2

“Well Funded”

“You’re right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I’ll have to close this place in… 60 years.”

Charles Foster Kane, (Orson Welles) Citizen Kane

 

 

A favorite tactic of some of the Catholic Left is to accuse faithful Catholics who speak out in the Public Square of being “well-funded” from no doubt sinister sources.  Father Hunwicke remarks upon this:

Gimme money!

 
Don’t miss this … a wonderfully, miraculously funny piece of hysteria in The National Catholic Reporter by an individual called Michael Sean Winters, screaming his abuse at Fr Weinandy. It is a classic, a real winner!

One little factual query. Winters says that the opponents of PF (opponents whom, incidentally, he appears to invite to leave the Church or at least her Ministry) are “well-funded and very noisy”. If he would count me in this category, I would have no problem about being deemed “very noisy”.

But “well-funded”? My wife and I live off our Church of England pension, with one or two modest additions. 

“Well-funded”! How do I get my hands on all this limitless loot which is apparently swilling around? Who dispenses it? To whom should I make application? Why has nobody told me about this before? How is a poor convert supposed to know about this eldorado if nobody tells him?

I want money! And I want it now! Just tell me whom to ask! 

Go here to read the comments.  This brought to mind a post that I made on August 24, 2012 entitled “Don There’s A Nut On The Phone.”

 

 

 

I was working at my desk in the law mines Wednesday afternoon, when I heard one of my secretaries say loudly “Mr. McClarey never speaks to anyone who will not give their name!” followed by a phone being slammed down.  I sauntered into her office to see what was up.  She told me that some bitter old harpy was yelling and talking a mile a minute, demanding to speak to me and ranting about who was paying for The American Catholic, that Biden was a better Catholic than Paul Ryan, and spewing various insults aimed at conservatives.  When she wouldn’t give her name my secretary hung up on her per our standard operating procedures.  I learned long ago that if someone will not leave their name that is almost a certain sign of someone with a few screws loose, and I simply do not have the time to waste dealing with such phone calls.  My other secretary heard us and said that she had received a similar call a few minutes ago and after letting the woman vent for five minutes hung up on her after she repeatedly ignored requests to give my secretary her name.  At this time the caller called back and we put her through to voice mail.  The person began her diatribe by denouncing me as a coward, this from someone who would not give her name.  I deleted her call at this point since she was obviously merely going to repeat the tiresome rant that my secretaries had already described to me.

If she had merely given her name I would have been happy to talk to her and tell her who is paying for The American Catholic.  Fifty percent of our revenue comes from the Vatican.  I was in the midst of fingering my monthly pot of Vatican gold when she called.  This of course is in addition to the squad of albino squirrel assassins that I received from the Vatican when I helped form The American Catholic four years ago this October.  The remainder of our funds comes from the Koch Brothers.  They usually pay us in blood diamonds, although I would note that the shipment last month seemed to be of a lesser quality than they customarily send.  As a result, I am happy to report that each contributor to The American Catholic is rich, rich beyond your wildest dreams of avarice!  (Don laughs evilly:  Ha! Ha, Ha, Ha!  Chortle, snort!)

Then you wake up.  The sad and sorry truth is that we are all unpaid volunteers.  My income for four years toiling away at this blog is 0.  Next year I hope to increase it to 0.00.

A few observations in regard to my would be interlocutor.

1.  How pathetic does  a life have to be when someone, outraged over a blog, decides to work herself into a rage and call a complete stranger to vent?

2.  Other than venting what good did she think she could do by calling?  Did she think she was going to intimidate me?

3.  I blog for fun and I am always vastly amused by people who take any of this as seriously as the deranged nut who called me.  Perhaps it is my Irish blood or my profession, but although I enjoy a good verbal or written combat, I never take any of it seriously.

4.   I wonder if the deranged 83 year old Planned Parenthood supporter, who spit in the face of the Romney supporter in the video at the beginning of the post, is related to my caller?

5.   Many liberals live their life in an ideological bubble and when they encounter conservatives their first reaction is not to debate, but to lash out.  My caller obviously fits into this category.

6.  I said a prayer for my caller that something might fill her life rather than the anger that seems to have a grip on her.  Thank you guardian angel for the impulse to do so!

7.  In the law mines you tend to encounter people under stress and some are fairly loosely wired.  If my caller was intending to cause me something more than brief amusement, she failed.

8.  I trust that my caller will continue to read The American Catholic.  She may be none the wiser as a result, but she will be so much better informed.  (If she has low blood pressure, I think that reading TAC will help cure that malady for her!)

9.  Our goals at TAC are to enlighten and amuse.  However, if I have to choose, I will always prefer rage at what we write instead of complete indifference.

10. There is a scene in Citizen Kane that I have always enjoyed:

Thatcher puts on his hat.

                                    THATCHER

                        I happened to see your consolidated

                        statement yesterday, Charles.  Could I not suggest to you that it  is unwise for you to continue this philanthropic enterprise –

                               (sneeringly)

                        this Enquirer – that is costing you one million dollars a year?

                                    KANE

                        You’re right.  We did lose a million dollars last year.

          Thatcher thinks maybe the point has registered.

                                    KANE

                        We expect to lost a million next

                        year, too.  You know, Mr. Thatcher –

                               (starts tapping quietly)

                        at the rate of a million a year –

                        we’ll have to close this place in sixty years.

TAC of course has no money to lose.  As a result I promise our well wishers and detractors that we will be around for a very, very long time indeed!

Share With Friends
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Donald R. McClarey

Cradle Catholic. Active in the pro-life movement since 1973. Father of three and happily married for 35 years. Small town lawyer and amateur historian. Former president of the board of directors of the local crisis pregnancy center for a decade.

2 Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *