifying it as a core part of who they are. And that is a big difference. As stated in the video there is a culture of being homosexual, there is generally a specific walk, speech pattern, basically a lifestyle that comes with being homosexual-if one is paying attention you can generally pick 'em out. Sidenote: Anyone else notice the uptick in homosexual stewards . . .I swear it's like every flight I get on-if it's a dude I give it at least 50-75% chance .. . . There are a few surprises now and then, but it's not too hard to pick out individuals for whom they are homosexual. I think if an individual has SSA they probably need to be careful on how they view themselves. I severely dislike how an LDS counselor asks this gal if she wants to be married to someone of the same sex. Personally, I think that's appalling-but then again my opinion of psychologists isn't very high and from my few interactions with LDS psychologists they aren't high on my list either. In one of the videos this individual talks about the sadness about not having a family . . .umm yeah that a consequence of your actions (i.e. your decision to not want to be married to a man). I'm pretty sure the plumbing works just fine with a guy but if you don't want to be married to a guy then no having a family in the Gospel is not gonna happen. Having said that, I think her current choice of actions is probably just great, give it time figure out how to deal with it and live life to the fullest. The sad fact that most people who are homosexual don't want to admit is that our experiences and how we react sexually changes over time. My goodness I remember as a teenager-it was really hard to keep my thoughts in line. As I've grown, matured, gotten married, libido changes, etc. my ability to keep my thoughts in line has dramatically improved. I don't seek out the things I used to, my thoughts don't turn to impure thoughts quite as much. I could be in the company of several beautiful women today and my reactions would be totally different vs. 20 or even 10 years ago. I've become a better master over myself. As we learn as we grow, the thoughts we think, the things we watch, small step by small step they are changing us and we are changing ourselves. If we give in to the natural man, we won't change but as we become men and women of God we change. Our actual brain make-up changes. I'm not saying that someone who has SSA will one day wake up and never have SSA, but I am saying that as they become more like our Heavenly Father it will get better. One of my pet peeves about modern culture is this stupid mantra and crap about "being true to oneself" . . .really?? What does that even mean, except I don't want anyone to tell me that I should be different. The goal isn't to be "true to oneself", the goal is to become like Heavenly Father-and that sure can't happen if you acting homosexual behaviors. I don't think this video is normalizing homosexuality (even if I disagree with some of the things said)-showing dudes kissing is. Sidenote: This might seem unrelated, but I really don't think we as a culture really understand the massive amount of side-effects that have occurred over the last 20 years since access to porn become prevalent. As a man thinketh so is he and the statistics of users of porn is very sad and I believe it has had a very, very bad affect in normalizing behavior that is not normal.

Doesn't surprise me in the least. In "After The Ball" it describes that one of the major institutions to go after and receive acceptance from was Boy Scouts-they have now become Queer Scouts rather than Boy Scouts (so sad).

Not now; but 50 years ago they would agree. Like I said, it's the frog boiling in the part.

Oh and in one of those weird quarks, I'm against the State being involved in marriage. I believe marriage is a religious ceremony and that the only reason the State should ever be involved is in the contract side; i.e. who gets what when one dies, etc. I think there two aspects, one is a social contract which I believe anyone should be able to enter into whatever type of social contract they want with another individual (or even groups of individual)-regardless of my personal moral views. Yes this would require the State to get completely out of the marriage business in taxes, insurance, etc. (and I would be all for that). I think marriage (which it was generally prior to 1900) is a religious ceremony and if two dudes want to form a Church that "marries" dudes, fine whatever-I'll still say it's morally wrong and unacceptable.

To each his own . . .time is limited I'd rather watch a movie without the homosexual stuff that makes me smile or laugh and tragedies that make me frown or cry-plenty of other movies/shows that do that.

I understand; my guess is that as things continue not only you but many others will feel torn-maybe not on this issue but on others. 25 years ago very, very few people in the Church felt torn on this issue, people knew of it, knew the behavior was unacceptable and that was about it. No one in the Church advocated homosexual bashing, etc. we were taught (while not explicitly-certainly implicitly) that beating someone up b/c they were homosexual was unacceptable. But as things have gone, more and more members feel torn on this issue-the Church's policy on children from homosexual homes caused many members problems. It is a very difficult balancing act-to condemn sin and yet still show love towards the sinner. More and more people want to be loved in their sins. They in effect love the way they sin. When one to stands up and condemns the sin to them it means that one is showing hate towards them. An attack of the sin, becomes an attack on them b/c of how they love the sin. They don't want to feel guilt for the sins they have committed. The ultimate love for others is the Christ-like love of seeing their full potential. As a parent, I have learned more about love then I would have otherwise. There are times when I as a parent must be very stern-I don't like it, but it is necessary. Part of growing up is learning when it is appropriate to feel guilt and when not, i.e. the development of a conscience. Part of a parent's job is to help develop that conscience and a huge part of that conscience is developed when a child understands unequivocally that certain behaviors are unacceptable. A parent's first job is to disciple their child in the way to live life. To disciple a child requires many different facets, one facet is lead by example, another facet is in giving tasks to a child, another facet is in enacting some form of discipline when a child steps too far out of line, another facet is allowing them to learn by their own mistakes. So as disciples of Christ we must do the same; we must boldly testify of truth and of error-when something is incorrect we should testify against it. We should lead by example, we should allow others the opportunity to fail. We should love others even when they do things opposite the gospel. Probably the most important aspect as disciples of Christ though is knowing exactly where we stand. If we know that we stand with the Gospel, with the scriptures, with God, with the Church and with the Prophets then regardless of how torn we might feel-I think we will always eventually end up on the right side at the end of the day.