8 Responses to The Mainstream Media is Fake News

  • To paraphrase Francis bacon; “What is journalism asked jesting Pilate?”

  • Let me add one more rule of fake news. You can read most articles these days or watch a news segment and what you get is almost entirely opinion. There is absolutely no question what the news source wants you to think about the issue. In fact, frequently there are no facts to support the opinion piece passed off as news.

  • Agree. I see it in my own son who is the chief political analyst on ABC-TV. The ‘This Week’ Sunday program is clearly biased. One example of making fake news is the imbalance of the Round Table. Only 10-15 minutes are given for the discussion, there are usually 5 panelists , three Democrats and two Republicans. Consequently, the “discussion” usually consists of party line selling points with the Democrat position winning on points. Most unsatisfactory. But the thing about this is that most folks are not fooled and use it as an exercise to find bias. Largely, the networks are fooling themselves.

  • All news reporting must satisfy that all persons reading are included for better or worse in Truth and Justice.

  • I think It’s downright propaganda. It is not reporting. Deliberate misrepresentation to further socialism. The credentials of these “journalist’s”? Report the news. Same with this crap going on in Rome. Forced down the throats of apathetic populace who have no idea of the truths of their faith. “Bless me Father, and rationalize my sins”

  • The newsroom HBO series gives an in-depth look at how and why our news is in such a sad state of affairs, it you haven’t “rented” the series its a must watch see slam of fake news stories here on you tube..enjoy


  • Fake cultures are also affirmed by the same outlets. Case in point….abstract art is about 97% unfortunate but the NY Times for decades has kept it supported by never criticizing the absurdities they recently reported….Ellsworth Kelly paints a green rectangle which each of you could paint…and the nyt reports that it is for sale in Chelsea for 5 million dollars. Two weeks previous they reported that a white rectangle by Robert Ryman sold for 20 million at Southeby’s auction. Whereas rap was invented for people who can’t sing…abstract was invented for people who can’t paint as well as Andrew Wyeth etc.
    Men’s fashions is another delusionary event that the NY Times affirms whenever the bizarre and worn by nobody ….mens fashion shows appear in NY.
    Who buys a painting that is a green rectangle? People who love rectangles? No. Wealthy people who know it’s a fake asset class that appreciates more steadily than Micron stock.
    Buy it for 5 mil today and next year you can sell it for 6 mil. Thank the nyt and the well rewarded galleries who get 40% of that price.
    It’s not just fake news….it’s fake art, clothing and music.

  • Pingback: TVESDAY SÆCVLARIA EXTRA | Big Pulpit

Separated at Birth

Monday, March 21, AD 2016


With all due respect to Mr. Klavan, the public figure that Bernie Sanders most reminds me of is Pope Francis:

1.Both are socialists with very little work experience in the private sector.

2.Both are popular on college campuses with kids who have very little experience of life.

3.Both are in favor of extremist environmental policies while decrying the lack of job opportunities.

4.Both seem to believe that governments can endlessly conjure wealth out of thin air.

5.Both enjoy great press at The National Catholic Reporter.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Separated at Birth

60 Responses to Anger Trumps Reason

  • “. . . he is feeding them a line of hooey that he has no intention of carrying out if elected.” Which has been my complaint since this all began.
    Bomber Bill Ayres, Cruz, Hillary, Romney, Obama, Moron.org, Kasich, BlackLivesMatter, Sanders, Rubio, McCain, and the entire GOP establishment are united against Trump. The entrails tell me If the Obama economy is so great, e.g. low unemployment statistic, why are near-record numbers of Americans dependent on food stamps? About 45% of Americans don’t pay income taxes; 40% of working age population don’t work; and 10% only have part-time jobs. Rarely is anything these clowns write, say or think even remotely true; and their constant misrepresentation of the facts surrounding the economy is no exception.more about them than it does about Trump. I was a Cruz man.
    Working class Americans are hurting after seven years of hope and change. And, near-record numbers of Americans dependent on food stamps. About 45% of Americans don’t pay income tax; 40% of the working-age population doesn’t work; and another 10% can only find part-time jobs. Rarely is anything these people write, say or think even remotely close to the experiences of millions of Americans. Their constant misrepresentations of the facts surrounding the economy are no exceptions.
    They were expendable. Not so long ago, 61% of Americans were middle class. That has crashed to 49% of the US population, and in aggregate they gave up 30% of their wealth: Yes We Can!
    And, millions of throw-away Trump voters are irate idiots because they don’t understand that their best interests lie in more immigration and more harmful trade agreements (TPP).

  • None of that matters because Trump validates their anger.

    And GoldmanSachs!

  • I’m not convinced Trump’s read his immigration plan. His easy reversal on H-1B visas suggests as much, and promises even more reversals in the future.

  • – or reason has lead to anger as regards actions of government oath takers

  • Love Andrew Klavan. Great writer and pundit.

  • Do you think a snickers bar would help?
    Schmucks voting for a schmuck. I hope they put on their thinking hats pretty soon.

  • Have you considered the possibility that the schmucks did put their thinking hats on, and decided they didn’t have anything to lose?

    Or that they don’t care that you do have something to lose?

  • Trump or Hillary. Take your pick.

  • Is this the time for a third party?
    A write in?

    Neither is a vote for both. A flip of the coin.
    We must not sit this one out.
    Who can we get behind and support for an Hail Mary throw into the political end zone.

    Tomorrow, Saint Patrick and Irish Luck, will be summoned by a group of conservatives that have similar convictions like Mr. McCleary and would never vote for Trump. This from Politico. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/top-conservatives-gather-to-plot-third-party-run-against-trump-220786

    As these men meet tomorrow in D.C., I’ll be offering prayers that a candidate can be victorious come November. A third party candidate. Abraham Lincoln pray for us.

  • Just out of curiosity – have ANY of you bothered to read Trump’s book “America Is Broken” in which you can explore his ideas/plans in his own words, unfiltered by a very liberal, often hostile press ???

    You may be surprised at some of the differences in what he REALLY proposes and the way his ideas have been reported and distorted by the media.

    The way that I see it, he is the best bet to stop Chillary.

  • “unfiltered by a very liberal, often hostile press ???”

    Please. Trump is a creation of the media. He thrives on being outrageous and all media coverage for him is cream whether it is negative or positive. Once he strays into policy, that is when it is clear that Trump has no clue about public policy. “I’m going to build a wall and make the Mexicans pay for it!” Yeah, right.

  • Please. Trump is a creation of the media. He thrives on being outrageous and all media coverage for him is cream whether it is negative or positive.

    Sarah Hoyt on her blog has her theory that the media is playing softball with Trump because they think he’ll be the easiest to destroy in the general.
    Though I don’t know how conscious this might be (I’ve established my view on conspiracies) it could get interesting if true, and the press end up creating a monster they underestimated. Maybe all those old sci-fi movies with the mad scientist killed by his creation were onto something…

  • RE : “..Please. Trump is a creation of the media…”(???? Really???)

    Oh well DRM everybody has one, and I do NOT agree with you but….

    BTW I could not help but note that you COMPLETELY sidestepped my main point (which was that Trump’s ideas are different in his book than they are when portrayed by a liberal, generally hostile media…) so here goes … direct question : have you bothered to READ Mr. Trump’s book – or are you just another pontificating American with a big OPINION even with nothing much to really base it on?

  • PS my personal first choice would have been Santorum BUT he could never actually WIN !

    I decided long ago that my primary goal was/is to STOP CHILLARY : as the unquestionably popular long time front running candidate, (IMHO) Donald Trump has the best chance at beating Chillary.

    I also believe that if the GOP does not quit their shenanigans and get behind this ,their absolutely most popular candidate IN DECADES, they will essentially be giving the election to Hillary Clinton and self-destructing at the same time.

  • “have you bothered to READ Mr. Trump’s book – or are you just another pontificating American with a big OPINION even with nothing much to really base it on?”

    No, I have not read Trump’s book he had ghost written for him. I have observed the words that have tumbled forth from the fount of ignorance directly throughout the campaign and that has been quite enough.




  • I decided long ago that my primary goal was/is to STOP CHILLARY : as the unquestionably popular long time front running candidate, (IMHO) Donald Trump has the best chance at beating Chillary.

    If defeating Hillary is your number one goal, then backing the one candidate who trails her in every solitary poll and could possibly be the only one who would also bring Republicans defeat in both the Senate and House is a peculiar choice.

    their absolutely most popular candidate IN DECADES

    By any metric he is the LEAST popular candidate in decades. Every single Republican nominee after the Ford-Reagan contest had sewn up the nomination by this point, or had reached the point where every challenger had dropped out. Not only is Trump still losing states, and will likely lose many more, his approval/disapproval ratings are off the charts in the wrong direction.

  • Lol…fount of ignorance…
    Gotta love it.

    In looking for “America is broken,” I found “Crippled America. How to make America great again.”

    For $18.95 you get the book, decoder ring, the ground round, the vino and an honorary degree from Trump University. Kick Ass, the movie, is included when you rush your order by calling in the next 5 minutes. Operators are standing by.

  • By the way, here is an article that runs through the numbers to show how Trump is the weakest front-runner in my lifetime.

  • Without having read the article, it seems to me, in fairness to Trump, that he’s running in front of the strongest field in our lifetime too. So his weakness may be relative. Or not.

  • That said, I for one can’t help but feel like we’ve gone from starting this primary season with an embarrassment of riches, only to wind up ending with just the embarrassment.

  • Better the Devil you know, said the Gods of the Copybook Headings.

    Something to think about should the candidates two incumbent parties offer us this fall turn out to be HRC and Trump.

  • In that case I have to vote for Hillary Clinton. I know what she’s going to do to screw up the country.

  • @Donald R. McLarey – RE : “…No, I have not read Trump’s book…” [hmmmm somehow that is pretty much what I expected that you might say.]

    In other words, kind of like I suggested in the first post, -you seem to be just another pontificating American with a big OPINION even with nothing much to really base it on, outside of news reporting by an often hostile and usually “liberal” news media. Then, as if to prove it for me, you go on to quote from some of the liberal media such as I referenced who might misrepresent Trump & his words : to wit, you provide :

    1). one link to The New York Daily News , a tabloid format rag owned by a certain Mortimer Zuckerman, whose interests also include real-estate deals [conflict of interests ??] AND political contributions to Democrat and Independent politicians. He is a long-time supporter of the Democrat party and claims to have had a hand in writing at least one of Obama’s speeches.

    HARDLY an independent or disinterested, objective party ! and,

    2). a reference to another disparaging piece concerning ONE of Trump’s books – (from 16 years ago ! ) from the notoriously liberal online site “Salon” [ Appropriately described – also online – wiki- “.. It focuses on U.S. politics and current affairs from a liberal perspective..”] Gee is it surprising then that they do not particularly like his book or his ideas?

    Oh and by the way Mr.McLarey, just in case you have not even READ the articles which you are using as references, be aware that THIS article is basically a screed by a former employee of Trump who helped to “ghost write” Trump’s first political book some 16 years ago (” “The America We Deserve”) – a book that Mr.Trump came out with in the year 2000. It is NOTHING to do with his current book !

    and finally,

    3). Another reference to another disparaging piece in which early on the author writes : “..I never met Donald Trump. His subordinate, who ran the company, was the one who hired me…” This article is primarily about the author’s job complaints, and has NOTHING to do with Mr. Trump’s book !

    It is from the online news website “Vox” – founded by Ezra Klein,a “blogger” who had worked at The Washington Post (“Pravda on the Potomac”), had been associate editor for “The American Prospect” – [ Described thus online – again wiki – “…a quarterly American political magazine dedicated to American liberalism. Based in Washington, D.C., The American Prospect says it aims “to advance liberal and progressive goals through reporting, analysis, and debate about today’s realities and tomorrow’s possibilities.”…”], as well as a contributor to such organizations as Bloomberg News and MSNBC [ “…Commentators have described MSNBC as having a bias towards left-leaning politics and the Democratic Party…” ] MSNBC has been accused of “left-leaning” by entities as disparate as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico ; now when both the Times and the Post call a news company “left-leaning”, does that mean “almost Marxist”???

    No Mr. McLarey – sorry but I must conclude that since your own references are FROM the very same liberal, biased & hostile-towards-Trump press that I spoke of….and since you have NOT read his book – in other words his own ideas in his OWN words – and NOT sound bites and NOT filtered through the hostile and generally liberally biased media – I must conclude then that you are indeed – [at least on this particular subject] just another uninformed American with a big OPINION but really has not taken the time to bother to do the proper research that would JUSTIFY a perhaps more VALID opinion.

    Besides – as I also made very clear – he would NOT have been MY FIRST CHOICE (that would have been Santorum, but he would never beat Chillary and he would simply put just never win. Sorry ! )

    BUT Trump is the best bet to stop Hillary. In my opinion.

    @P Zummo

    RE : “…If defeating Hillary is your number one goal, then backing the one candidate who trails her in every solitary poll and could possibly be the only one who would also bring Republicans defeat in both the Senate and House is a peculiar choice….”

    OK YOU can form your opinion by whatever the polls say if you would like to, but MY thoughts and viewpoints are NOT arrived at by some polling nonsense, by consensus of some (probably liberal-leaning) pollsters. The fact of the matter is that Trump has been CONSISTENTLY FOR MONTHS been drawing HUGE crowds and HUGE support from the people ! [ I admit that I am at a slight disadvantage in that I do NOT watch T.V. at ALL – haven’t in about 7 years- BUT I have seen many news reports about his continuing popularity.] Polls shmolls ! I research things to arrive at a (hopefully) informed opinion that I can live with. My research does NOT concern itself a great deal with “polls” !

    Thanks for the link to the article decrying Trump’s popularity. I have not had the time to fact-check it and all that business, BUT so what? This guy does not like Trump. Who cares? I still maintain that :

    1) he is the best chance to STOP HILLARY

    2) if the Republicans do not get behind this guy they are going to not only self-destruct BUT are going to make a gift of the presidency to Chillary ! (BTW if you want me to, I’m sure that I could supply links to many articles which attest to Trump’s HUGE popularity too ! ]

    @Philip you’re absolutely correct that I blew it on the title and it IS in fact “CRIPPLED AMERICA : How to Make America Great Again”. But apart from that admission, frankly the “satire’ in your post is absolutely lost on me ( and meaningless).

    LOL to me its as if it came from “the fount of ignorance” Einstein.

  • “@Donald R. McLarey – RE : “…No, I have not read Trump’s book…” [hmmmm somehow that is pretty much what I expected that you might say.]”

    It’s not his book. It’s a book he paid someone else to write.

    “In other words, kind of like I suggested in the first post, -you seem to be just another pontificating American with a big OPINION even with nothing much to really base it on, outside of news reporting by an often hostile and usually “liberal” news media.”

    Nope, its an opinion gleaned from close observation of what Trump has actually said.

    “one link to The New York Daily News”

    Yes, to demonstrate that Trump did not write the book that you are so taken with. The other links also demonstrated Trump’s use of ghost writers on other books and articles he allegedly wrote.

    “BUT Trump is the best bet to stop Hillary. In my opinion.”

    He might well accomplish that, as I have written:


    The problem of course is that Trump is just as unfit for the office of President as Clinton is. Trump is a fairly conventional New York liberal. Right now he is gulling foolish conservatives to support him even though his history indicates where his political loyalties lie.

    He is largely ignorant in regard to public policy as his speeches and pathetic debate performances amply demonstrate, and if elected would govern by instinct, and his instincts are on the left. I have seen many an idiotic political movement in my time, but the Trump Cult among some conservatives is the most delusional that I have witnessed.

  • Everybody has an OPINION Mr. McLarey.

    I just don’t always share the same ones as you do… but don’t be angry. It’s really nothing personal at all.

    The fact is that I disagree with your curt dismissal of DONALD TRUMP’S book and I do not estimate that your opinion is really all that valid since admittedly it is largely gleaned from press coverage [ from “what Trump has actually said…” – oh I get it – you mean those EDITED SOUNDBITES BY THE LIBERAL MEDIA ESTABLISHMENT ! ! ! ]

    AND you have not even bothered to read HIS book !

  • RE : “… Right now he is gulling foolish conservatives to support him even though his history indicates where his political loyalties lie…” (Really?? “foolish conservatives..”??? oh great and powerful thinker – just exactly WHO do you propose to vote for then….HILLARY??


    blah blah blah

    STOP HILLARY ! ! !



    It is one thing to wish to stop Hillary and recognize that Trump is a miserable lesser evil choice. I can understand that, as I have stated several times on this blog, even if I do not agree with it. It is another thing to be a delusional cultist who can’t accept that his idiot cult leader does not write the books that appear in his name.

    Oh, and by the way, writing in caps does not make your arguments more convincing, but merely makes you look crazy:


  • Donald Smock.

    Sorry you were “lost on the satire.”

    Here’s a clue.
    Press conference following a recent primary..?
    Pitch the products….?
    Look at my catalogue…?

    Trump is con man.
    A confidence man.
    Enjoy your choice Donald.
    Buy the package deal. Don’t choke on the steaks.

  • blah blah blah

  • The Breastplate of Saint Patrick

    I arise today through a mighty strength, the invocation of the Trinity, through belief in the Threeness, through confession of the Oneness of the Creator of creation.

    I arise today through the strength of Christ with His Baptism,
    through the strength of His Crucifixion with His Burial,
    through the strength of His Resurrection with His Ascension,
    through the strength of His descent for the Judgment of Doom.

    I arise today through the strength of the love of Cherubim
    in obedience of Angels, in the service of the Archangels,
    in hope of resurrection to meet with reward,
    in prayers of Patriarchs, in predictions of Prophets,
    in preachings of Apostles, in faiths of Confessors,
    in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men.

    I arise today, through the strength of Heaven:
    light of Sun, brilliance of Moon, splendour of Fire,
    speed of Lightning, swiftness of Wind, depth of Sea,
    stability of Earth, firmness of Rock.

    I arise today, through God’s strength to pilot me:
    God’s might to uphold me, God’s wisdom to guide me,
    God’s eye to look before me, God’s ear to hear me,
    God’s word to speak for me, God’s hand to guard me,
    God’s way to lie before me, God’s shield to protect me,
    God’s host to secure me:
    against snares of devils, against temptations of vices,
    against inclinations of nature, against everyone who
    shall wish me ill, afar and anear, alone and in a crowd.

    I summon today all these powers between me (and these evils):
    against every cruel and merciless power that may oppose my body and my soul, against incantations of false prophets,
    against black laws of heathenry,
    against false laws of heretics, against craft of idolatry,
    against spells of witches and smiths and wizards,
    against every knowledge that endangers man’s body and soul.
    Christ to protect me today
    against poison, against burning,
    against drowning, against wounding,
    so that there may come abundance of reward.

    Christ with me, Christ before me, Christ behind me, Christ in me,
    Christ beneath me, Christ above me,
    Christ on my right, Christ on my left,
    Christ in breadth, Christ in length, Christ in height,
    Christ in the heart of every man who thinks of me,
    Christ in the mouth of every man who speaks of me,
    Christ in every eye that sees me,
    Christ in every ear that hears me.

    I arise today through a mighty strength, the invocation of the Trinity, through belief in the Threeness, through confession of the Oneness of the Creator of creation.
    Salvation is of the Lord. Salvation is of the Lord. Salvation is of Christ. May Thy Salvation, O Lord, be ever with us.

  • blah blah blah

    Such a weighty response, Mr. Smock. But since you can’t be bothered to address anything said to you with anything other than scorn, we won’t trouble you with the burden of future replies.

  • to Ernst Schreiber: And that’s what makes them schmucks.

  • I would venture to guess the schmucks return your disdain.
    Which is unfortunate for you, since they appear to comprise a larger share of the electorate than does whatever you define as not-schmucks.
    Unfortunate for me to, but I at least have the consolation of knowing it isn’t personal.

  • In 1980 voters had enough common sense to recognize what the problems were and chose someone capable of addressing them. In 2016 voters have become so susceptible to emotional, rather than fact based appeals, that they think with their cravings rather than their heads. When it turns out that none of the current candidates can give them all they desire, there will be hell to pay. The country and the people have gone so far down the road to perdition, there is little hope of a turn to moral values. While Mr. Smock is properly decrying the conditions today, he might be well informed as to history and causes to get a better perspective as to why we are where we are now.

  • Christianity is a Monarchy. God has no political association with democracy. God is King and absolute master of all. You may have an opinion because God is merciful, but you have no choice if you call yourself Christian and hope in your heart to be with God for eternity. I wish there were no political flags in Church. To have a national political flag in Church is to deny God’s supreme Kingdom over all the earth and all that exists. I pray for God to forgive us in our simple and childish political zeal. Only our zeal for God has valid worth.

  • @Donald Link

    If we would only have a Republican candidate running for office like we had then. Pipe dreams only on this cycle I’m afraid.

    Sure seems that the temperature is increasing regarding our political climate change.
    Keeping close to God is an oasis as things heat up.

    As you mentioned. This is not an overnight dilemma. We’ve been on this road for sometime now.

  • Peashooter, confusing religion with politics is as disastrous as confusing politics with religion. Christ is King, but He gives us no instructions on tax rates, the welfare state, defense policy, foreign relations, pollution regulations and a million and one matters that must be resolved through politics.

  • D McC..As I said; I am a Monarchist, God, and, only God, is my King. God has given us EVERYTHING we need because God is God. All things “political” clearly fell under my previous statement. I tolerate the secular state until judgment permanently destroys it, but I recognize only God the King. The secular state is all but irrelevant in my life. What time do you have to spare on such redundant worldly arguments? Especially when you do not know the time nor hour of your death? I rather spend this God created time worshiping God and serving the poor as God himself directed. I obey my King, not children playing with time as if it were theirs. I will pray for you.

  • “The secular state is all but irrelevant in my life.”

    That is false, especially if you have kids.

    “I tolerate the secular state until judgment permanently destroys it, but I recognize only God the King.”

    As Christ said, His kingdom is not of this world, and it is simply untrue that Christians are absolved from any responsibilities in regard to how the polities in which they live are governed or misgoverned.

    “What time do you have to spare on such redundant worldly arguments? Especially when you do not know the time nor hour of your death?”

    God gives us our lives to strive to do good in this world, and that often involves questions that have to do with politics. For example, should nuns be forced to pay for contraceptive coverage? Does a child in the womb have a right to life? Muat the State respect the seal of the confessional?

    “I rather spend this God created time worshiping God and serving the poor as God himself directed.”

    Your right to worship God as you choose and to help the poor as you choose, are both the products of political outcomes.

    “I obey my King, not children playing with time as if it were theirs.”

    Did God tell you to be smug and arrogant? That is certainly how you come off.

    “I will pray for you.”


  • Once again, people keep flocking to either of two extremes — either “politics is the ONLY thing that matters” or “politics doesn’t matter at all.” The secular state is not “irrelevant” and Christians do have a responsibility to do the best they can to affect political outcomes. However, that does not mean it’s “the end of the world” if they fail.

    I am not as indifferent as Peashooter — I took the time to vote in the IL Republican primary for someone other than Trump (not gonna say who because I don’t want to sidetrack this thread) — and I do dread the prospect of either a Trump or Hillary presidency. I personally think these candidacies are manifestations of divine chastisement in the form of bad leadership (a topic I’ve discussed before). That said, we should remind ourselves frequently that the Church has survived and even thrived under far worse conditions than these.

  • I rather spend this God created time worshiping God and serving the poor as God himself directed.

    Or I guess writing comments on a blog haranguing others for their interests.

  • True Elaine, and often time such worse conditions could have been avoided or ameliorated if Catholics had been wiser in their political actions.

  • http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2016/march-web-only/theology-of-donald-trump.html?start=1

    This is from Christianity Today– “On the theology of Donald Trump” and his appeal to evangelicals

  • We cannot let Hilary appoint Supreme Court justices. A vote for her is a vote to extend abortion and gender bending to say nothing of direct attack on religious rights. Bottom line is Trump is relevant only if he gets the nomination. At that point he becomes critical.

    A registered New Deal Democrat since 1960.

  • No one can solve the situation in our nation or in the world. Prayer and fasting is the solution Our Lady gave to us, all else will fail, words, waste of time because we live in an imperfect world and without the help of God and prayer we are all doomed to the same mistakes and problems mankind has faced since the beginning of time and government. There is nothing new under the sun, just the same sins, problems and sufferings. Now the problem is worst because there are more human beings in the world, hence a bigger problem.

  • “Now the problems are worse because their are more human beings in the world, hence a bigger problem.” -jf

    I disagree.

    If the human beings in this world were people of prayer and fasting, I believe the problems wouldn’t be as bad as they are. It’s because people have decided to worship themselves and focus on their own glorification that things have become so dark in this world.
    Abortion on demand, homosexuality as acceptable form of lifestyle and promiscuous behaviors that are NOT challenged by society are indicators that prayer and fasting have declined in recent decades. God loves us, but our free will choices can prevent graces that could help our world. How many babies have been killed that otherwise might have played important roles in solutions to many problems we face today?

  • I deleted your last comment Peashooter. You merely repeated yourself and you did not respond to any of the responses to what you had already posted.

  • Oh, I am so disappointed.
    One would have thought there would be Catholics here to answer. All I read is bitter Sinicism, with an emphasis on sin. If voting is your passion, take from each candidate what is good as the Lord God would have said. Discard the rest. Make your measurements there, among the good.
    I don’t believe cynicism is within Gods intended vocabulary for us. I am passionate about the greatest of kings, creator of all things seen and unseen. My desire is merely to obey my master forever, not quibble uncharitably over secular things such as some democratic processes boiling as a witch’s caldron of seething with animosity. Obeying is much easier and far less self centered. Christ Centered, that is the meaning of life! All else is an illusion designed to destroy us. I beg you, think of your King!

  • Ok, let’s say I want to obey.
    Now what?
    You know me so well, Peashooter, how have I disobeyed? When have I not thought of the King?

  • [When have I not thought of the King?]

    I am smiling!

    Hosanna in the Highest!

  • Well you do a find job of exalting yourself. What did the King say about that…
    To some who were confident of their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, Jesus told this parable: 10 “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11 The Pharisee stood by himself and prayed: ‘God, I thank you that I am not like other people—robbers, evildoers, adulterers—or even like this tax collector. 12 I fast twice a week and give a tenth of all I get.’
    13 “But the tax collector stood at a distance. He would not even look up to heaven, but beat his breast and said, ‘God, have mercy on me, a sinner.’
    14 “I tell you that this man, rather than the other, went home justified before God. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

  • I’m thinking of Christ our King when I do all I can to teach the young women I work with the importance and sacredness of Life. These are women who have considered abortion for themselves, for family and friends.

    To be political, to be a friend of the King, you get yourself involved in saving souls from making disastrous mistakes. Mistakes that could kill lives.

    To be indifferent to political injustice, is what then? A friend of God?
    Peashooter. You might have a false King you adore. Ground check your conscience.
    Seek a good spiritual director.
    Come to serve the King.
    The King of Mercy.
    The Son of God.

  • Zacchaeus and Saint Matthew the tax collectors! If I could be so righteous! But I am just another sinner, full of pride and arrogance. I must keep my eye on the Lord with your help and the help of Saint Joseph of Cupertino I will!

  • Peashooter you say it, but you don’t believe it. You make a mockery of the words with your hollow excuses. If you admit that the last shall be first, then your efforts to place yourself last is just the same old usual effort to be first. You are the other side of the same pharisee coin. But don’t worry, you have received your reward as you pray loudly to be seen by others. By all means, please continue the show.

  • I will pray for you and I will pray that you will have more posters.
    Christianity is a Monarchy not a democracy. Democracy is secular.
    You cannot save yourself, much less the world. Noble as your effort may be, it begets vitriol and furthermore you know this. Do this YES! But with mercy I beg you.

  • http://www.lifenews.com/2016/03/21/woman-breaks-down-in-tears-saying-regrets-aborting-her-baby-to-get-a-nose-job/


    This is the battlefield.
    Are You your brothers keeper?
    You can not be stagnant and claim victory with God. You cannot.
    Abortion. Pornography. Materialism.
    See the political landscape and engage it.

  • Last point.

    I couldn’t bare the thought of being in front of Almighty God and His throne and then trying to explain away the reasons I walked by the beaten up bleeding man who was left for dead. He was robbed and laying in a pool of his own blood. Did I stop to bind his wounds?
    Did I take him to a Inn so he could recover?
    Did I do anything for him, or just walk past him?

    We only have a few years on earth.

    Make yours a brilliant testimony of the Love that is God. The Samaritans were considered to be the outcasts of society. The low-lifes.
    Yet the lowlife shined brighter and more brilliant than the priest that walked past the injured man.

Narcissism and Love

Tuesday, August 4, AD 2015



Andrew Klavan’s beloved dog is dying and he springboards that sad fact for a powerful meditation on a media that mourns a dead lion while attempting to conceal the deeds of Planned Parenthood Worse Than Murder, Inc., that traffics in the body parts of some of its victims:

Narcissism should not be confused with self love, no matter what the dictionary tells you. Narcissism grows out of a sense that the self is fragile, that it will shatter in the presence of hostility or even bland contradiction. True love of self, used wisely, is a virtue. True love of self is the school of our affections. The Gospels tell us to love our neighbors as we love ourselves because it’s in true self love that we first learn forbearance, tolerance and kindness to someone very dear to us. With true love of self as a guide, our love for our pets can be a perfect training ground for a love of others.

In this, the love of animals is very like another kind of love: the love of a mother for her baby. That love, too, has a measure of narcissism in it. That love too attaches itself at first to a creature with no inner consciousness of its own.

 But a good mother knows that people don’t just live in space, they live in time as well. (This is the great point Peter Singer misses, by the way.) You are not just who you are, but also who you’ve been and who you will be. Likewise, a fetus is not just the creature it is, it is also the child it will become, and likewise the child is the adult it will grow into. A mother who lets the love for her baby grow as the baby grows, who learns to release her child into its own consciousness and yet loves it still even on into adulthood — she is the nearest exemplar to the gospel commandment we have this side of heaven. That’s why — no matter how many female soccer stars and talk show hosts and corrupt senators the media hold up for our veneration — the Good Mother remains our chief human image of love, sacrifice and virtue.

Narcissism or the golden rule; Cecil the lion or America’s murdered babies; to dance round the golden calf of our own egos or to worship in the temple of true love. In the media these last couple of weeks, we’ve seen what choice the powers-that-be would have us make. Let’s make another.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to Narcissism and Love

  • Thank God for perspective from reality.
    It sickening to see this time after time. A complete non-story to take the place of news of significance. The liberial Media Mobsters struck again. Short changing the American public and directing the attention of the viewers to drink arsenic instead of upholding their fiduciary responsibility.

    Thanks for Klavan’s message this morning.

    Our Good Mother leads us to everlasting waters of Life. Thanks be to God.

  • “Narcissism should not be confused with self love, no matter what the dictionary tells you. “
    Perhaps, we should consult the Devil’s Dictionary by Ambrose Bierce. “”I” is the first letter of the alphabet, the first word of the language, the first thought of the mind, the first object of the affections. In grammar it is a pronoun of the first person and singular number. Its plural is said to be “We,” but how there can be more than one myself is doubtless clearer to the grammarians than it is to the author of this incomparable dictionary. Conception of two myselves is difficult, but fine. The frank yet graceful use of “I” distinguishes a good author from a bad; the latter carries it with the manner of a thief trying to cloak his loot.”

  • Killing the lion who was a threat to no one was wrong. Killing innocent, defenseless children is infinitely more wrong.

  • Killing the lion who was a threat to no one was wrong”
    Was it wrong because it was not a threat? Or because it was a lion? I’m wondering who cries for cows and chickens. I’m having a ham sandwich for lunch.

  • Oh boy, here we go again. If I hunt and kill a deer or a moose or a turkey or a boar (hopefully without ccausing unnecessary suffering – a quick and decisive kill is best), and then use its flesh to provide food for my family, or in the case of a deer or similar animal use its hide to provide clothing for my family, then that is all well and good. If a lion or a tiger or a bear or a cougar or smiilar animal is attacking human beings and I kill the attacker, then that too is all well and good.
    But if my ego needs just one more trophy please and I discard into refuse the flesh and the hide (how one can eat a lion’s flesh or employ its hide for clothing I do not know), but use the severed head as evidence of my jungle safari prowess, then I am an ass of a man and a waster of God’s good resources.
    Now none of this compares to the torture by dismemberment and live vivisection of an unborn baby which Planned Parenthood routinely performs. The man who killed Cecil the lion should get some jail time and some mandatory community service (perhaps at a jungle preserve while disarmed). The man who murders unborn babies however merits the punishment visited on his Nazi forbearers who did the same thing in the concentration camps of WWII. There is a difference in degree of wrongness here. The first doesn’t adequately compare with the heinousness of the second. But that doesn’t make the first any less wrong than it really is. We are called upon to be stewards of the environment just as we are called upon to be loving parents. Both require personal responsibility and accountability.

  • Paul,
    I do not follow trophy hunting. The hunter may do nothing with it, but the processor might make sausage or animal feed. Some hunters do eat wild game. This type of hunting is not new.
    I am not one against mink coats, bear rugs, lion blankets, or squashing bugs. However, I have a problem if the animal population is low. Poaching is a crime. Hunters should abide by the laws which govern what, when, and where one can hunt.
    I completely agree with your PP assessment. Monsters. People used to scratch their heads wondering how people neighboring concentration camps could possibly turn a blind a eye. I ask the same of too many Americans today.

  • Kyle,
    I am opposed to trophy hunting. Now if someone kills a lion because he has become a threat to the local people, or because the people in the local village may make use of the lion’s hide, or whatever, and the killing does not reduce the local lion population below viability, then that is all fine and good. Eat or otherwise make good use of what you kill. Don’t waste the providence which God provides. However, as I understand it, the dentist who killed Cecil the lion was after another trophy. This wasn’t a case of protecting villagers or even providing a rug for someone’s living room (though there are less expensive and more environmentally benign ways of providing said rug).
    As for those who perform live vivisection on pre-born babies, you know where I stand about that. The Lord’s mercy for those babies will one day be the undoing of us all.

  • Animal trophies are a natural part of our Southern Culture. They are on office walls of lawyers & administrators & restaurants, and homes–all over the place!! Not only are they part of our culture, I think they are absolutely beautiful. If you have not seen a well preserved pheasant, then you are missing one of the most beautiful displays of God’s artwork on the face of the Earth.

    It is my understanding that any lion meat from such hunts as this dentist was on is required to be given to the locals for food. The money from the hunts provides jobs for locals as well as finding wild life conservation efforts.

    Hunting raises money needed for conservation of the animals being hunted & the environment in which they live (hence saving other species as well.). Hunting also helps to manage over population of given species (deer for instance here in AR.). When animals such as deer become too great in number, there is not enough food for them all which results in unnecessary suffering through starvation, sickness & disease, and death by predators taking advantage of animals in their weakened conditions. Here in AR, every year, hunters give hundreds of pounds of dear meat to charities which provide the free, high quality protein to the poor of our state for sustenance.

    I have been greatly amused by the horror surrounding “baiting” of an animal. One animal rights extremist became personally insulting with me when I pointed out to her that traps of all kinds are “baited,” and even hooks ate baited in order to get fish to bite a hook. Corn feeders are “baiting” deer.

  • Let me say, before I post the following link re: the hunting of lions, that I am livid those idiots killed a protected line. The nationals who were involved in that business should have the law book thrown at them because they knew better than what they did. Now, having said that, let me say that the feelings that I have re: the mutilation, torture, & selling of babies are so deep and so horrific that I don’t have the means in the English language to express them.

    Now, here is a relevant article about the necessity of hunting lions from the NT Times.


    Since this incident with the dentist is obviously being used by national & international animal rights extremists to push their political agenda, I am expecting a push for national legislation to stop Americans from going abroad & hunting and/ or bringing any part of their hunted animal home to the US with them.

  • Phillip said: “The liberial Media Mobsters struck again.”

    Just one animal rights extremist organization here in the US has billion dollar assets with which to push their political agendas through stories like what happened with this protected lion. They have big time PR & advertising departments.

  • “Was it wrong because it was not a threat? Or because it was a lion? I’m wondering who cries for cows and chickens. I’m having a ham sandwich for lunch.”

    Animal rights extremists, who ate pushing this lion story, religiously believe that to own or kill any animal is the same thing as owning or killing a human. I am NOT making this up. When it comes down to it, the animals are usually placed above humans in importance. Hence judges destroying thousands of acres of CA farm land & driving multigenerational farms, which grow food people need to eat, by denying them water–to save a few small fish.

  • I am livid those idiots killed a protected li[on]. The nationals who were involved in that business should have the law book thrown at them because they knew better than what they did.

    What they’re alleged to have done.

  • Ernest Said: “What they’re alleged to have done”

    Thank you, Ernest for the correction. If anyone should know that false accusations are regularly made re: animals by the media, it should be me. Sometimes, even I forget.

    One of my close friends had her horse ranch raided in 2010 by animal rights extremists under the color of law–she was charged with 25 felony counts of animal cruelty–all charges had to be dropped & her animals returned to her legal custody after 18 months & tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees. All kinds of false allegations were made against her in the media. This friend is the only person in the US of whom I am aware who has received all of her animals back in relatively good health & has had all of the charges against her dropped. She is one tough bird!

    Another man I know, who owned a huge farm & sale barn business was raided by the same animal rights extremist orgs–they walked off with $325,000 worth of livestock belonging to 7 people from 3 states. Again there were all kinds of false, horrid accusations made in the media & on line re: this poor man. Again, after 4 years of legal tangling, around 100 counts of animal cruelty including some felonies had to be dropped.

    Another friend of mine, a dog breeder, who took her case all the way to our state supreme court after about 3 years of legal wrangling received right at 200 of her dogs back from a county “humane” society who had held them against a judges order for an extended period of time. Horrendous accusations were made against her in the media & on all kinds of online forums.

    Etc., etc., etc.

Science Fakers

Thursday, May 21, AD 2015


Law Professor Elizabeth Foley nails it at Instapundit:

THEY’RE NOT SCIENCE DENIERS, THEY’RE SCIENCE FAKERS: What is it about progressives and their manipulation of scientific data?  It’s not just global warming climate change; now it’s social science on gay marriage.

According to the study, people from communities hostile to gay marriage could have their opinions shift dramatically after spending just a few minutes speaking with a gay person who canvassed their neighborhood promoting gay marriage. . . .

The study, among other things, lent support to the notion that those opposed to gay marriage simply don’t know or interact with open homosexuals. More broadly, it was seen as an important development in the science of how people can be convinced to change their minds on ideologically-charged issues.

The study began to fall apart when students at the University of California at Berkeley sought to conduct additional research building off of it, only to find major irregularities in how its research was apparently conducted. . . . 

