Jesus' ministry was primarily a message to the Jewish people in preparation for a Messianic Kingdom. But it was Paul who targeted a larger Greco-Roman (outside) community after being forced out of synagogue.

While there was overlap between Paul and Jesus, there were also large divides between Pauline Christianity and Judean Christianity, which only grows -- if you trace Paul's letters in chronological order -- into a full-blown chasm by the end of his life.

On the other hand, Jesus said not a "jot or tittle" of the Law would pass away. And he would not have put aside his religion in light of a lawless Gentile mission or a new cosmic encounter with a Holy Spirit or Holy Trinity -- which would have been polytheism!

Bloomberg Business News and the Washington Post

are guessing that Romney may have paid near zero federal taxes in 2009 due to losses on his investments resulting from the financial crisis. They probably have the right idea, just the wrong year.

It is true that Romney suffered capital losses on his investments in 2009 that might act to shield much of his income in that year from taxes, but he would have to be a complete idiot to allow his tax planners to file a return showing no income taxes paid just as he was gearing up for a presidential run. But, then again, we are talking about someone who waited until 2010 to close his wife's Swiss bank account.

Much more likely to this writer is that Romney probably does have one or more years in his recent history where he paid near zero taxes, but the year in question is probably not 2009. Much more likely candidates are the tax years 1999 to 2001 when he supposedly left his high paying job at Bain and accepted a smaller $275,000 salary to head the winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. It is reported that once the Olympics showed a profit, Romney ended up donating his salary to charities, thus further lowering his reported income for tax purposes.

His lower salary and loss of some board member compensation would mean less current income to shelter from 1999 to 2001. But, his tax shelters would have lost none of their potency. He was already utilizing IRAs and 401(k)s to shelter much of his investment income, possibly worth as much as $100 million today, from taxes. He was already making use of numerous off-shore tax havens in the Cayman Islands and other foreign locations and admits to having had a Swiss bank account in his wife's name. He admits that he had a trust established for his children to shelter as much as $100 million more of his wealth from taxation. And much of his income came from Bain Capital private equity investment funds located offshore so much of their profits could be deferred for ten years or limited to a maximum tax rate of 15 percent, a special tax provision only available to private equity and hedge fund managers.

Also, the leveraged buyout business took a big hit in 1999 and 2000 as the country entered a recession so he likely had significant capital losses to deduct. This was followed in 2001 by the dotcom collapse. As a large wealthy investor it is likely he was being put into numerous IPO's available only to the well-connected and many of these high-tech investments most likely soured in 2001 leading to further tax deductible capital losses.

Some may argue that someone who donates his salary to charity or has investment losses deserves to pay no taxes. But, they are missing the point. Romney's vast personal fortune of between $100 million and $200 million at the time was accreting at some 20 percent per year so how should he able to avoid paying taxes on the $20 to $40 million of dividends and interest income and profits and capital gains he must have been receiving on his investments? Donating a $275,000 salary to charity is chump change compared with avoiding taxation on tens of millions of profits each year.

Of course, some will argue that this is all just speculation. What else are concerned citizens to do when a candidate for president, running on a platform of being business smart and the man to fix the economy, refuses to tell us how he made his money and whether he paid his fair share of taxes along the way?

Some may argue that this is all legal. That our laws allow for the wealthiest to accumulate $400 million plus fortunes and pay little to no taxes. But, that is exactly the point. Who do you think is writing our tax laws? It is the wealthiest of our country that are lobbying our government for tax breaks and making large campaign contributions to elected officials to ensure these tax breaks not only continue, but are amplified and extended. And who is their boy, Mitt Romney.

The Republicans sure have the right symbol with the elephant. Republican debates are nothing but elephants in the room.

The biggest of which must be: to someone out there who's hurting, they spend the whole two hours yammering away about earmarks and illegal immigrants and contraception and every other peripheral, wish-I-had-the-time-to-worry-about-it issue they can think of.

Then there is the elephant of how they all -- with the sometime exception of Ron Paul -- nod along to insane statements just because they don't want to ever look like they're to the left of anybody, on anything, especially the evilness of Barack Obama. So Wednesday night when Newt said the president of the United States had a history of practicing infanticide... yep, yep, yessir, that's what he does all right. Clubs infants like baby seals in his spare time. Ike played golf, Kennedy liked boating...

Ron Paul said foreign aid just helps our enemies. Which, I believe, would make Israel and Egypt our two biggest enemies. Yup, yup, hate foreign aid. A meaningless percentage of the budget, btw.