Donald Green, a professor at Columbia University and a co-author of the paper, made the decision to retract it after having a confrontation with co-author Michael LaCour, a graduate student at UCLA. While LaCour maintained that he hadn’t fabricated the data, he was also unable to produce the original source files supposedly used to produce it. When he failed to write-up a retraction, Green took the initiative and did so himself.

Guess some folks think they can fake it ’til they make it.  Or maybe it’s just Alinsky’s “the ends justify the means.

Continue reading...

15 Responses to Science Fakers

  • “social” science has always been a politicized swamp,

    No, there are conscientiously conducted studies and there is junk work. The real problem would be the questions which are not asked because there is too much uniformity in defining what constitutes a worthy questions.

    What’s odd about this is that the perpetrator stands accused of inventing a piece of survey research out of whole cloth and his accusers are other social researchers who have co-authored pieces with this fellow LaCour’s co-author. LaCour’s co-author has repudiated the paper.

  • “No, there are conscientiously conducted studies and there is junk work.”

    Margaret Meade comes to mind as a patron saint of modern anthropology:


    Outright fakery is at the very core of most “social” sciences.

  • Dr. Sheldon Cooper comments on the so-called “social sciences,” in general, and this issue, in particular, “This is why I have no respect for the field.”

    Seriously, behavioral or post-modern academics/journalism/scholarship consist of credentialed cretins deriving conclusions based on ideology and not fact/logic. It relies on anecdotes and stereotypes incorporated in mental emotional filters to misrepresent and misunderstand data, events, and facts. In fact, the academy is venal. Its purpose is to advance the ideology/narrative and provide continual propaganda for charlatans such as Clinton and Obama, and for the progressive program. Behavioral academics/scholarship seamlessly imbeds fabrications into facts. In it, all reading is arbitrary and personal. A theory cannot be proved only disproven. Behavioral academics invent facts, deny/ignore errors, display arrogance and execrate anybody providing opposing evidence. For those liars, truth, facts, realities, and history do not exist. They are clay in their hands. They use them to make a point, to do good as they see it. And whatever they need to twist or omit is justified by their purity of intentions – and they always have the purest of intentions.

  • Donald R. McClarey provided a link to Freeman’s paper, and his conclusions about Mead’s work are pretty damning. Her work is discredited as fakery or unbelievable incompetence.

  • Deleted your last comment Art. Try again without the personal insult. I include in “social” sciences: anthropology, sociology, political science and parts of economics. I await with eager anticipation your defense of these citadels of unbiased, factual and objective science.

  • “Social Science” puts me in mind of “Socialist Reality”.

  • William P Walsh wrote what I was thinking.
    If men were the automatons that behaviorists claim they are, the behaviorist psychologists could not have invented the amazing nonsense called “behaviorist psychology.” So they are wrong from scratch–as clever and as wrong as phlogiston chemists.
    Notebooks of Lazarus Long in Time Enough for Love by the late Robert Anson Heinlein

  • Michel Foucault was surely right, when he observed that the objective features of a phenomenon so little constrain the ways it is classified and theorized that these features can be disregarded in trying to understand why a particular classification system or scientific theory has been adopted.

  • Cut out all that tainted grant (and other) politicized money and watch this “crisis” go down faster than the Hindenburg.

    These erratic eco-scientists would have Christ arrested for trying to crush a mountain with the weight of people when he gave His “Sermon on the Mount”

  • Big problem with social sciences is figuring out an objective measurement– and a way to distance yourself from the data enough to interpret it. People are complicated.
    There’s the additional problem of when it’s licit to do experiments at all.

  • Lewis Carroll’s Red Queen was a Social Scientist: verdict conclusion first, trial evidence after.
    I say that as a historian who preferred the humanities to social science. Probably why I failed to prosper in academe, at least in part.

  • It is worth remembering that Sociology was founded by Auguste Comte and has always reflected his belief that “For the human mind, each branch of our knowledge is necessarily required to pass successively, in its progress, through three different theoretical states” In the “theological state,” the human mind explained phenomena by “supernatural agents” and by arbitrary wills conceived in the image of man. In the “metaphysical state,” it explained them by abstract entities and hidden causes (“abstract forces inhering in bodies, but distinct and heterogeneous”). In the “positive state,” it does not seek to explain them, it observes them as facts and unifies them by laws, and so makes itself capable of rational prediction (it restricts itself to “considering them as subjected to a certain number of invariable natural laws which are nothing else than the general expression of the relations observed in their development”).

    Comte insisted that sociology, and science in general, seeks nothing but laws or invariable relations between phenomena, whereas metaphysics seeks causes. Science asks only the question “how” without ever asking the question “why” and rises above simple empirical observation only in order to foresee facts or phenomena in a deductive manner. For him, the paradigm of a scientific law is a differential equation, describing, not the causal relationship between phenomena, but the functional relationship between variables.

  • Auguste Comte, the French buffoon who started the Religion of Humanity:


    More on this intellectual charlatan:


  • Donald R. McClarey wrote, “Auguste Comte, the French buffoon who started the Religion of Humanity:” – The very same.
    His Religion of Humanity was aptly described by Thomas Huxley as “Catholicism without Christianity.” Jacques Maritain has pointed out that this project only seemed feasible because, “It is a fact that at Comte’s time a noticeable part of the French bourgeoisie had already inaugurated this kind of Catholicism. If Comte could dream of founding an atheistic Catholicism, it was because the class in question had among its most solid members a number of practical atheists, more or less brought up by Voltaire and Béranger. They called themselves Catholic, though in all their principles of conduct they denied God, Christ and the Gospel, and upheld religion for merely temporal and political reasons — preserving social order and prosperity in business, consolidating their economic power, and keeping the lower classes in obedience by means of a virtuous rigor sanctioned from on high. The existence of this type of so-called Catholics made the idea of creating an atheist version of Catholicism less impossible; at the same time, the sort of inconsistency and hypocrisy which affected them was for the founder of positivism an incitement to endeavour to regenerate them. The religion of humanity was, so to say, a reply to their negativeness. It told them: Admit what you are — and instead of adoring God with your lips without really believing in Him, and instead of being socially useless, because you despise the commandment given to you to love each other, adore the Great Being which is made known to you by sociology, and make yourselves useful by serving it with that atheistic love which is called altruism.

    Such an appeal was bound to remain unheard, because no matter what love and devotedness one spoke of, this was precisely what the persons thus addressed did not want at any cost; besides, they had no desire to deprive themselves of the slim chance offered to them by a Christian death, in case the priests were prating more than fairy tales.”

  • Pingback: MONDAY EDITION - Big Pulpit

Of Magical Thinking and Leftist Economics

Saturday, May 2, AD 2015

I have often thought that Leftists must believe that unicorns or good fairies bring wealth, because their approach to economics always requires magical thinking.  Seattle has mandated a $15.00 an hour minimum wage.  Predictably businesses unable to pay the increase are going out of business.   That this takes many erst-while supporters of this exercise in prosperity through fiat by surprise is very amusing.  Ian Tuttle at National Review Online gives us a case in point:
I’m hearing from a lot of customers, ‘I voted for that, and I didn’t realize it would affect you.
Hibbs opened Comix Experience on April Fools’ Day, 1989, when he was just 21 years old. Over two-and-a-half decades, the store has become a must-visit location for premier comic-book artists and graphic novelists, and Hibbs has become a leading figure in the industry, serving as a judge for the prestigious Will Eisner Comic Industry Awards and as a member of the Comic Book Legal Defense Fund’s board of directors. He notes with pride that his store has turned a profit each year — no small task — since its very first year.
 But that may not last. Hibbs says that the $15-an-hour minimum wage will require a staggering $80,000 in extra revenue annually. “I was appalled!” he says. “My jaw dropped. Eighty-thousand a year! I didn’t know that. I thought we were talking a small amount of money, something I could absorb.” He runs a tight operation already, he says. Comix Experience is open ten hours a day, seven days a week, with usually just one employee at each store at a time. It’s not viable to cut hours, he says, because his slowest hours are in the middle of the day. And he can’t raise prices, because comic books and graphic novels have their retail prices printed on the cover. What is a small-businessman to do?

Continue reading...

16 Responses to Of Magical Thinking and Leftist Economics

  • While a move would involve its own set of expenses, perhaps Mr. Hibbs should
    consider relocating to a saner state– he’d likely do well here in Texas.
    Once again we see the pattern of liberals spending other people’s money to
    make themselves feel good about themselves, without giving much thought to
    how their choices actually affect people. It is astonishing that they’re so out of
    touch with reality that they do not see this result coming. It’s sad that many
    mom-and-pop businesses in Seattle will be driven out of business and be
    replaced with chains that have deeper pockets and operate with more economy
    of scale. The people of Seattle were worse than fools to vote for this and
    frankly, they deserve what they get. Idiots.

  • Maybe this will actually get through to people?

  • @Clinton: I was also going to say….Move to Texas….but Texas doesn’t need any more transplanted liberals, do they? I say he should find another state that at least hasn’t succumbed to this idiocy (yet) but stay out of Texas, please.

  • In determining the amount of the wage, the condition of a business and of the one carrying it on must also be taken into account; for it would be unjust to demand excessive wages which a business cannot stand without its ruin and consequent calamity to the workers.


  • That’s

    Paragraph 72

  • This was an initiative of Mayor. The mayor’s capsule biographies do not give his employment history prior to 1990. Evidently he earned a degree in sociology from the University of Portland in 1980 (that’s a Catholic college run by the Holy Cross fathers). He’s made a public point of his homosexuality for 35 years, so you can see his schooling was decisive. He’s also a seminary dropout. All of his admitted employment since 1990 has been in the public sector or for philanthropic concerns. Big f****** surprise.

  • The nine member city council includes a dyke and an SDS veteran (who also lived on a commune for twenty years). Three have worked as attorneys and three have worked as journalists. Two have some kind of business background (one of whom was a company GC). One was a computer programmer (but at this point in her life is some sort of commie). Big F***** surprise.

  • The Democrats must really love poor people; they make so many.

  • Also, maybe I’m reading too much into the article (“I was appalled!” he says. “My jaw dropped. Eighty-thousand a year! I didn’t know that. I thought we were talking a small amount of money, something I could absorb.”) but I’m having a hard time feeling sorry for someone who appears to fit the definition of the useful idiot who just realized what the customer wanted the rope for.

  • I’m not seeing how the store owner assented to this at any point, just that his initial thought was he could absorb the cost.

    You ‘create a job’ when two parties come together for a common purpose. The wage is a crucial influence on whether than agreement is worth it to the parties. Characters like those on the Seattle City Council look upon businesses as suitable objects for looting and nothing more.

  • I recently read that Obama may return to community agitating when he finishes wrecking our country.
    Here’s how he helped de po’ people way-back-when.

    “President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.

    “As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.

    “The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama helmed as the lead plaintiff’s attorney.”


    “Magical Thinking and Leftist Economics” greatly contributed to the recent Great Recession.

  • Obama’s a lawyer who fancies that underwriting is something banks do not know how to do so need to be told by lawyers, or he fancies that they need to be told by lawyers to eat the cost of bad business decisions because lawyers and their clients are just damn better than loan officers, or he fancies that lenders leave money on the table due to spite so routinely they need to be told by lawyers not to do that.

  • Art: You are giving the zero (and the rest of the wrong people running the country) too much credit, both for intellect and for hionesty – both of which are totally absent.
    One doesn’t need to be Einstein to realize that the Feds still want banks to lend to “low-to-moderate” income peoples: Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). One doesn’t need to prove “discrimination.” All needed is to show “disparate impact” or what they used to call the “effects test.” As in whatever the bank did (it don’t matter what) if it had the effect of discrimination it was discrimination.
    Clinton’s appointed his late term HUD Secy. Cuomo who ordered FNMA and FHLMC to buy up to 50% of their paper volume in “low-to-moderate” income peoples’ bad paper. Bush and his country club GOP saw the profits and ractchetted it up. After 2008, the corrupt, incompetent politicians and the lying liberal media blamed the banks, say, Wells Fargo for forcing subprime loans on poor blacks and foreclosing on their homes. As if a banker ever existed that wanted to foreclose on a “low-to-moderate” income slum.


  • I think Freddie Mac slashed underwriting standards in 2003, not 1997.

  • When corrupt Clinton took over wrecking America, the US homeownership rate was 63%. When he left the WH, penny-less, the rate was 68%. The rate topped out at 69% under Bush, not a meaningful increase.
    By 1997, Fannie was offering to buy 97% loan-to-value mortgages. By 2001 (Bush first year and he never changed management), it was offering to buy mortgages with no down payment at all – 3% to zero (traditional down payment is 20%, plus debt payments to income ratio of say 28%) less owner’s equity is not a material factor. NB prices were inflated by the excess liquidity ($$$ chasing real estate) that the GSE’s and CRA-pushed banks pumped into the market. So, values were fairy-tale/mark-to-make-believe values based on government interference. Later, they allowed low teaser rates and negative amortization, without analyzing whether the obligor (lawyers use that noun) could pay the regularized payments. The myth was (despite the S&L crisis and several RE bubble-bursts in living memory) that RE sales prices rise forever.
    The Bush dynasty’s country club/chamber of commerce backers were as wrong about housing as they are about open borders. The idiotic libs’ “minimum wage” rants are even more ruinous/stupider.
    FYI Fed rate rises were nothing when adjusted for annual real estate price increases/inflation, resulting in negative perceived/real (nominal rate less inflation rate) interest rates for such loans.
    Will Rogers would know the problem with the wrong people running America. “The problem isn’t what people don’t know. It’s what people know that isn’t so.”

  • Where was the bishop?

    The moral superiority of free trade was worked out by late-medieval Scholastic Catholic scholars. The immorality of coveting thy neighbor’s goods is of older knowledge and much higher authority. And it’s not as if bishops in America’s hotbeds of left wing socialist economics and Social Justice Bullying are being asked to stand up to murderous national socialists. Yet.

6 Responses to 50 Shades of Barack Obama

  • Man, I know I’m at critical nerd level when I keep cringing and saying, “That’s not the character’s name!”

    But it’s funnier because if they had gone with the actual character name, we’d get either “Christian Obama” or “Barack Grey”. Either is dripping with deep irony I think.

  • Wow. Who will rescue America?
    Our help is in the Name of the Lord.

  • Anzlyne.

    Thank you dear soul.
    I have written three posts only to erase them because they were at the core, written with hatred. The truth is God knows our frustration. He knows all hearts. He knows.
    Our help IS in God…not man.

  • God knows all hearts, mine, yours and Obama’s. So I ask the grace to leave the assessment of that man’s soul to the Lord. As a matter of practical reality, he is the worst President in our history, put there by the worst electorate in our history. Politics will not save us. Religion will. Happy Easter.

  • “worst electorate in our history”

    Apply Pogo’s famous comment about who the enemy is here? “We have met the enemy and he is us”

  • For some time now, I have come to believe that America/its Constitution was flawed from their inception. They got it wrong on Freedom, the same constitution is used to justify evil in society under the guise of “rights,” etc. Look to history, nations forgetful of God are doomed.

Hey, You’re So Welcome!

Tuesday, August 12, AD 2014

A nice spoof by Andrew Klavan of the demonization of white Christian men that seems to be an essential feature of the contemporary left in this country.  What was started by the Founding Fathers, as pointed out by Lincoln in the stirring quote below, was to free us from looking at people as groups instead of as what we truly are:  children of a loving God who endowed each of us with unalienable rights:


These communities, by their representatives in old  Independence Hall, said to the whole world of men: “We  hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are  created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with  certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” This was their majestic  interpretation of the economy of the Universe. This was their  lofty, and wise, and noble understanding of the justice of  the Creator to His creatures. [Applause.] Yes, gentlemen, to  all His creatures, to the whole great family of man. In their  enlightened belief, nothing stamped with the Divine image and  likeness was sent into the world to be trodden on, and degraded,  and imbruted by its fellows. They grasped not only the whole  race of man then living, but they reached forward and seized  upon the farthest posterity. They erected a beacon to guide  their children and their children’s children, and the countless  myriads who should inhabit the earth in other ages. Wise  statesmen as they were, they knew the tendency of prosperity  to breed tyrants, and so they established these great  self-evident truths, that when in the distant future some man,  some faction, some interest, should set up the doctrine that  none but rich men, or none but white men, were entitled to life,  liberty and the pursuit of happiness, their posterity might look  up again to the Declaration of Independence and take courage to  renew the battle which their fathers began — so that truth,  and justice, and mercy, and all the humane and Christian virtues  might not be extinguished from the land; so that no man would  hereafter dare to limit and circumscribe the great principles  on which the temple of liberty was being built.

Abraham Lincoln, August 17, 1858


Continue reading...

2 Responses to Hey, You’re So Welcome!

  • Walter Williams explains that which liberal demagogues and left-wing ideol . . . er, academics forget in their income inequality/class hatred rants.

    From his January 2000 essay “Capitalism and the Common Man“:

    “Henry Ford benefited immensely from mass-producing automobiles, but the benefit for the common man from being able to buy a car dwarfs anything Ford received. Individuals and companies that produced penicillin and polio and typhoid vaccines may have become very wealthy, but again it was the common man who was the major beneficiary. In more recent times, computers and software products have benefited our health, safety, and quality of life in ways that far outstrip whatever wealth was received by their creators.”


    Café Hayek quotes page 50 of the 2006 Liberty Fund edition of Ludwig von Mises’s 1956 volume, :The Anti-Capitalistic Mentality”:

    “It was not vain disquisitions about a vague concept of justice that raised the standard of living of the common man in the capitalistic countries to its present height, but the activities of men dubbed as ‘rugged individualists” and “exploiters.’ The poverty of the backward nations is due to the fact that their policies of expropriation, discriminatory taxation and foreign exchange control prevent the investment of foreign capital while their domestic policies preclude the accumulation of indigenous capital.


    “All those resisting capitalism on moral grounds as an unfair system are deluded by their failure to comprehend what capital is, how it comes into existence and how it is maintained, and what the benefits are which are derived from its employment in production processes.”

  • Excellent post. Excellent comment by T. Shaw.
    By the way, being a Christian white man, I am most assuredly racist for I believe in the human race. I also have a Filipina wife with extraordinarily beautiful light brown skin. Again, being a Christian white man, I love her with all my heart.
    How I hate liberalism!

The End of Debate

Wednesday, May 21, AD 2014



A popular tactic on the left today, and for the past several decades in this country for that matter, is to strong arm adversaries and shout them down.  Faithful readers of this blog will recall the “feminist studies” professor Miller-Young who went berserk when confronted with a group of young pro-life women peacefully presenting  information on abortion at the University of California at Santa Barbara.  Go here, here and here to read about it.  The following is an account by one of the pro-lifers present, Mairead McArdle, a student at Saint Thomas Aquinas College:



One part of the story that is not as widely known is what happened prior to the professor’s theft and assault. I can tell you about it. I was there.

I was among 13 pro-life students who exercised our right to free speech on that sunny afternoon in March. I was actually the first one to speak with Professor Young.

When the incident began I was using the sign in the “free-speech zone” to start conversations with people passing by. I began a calm, rational conversation with Professor Young, asking her what her thoughts were on our position and our sign.

She immediately raised her voice and spoke condescendingly, accusing me of using “fear tactics” to coerce women.

“I have a PhD, three degrees more than you do!” she yelled, smiling. At one point, she threw the pamphlet I had handed her at me.

“Do you even go here?” she asked me. “There’s no way you have the right to be here.”

I told Miller-Young that she could ask the administration whether we had the right to promote our cause on campus. She refused, saying she knew we had no right to remain.