Newt said where government becomes the central provider of services, it's a move towards tyranny -- yeah, except in all the countries where it isn't, like all of Scandanavia and much of Europe. Today a barium enema paid for by medicare, tomorrow Poland.

And isn't a highlight of every debate when Mitt Romney takes umbrage at being accused of the best thing he ever did in his life -- Romneycare? Something he should be proud of? Last night he took out his dueling glove and declared that when he was governor, he made sure there was NO requirement from the church to provide morning after pills for rape victims. They will be punished with a baby, as Jesus would want. Mitt's attitude is always, "How dare you accuse me of helping people or being compassionate! Why, I'll have you know I'm every bit as much of a cold hearted bastard as any of these other pricks up here with me!"

"But Mitt, we have a picture of you giving money to a homeless person."

"I did NOT give a bum money! I was paying him to blow me!"

This Republican field over the last year has been such a comedy gold mine -- which I have compacted into a stand-up special I'm doing Thursday night, February 23, called #CrazyStupidPolitics -- it's free, and it's live-streamed on Yahoo! 10:30 Eastern (with a mindblowing announcement at the end). I apologize for the shameful plug, but I just want you to have a good laugh! Thank you Arianna, you're the best... and now back to our blog.

The biggest elephant in the room tonight for me was Satan. All day, TV news was talking about Satan because of Rick Santorum's dug-up (but, no doubt still accurate) comments about Satan from 2008. It just shows you how when someone is a nobody politically speaking -- as Santorum was in 2008 -- you can say any kind of crazy shit and it's not newsworthy. But when you are seeking the highest office in the land... in the world -- it really worries me that you believe in demons and a personified creature named Satan.

People get mad at me for using the phrase "this stupid country", which I sometimes do -- but, I'm sorry -- Satan? In 2012? This elephant is not only in the room at the debates, but everywhere on TV today where people were talking about this and not breaking down in the middle and screaming, Wait a minute -- We're modern people, surely we don't give any credence to this comic book character that was created in the bronze age!! It's barely worthy of a children's story, and people take it to the Oval Office -- Bush did -- and it affects their thinking and our lives. Why is Santorum so against contraception? Because there's a line in Genesis about not spilling your seed. A random brainfart from some desert dweller 3,000 years ago, before people knew about germs or atoms or round planets, and it gets written down and passed down and in 2012 people like Rick Santorum are still too R-word to see that, and that's why some woman in Akron, Ohio might not get birth control.

And as far as Rick's claim tonight that even though he holds these beliefs, he wouldn't legislate them? Bullshit -- he said states absolutely had the right to outlaw contraception. That's the same thing -- as an officer of the government, he should take the opposite position. Ron Paul would.

My favorite moment of the debate was the last question, when they all were asked to summarize themselves in one word: Ron Paul said "consistency," and you know what? I have no argument with that. It's true, and he's earned it.

The other ones however, I think I could find a more honest word. Mitt Romney said "resolute." I would have gone with "shapeshifter." Or perhaps "irresolute." Rick Santorum said "courage" , whereas I would have said "Bellevue." And Newt Gingrich said "cheerful." I was thinking "pus."

One other thing: in the overtime, I heard Ron Paul make the point to John King that his foreign policy was similar to Eisenhower's, how Ike avoided getting militarily involved in Vietnam or the Suez Canal and got out of Korea. Because he was a military man. Ron Paul served, also -- the other three not so much. I know it will never become law, because it would require a constitutional amendment, but I don't think it would be such a bad thing if you had to have served in the military if you wanted to be president. Kennedy also avoided war where many would not have. After him, though, we got into the era of non-servers and draft-dodgers, and used the military like a toy. Ex-soldiers understand it's not. And the president is Commander-in-Chief -- shouldn't you have served some time in an organization you're the head of?

I hope this was the last Republican debate. Well, I say that, but I'll need the material after I use up an hour of good jokes tomorrow night, so, fuck it, keep going.

Last bullshit call: In his closing statement, Rick Santorum said that in the race against the Evil One (no, not that Evil One, he was talking about Obama), the president would have the media in his pocket (yeah, except Fox News, lots of newspapers, all of radio... ), and way more money. Huh? Sheldon Adelson this week said he might give $100 million to Newt Gingrich! If he'd give that to Newt who has no chance, he might give more to Romney. And he's just one old cranky billionaire who hates Obama, there's a whole gaggle of them.

And Sheldon, if you want to blow money so bad, just walk into one of your hotels in Vegas and go to the Roulette table.