After about 10 minutes of Miller-Young talking over me and yelling obscenities, a group of about 15 students gathered around us and watched the spectacle, as the professor continued her rant.

Before Miller-Young had begun, some of the students had been having reasonable discussions with us, but now they joined the professor and, following her example, mocked us and our work.

Professor Young started waving her arms, and walked back and forth between us and the students, insisting to them that we were liars.

Each time I tried to speak to Miller-Young, she would interrupt to yell at me. I also talked to at least three of the students who had gathered around. Because the situation was already hostile, however, and they threw insults me.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to The End of Debate

  • “I have a PhD, three degrees more than you do,” she shouted. Degrees from today’s liberal academia include:

    BS = bull s….
    MS = master s…
    PhD = piled higher and deeper
    DD = dirty diapers

    As my 2nd sponsor in a 12 step program once told me, “A thermometer has degrees and you know where you can stick that.”

    PS this is a commentary solely on today’s academia and not on those readers here who earned their degrees the old fashioned way.

  • This woman used her PhD as her license to have the right to impose her opinion judgement of how life a should be. People with or without PhD s use their position as justification. In some groups this self assertion just comes down to who is toughest. What this wrangling points out to me is that is not about ideas – more primal than that. It is just about dominance. And narcissism, no respect for others, God or man.
    Not about ideas so no discussion or debate.

  • and this is what the students are taught from the first day at secular college, that they are better than the rest of the community. Lord of the Flies by William Golding comes to mind. Beelzebub is translated Lord of the Flies.Unfortunately, when the students assume this posture, they miss truly being better than the community.

  • If Miller-Young, PhD were not a professor of utterly useless spucatum tauri, she would, as her students soon will be, intimately familiar with KFC as employer.

    Lower primates fling their feces at each other. Birds of a feather . . .

  • For the defenders of Truth;
    $29.95 Liberalbegone Spray.
    When reason and manners are absent from dialog, and aggressive behavior ensues, break out your last defense…Liberalbegone!

    Fire a warning shot first. Spray at violent extremities that are flalling about.
    If aggressive behavior continues, one rapid spray in the red facial area should be enough to subdue the 3 x PhD in her tracks.

    To easy. I know. What is on the horizon? Hate speech crimes exist.
    NSA phone records infringement.
    The War on virtue decency and purity is taking place. St. Michael defend us in battle.

  • Here she is:


    Unless UC Santa Barbara is eccentric with titles, she’s been awarded tenure. Santa Barbara is a research university, not a lower-tier private college; you need to publish if you want to keep your job. This woman is 38 years old. Its a reasonable guess she began working on her dissertation 10 years ago. In the intervening years, her published work has amounted to…her dissertation edited for publication. At the liberal arts college I know best, a publication record like that gets you a pink slip; melanin will not help you avoid such a fate if you’re up short to that degree.

    Here’s a precis of her sicko research here:


    This history department in any institution is not the site of practical learning. It’s liberal education, which is to say education for leisure. People use their leisure-time viewing the smut she studied without the need for an academic guide.

    She was awarded a doctoral degree in “American History” for puzzling over disgusting mass entertainment products produced after 1966. What does this suggest?

    1. New York University and UC Santa Barbara, the sites of said travesty, should be reduced to rubble by aereal bombardment.

    2. The hiring committee who inflicted her on the students of UC Santa Barbara, the tenure and promotion committee who further inflicted her, her dissertation committee and she herself should be tarred and feathered and forced to run around Washington Square Park in Manhattan until they drop from exhaustion.

  • Miller-Young is being charged with misdemeanor theft, battery, and vandalism.
    Amazingly, she has pled “not guilty”. UCSB does not appear to have conducted
    an internal investigation of its own in the matter, and the Associate Professor has
    not been suspended from teaching, even though she is being charged with
    battery on a 16-year-old girl.
    It doesn’t surprise me that there are Miller-Youngs out there– the world is full
    of crazy, vicious people. What truly astonishes me here is that this university is
    so complacent about leaving this woman in her teaching position considering
    the nature of the charges against her.
    Back in March, Michael Young, the UCSB vice-chancellor for student affairs, issued
    an email to all UCSB students regarding the issue. In it, he denounced
    demonstrators who “peddle hate and intolerance with less-than-noble aims”,
    and referred to them as “anti-abortion crusaders” and “evangelical types”. In
    short, while he never mentioned Miller-Young, he seemed to blame the 16-year
    old girl she assaulted. But rest easy, the vice-chancellor assured students in
    his email that he cherishes open debate and affirms that “our Founding Fathers–
    all white men of privilege, some even slave owners– got it right when designing
    the First Amendment of the Constitution”.

  • She’s a real credit to her institution, her profession, and all the ideals they both purportedly stand for.
    By the way, Donald, what do you mean “is developing?” That totalitarian mindset is rather fully developed by now, don’t you think?

3 Responses to “Shut Up!”, They Explained.

7 Responses to International Men’s Day

  • “Why on Earth would I want to lower myself to equality with men!” I like your mom…and Marie Sklodowska Curie, Liza Meitner, St.Joan of Arc, and Sister Mary Samuel OSF.

  • Mothers day IS just around the corner, and I am in awe of my saintly mother.
    When you meet so many people that haven’t had the blessings and love of self sacrificing mothers, then one truly is in awe of them.

    Your mothers quote is such a deep acknowledgment of the truth to their calling. How JP II described the assault on the family can be witnessed by the inept feminist who regard motherhood as degrading.

    God bless our mothers!

  • “Why on Earth would I want to lower myself to equality with men!”
    My mother used to say that all the time. And, my dad would agree.

  • Whenever women have insisted on absolute equality with men, they have invariably wound up with the dirty end of the stick. What they are and what they can do makes them superior to men, and their proper tactic is to demand special privileges, all the traffic will bear. They should never settle merely for equality. For women, “equality” is a disaster.

    Robert Anson Heinlein

  • The existence of an International Women’s Day implies that all the other three hundred sixty-four days are men’s. And the leftover quarter day too. Which is reflective of the ratio of men’s history making accomplishments to women’s–if you overstate women’s.

  • Men and women are equal in sovereign personhood, the equal opportunity to attain eternal life in the Beatific Vision. If men or women or gays demand extra civil rights to attain heaven, then they are not only mistaken, they become a scandal and a joke. How does one attain a magnum of freedom unless one disfigures freedom by making another person’s freedom less free. Then one’s freedom is greater than the person whose freedom has been diminished. This is all very un-Catholic, since God is the Creator of and Endower of freedom and all other civil rights.
    Essential in all civil rights and equal Justice is the acknowledgment of the rational, immortal human soul endowed with all freedom and the free will to pursue our destiny in our vocation.
    A class monitor in Catholic grammar school drew a milk bottle on the blackboard. In those days milk came in glass bottles and she chalked in the grace of a pure soul, the full bottle. Then she took some of the grace out for venial and then for mortal sin. Then she drew smaller bottles which were fill with chalked in grace.
    We have a Father’s Day and a Mother’s Day for these vocations, but celebrating an individual’s sex sounds pornographic.
    Atheism tries to inflict tyranny by inflating the atheist’s freedom over the sovereignty of every person. The devil deals in division. He is still selling apples with a one way ticket to hell. The devil needs to prove that he is right. Well, unless one enjoys eternal damnation out of the sight of God, the devil is still wrong.

  • The masculine ideal (if such exists) has little to do with gender or sex. What do they have to do with it?

    Let us celebrate fortitude, justice, prudence, and temperance. Let us honor integrity, loyalty, charity, amity, courtesy, kindness, obedience to truth, stark devotion to duty, humor, courage, and, most importantly, reverence.

    When my father passed, I quoted Hamlet (to myself). “He was a man, take him for all in all, I shall not look upon his like again.” Sorry for the man that doesn’t thusly esteem his father or his mother.

Klavan on Pope Benedict

Wednesday, February 20, AD 2013

Andrew Klavan, the mystery writer and humorist I have often quoted on this blog, is a big fan of the Pope:

Pope Benedict, as I’ve said before, is the Last European, by which I mean the last great man and mind who fully comprehends the beautiful but now dying culture that produced him.  It’s appalling to me–though not surprising–that the only thing the mainstream media ever covers about him is how often he apologizes for the abuses of some priests or how politically incorrect his view of gay people is or whatever.  I have now read a good selection of his writings and when the work of Foucault and Derridas and de Man and the rest of that benighted lot has toddled off to the obscurity it so dearly deserves, Benedict’s writings will stand.  They may be the final flares of genius to fly up from the continent he loves before darkness closes over it.

I’m not a Catholic.  My views on authority and sexual morality are too individualistic.  But when I see the level of thought coming out of Anglicanism  – especially the low and despicable crypto anti-semitism in the cowardly guise of anti-Zionism – and then read the grace-filled, spirit-inspired work of Big Ben, well, I’m embarrassed.


B-16′s greatness doesn’t lie in his papacy. Or that is, if it does, I wouldn’t know. It’s his writing, his theology, his thought that elevate him in my mind. When I was but a youngish dude, pounding my way through the great works, it seemed to me that the wisdom of many of the great German thinkers of the 18th and 19th centuries had been thrown aside for no good reason. Kant and Hegel had philosophically rescued the essence of Christianity for the scientific age, and had been ultimately left behind by mainstream thinkers not because they were wrong, but because they were just sort of out of keeping with the atheistic spirit of the day.

As Nietzsche understood, that God-is-dead zeitgeist would perforce lead to moral relativism. And so it has. But Ratzinger, shrugging off the zeitgeist like the cheap suit it is, humbly went on tilling the Kantian and Hegelian fields, making his way back not just to the essentials of Christianity but to the sacred person of Christ himself.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Klavan on Pope Benedict

  • Interesting. A while back, a European author wrote a book entitled “The Cathedral and the Cube” where he spoke about European decline. I find the many types of European expression wanting, myself.

  • That was actually an American writer, George Weigel.

  • It is common nowadays to refer to the “Catholic turn” in French philosophy, i.e., the way in which the most original and prominent thinkers of contemporary France seem to function within Catholic horizons: the philosophers Rémy Brague, Chantal Delsol, René Girard, Pierre Manent and Jean-Luc Marion, together with writers like Max Gallo, Jean D’Ormesson, Jean Raspail, Denis Tillinac and, Michel Tournier.

    They are continuing the tradition of Maurice Blondel, Etienne Gilson and Jacques Maritain and of Claudel, Mauriac and Péguy in the last century.

    Perhaps, we shall see theologians like Bouyer, Danielou, Chenu, Congar, de Lubac and Maréchal.

  • The trouble is, if European culture doesn’t survive, and I agree that there are worrying developments, what are we left with? The New World reflects back that culture, its beams somewhat dimmed by having to cross the Atlantic, and I would argue that in the 20th century the contribution of the United States was a negative one, flooding the market with a commercially driven counter-culture based on film and ‘popular’ music which is not only antithetical to the ideals of ‘high’ culture but undermines it by denying its existence.

  • Michael PS:

    Many of the names you mention are familiar to me, but I thought Ives Congar was sanctioned by the Holy See.

  • Mary D Voe

    He was rehabilitated and went on to be a peritus at Vatican II and a member of several important committees.

    To remove any lingering damage to his reputation, in 1994, in Congar’s 90th year, Pope John Paul created him a Cardinal.

Klavan: Gloom Begone!

Tuesday, January 8, AD 2013



Andrew Klavan writes a column and notes reasons for optimism in our winter of discontent:

1. Fracking. As I’ve said before, Obama and the EPA will ultimately be splatter on the windshield of this progress. There’s energy in them thar hills and eventually we’re going to get at it, whether these luddite environmental knuckleheads like it or not. That means wealth, energy independence, jobs, power and a reboot of Dallas. Obama may be choosing decline, but the rest of the country may well choose prosperity and growth in spite of him.

2. Federalism. Around the country, conservative governors are taking action that could galvanize reform nationwide. Right-to-work laws, state budget cuts, reduced property taxes and creative approaches to education. As prosperity follows these practices — and abandons California and Illinois and other lagging states — they will gain credence with the general population and make political stars of the governors who supported them.

3. Reality is on our side. When I call Obama a reactionary, what I mean is that he adheres to a grievance-based socialist ideology he learned in college from professors who were probably old even then. As these academics die and go to hell for all eternity, up-and-comers may begin to notice that the poor suffer under left-wing programs and rise under the free market, that education improves under conservative guidance and gets worse under liberals, and that big business actually gets more entrenched and powerful under the left while the right helps the little guy thrive. That, after all, will be the off-beat, radical position, and academics love to be off-beat and radical as long as everyone around them is being off-beat and radical too. A new generation is already on the rise that understands entitlements are unsustainable and that freedom works. It won’t be long at all before we begin to hear their voices in the mainstream. I hope.

Continue reading...

21 Responses to Klavan: Gloom Begone!

  • In addition to point 1 on fracking for oil and gas above, we should also mine coal and build new nuclear power plants based on a thorium-232 / uranium-233 fuel cycle. With the gas and oil from fracking, and with energy from new nukes applied to the Fischer-Tropsch process of producing liquid fuels out of coal, we won’t need Saudi oil and can tell the Islamists to go drown in their mineral slime.

  • I really wonder how long it will take mindless American traitors to realize they made the worst mistake in our entire history with the reelection of a socialist president. I expect Gloom to really deepen in the new year.

  • I am sincerely sorry.

    I am positively pessimistic. I can’t talk about it with my sons. They will suffer.

    It all has been shoved too far down the rat-hole. The Obama gang set out to destroy the evil, unjust private sector and they killed the “goose that lays the golden eggs.”

    The vile imbeciles re-elected the destroyer ensuring it cannot be resurrected.

    The gutless GOP House majority now is smaller.

    And, worse, GOP House leadership are equally as bad borrowers/spenders, e.g., their surrender in the so-called “fiscal cliff” deal.

    I see no way they can do any better on needed spending cuts and the debt ceiling curtailments in two months.

    God gave us memory so we could have jobs in 2014.

  • “And, worse, GOP House leadership are equally as bad borrowers/spenders, e.g., their surrender in the so-called “fiscal cliff” deal.”

    I have read that many times on conservative sites T. Shaw and it is rubbish. If the Republicans had done nothing severe tax increases would have been imposed on the American public. Now the Republicans have made permanent the Bush tax cuts for 98% of American taxpayers and solved the problem of the Alternative Minimum Tax be having it finally pegged to inflation. In regard to spending cuts I am disappointed but not surprised. With the Democrats in control of the Senate, the best the Republicans can do is to attempt to block new spending and I believe they will do that. So there will be no new trillion dollar “stimulus” and Obama can forget about Congress allocating large funds for new programs. In the wake of an unnerving defeat in November I actually believe the Republicans haven’t done too bad so far.

    My kids are 21, 21 and 17. I refuse to be pessimistic about the future of their country, and as long as I live I will fight to brighten that future. Woe is me pessimism is a luxury I cannot afford.

  • I like Donald’s sense of hope even if I do not always feel it: “My kids are 21, 21 and 17. I refuse to be pessimistic about the future of their country, and as long as I live I will fight to brighten that future. Woe is me pessimism is a luxury I cannot afford.”

    All we have to do to prosper is repent. As I have repeatedly commented before, we have access to enough natural resources – uranium, thorium, coal, gas, etc. – for a more than adequate supply of low cost energy essential to a thriving technological society. God has been exceedingly generous towards us. That isn’t the problem. Rather, man’s attitude and rebellion are the problem. I see signs of that reversing as Life Site News now says 83% of Americans want restrictions for abortion, and as the militant homosexual movement starts revealing itself for what it really is. So maybe Donald’s sense of hope is justified. Besides, isn’t despair a sin?

    I can believe that pessimist me just wrote all that.

  • “If the Republicans had done nothing severe tax increases would have been imposed on the American public. Now the Republicans have made permanent the Bush tax cuts for 98% of American taxpayers and solved the problem of the Alternative Minimum Tax be having it finally pegged to inflation. In regard to spending cuts I am disappointed but not surprised.”

    Thing is Obama will take credit for both and the GOP will be more than happy to allow that. Before you say, “Who cares who gets the credit for it?” consider that the propaganda war is an essential battleground of this war and for too long the GOP has conceded this to the Dems, to the detriment of the conservative movement and the country. And there are defintely ways the republicans can do a better job in the propaganda department. For one, they can go on offense and demonstrate the alarming disparity in what we spend on entitlement programs and what is actually received by the recipient. We can propose that we can maintain levels of benefits while cutting overall spending on these programs. Responses to State of the Union addresses and Saturday radio messages can be good venues for starters. A repeated articulate simplified explanation will do well. But to expect immediate results would be foolish. After all, the prediciment we are in now is the result of an aggressive and incremental push by the left over the last 100 years. So, we need to look furhter down the road. Getting young conservatives like Rubio and Cruz, for starters, as our spokesmen would be a good idea. Ryan, in my view, while good where he is at, is too much of a wonk and not really able to convey these things in simple terms. Besides, I think he has demonstrated he is too beholden to the GOP establishment. And we have to stop being afraid to demonize the demons for crying out loud! This, “there ain’t no good guy there ain’t no bad guy. There’s only you and me and we just diagree (my apologies to Dave Mason)” approach has got to go. It is killing us.

    Another thing is there needs to be an effort aimed at encouraging young conservatives to consider careers in the Federal Departments that control our government. We can talk about cutting spending all we want (and yes I agree we need to cut spending) but if the leftists who control these governemnt bureaucracies are still able to determine how the money is being spent, the probelm will not just not get better, but will get much worse.

    “With the Democrats in control of the Senate, the best the Republicans can do is to attempt to block new spending and I believe they will do that. So there will be no new trillion dollar “stimulus” and Obama can forget about Congress allocating large funds for new programs.”

    With baseline budgeting, spending automatically goes up eight percent anyway. There should at least be a propaganda campaign with a view towards repealing it. Ever notice that when the Dems lose elections, they don’t give up on their agenda? They just continue pusuing it with even more vigor. Maybe one day it will dawn on the republicans that they would do well to do the same. But as it stands right now, we lose even when we win.

    In the wake of an unnerving defeat in November I actually believe the Republicans haven’t done too bad so far.

  • With noting to add to the conversation, I looked for a word to describe the video and Robert A. Rowland’s word: “mindless” works.

    Greg Mockeridge: Paul Ryan has maintained his integrity. I believe you underestimate him.

  • what’s the point of calling Obama a reactionary as if that’s a more stinging remark than picking apart his doctrinaire liberalism? it reminds me of how the word “fascist” is abused. why this need to appropriate rhetoric from the Left. i don’t care if something’s “reactionary” as in it’s old established opinion, i just care if it’s right or not. being pedantic i know, just certain semantics i’m not a fan of

    anyway the GOP will win presidential elections in the future, sure. the question though is whether it will continue to exist in its current form, or whether someone like Jon Huntsman will come along and transform it into a less conservative party that has policy differences but no deep philosophical disagreement with the Left.

  • “Greg Mockeridge: Paul Ryan has maintained his integrity. I believe you underestimate him.”

    I wasn’t saying anything one way or the other abgout Ryan’s integrity. It’s just that he goes along with the GOP leadership when push really comes to shove. He probably does so because he thinks it’s the prudent thing to do. And an argument can be made for that. In any event, ma main point is that Ryan is not a leading movement conservative. He is good right where he is, heading up the Budget Committee in the House.

  • “what’s the point of calling Obama a reactionary”

    For the sake of accuracy. Obama is the tail end of welfare state liberalism, a movement that is manifestly coming to an end. He has no new ideas to salvage it and is unconcerned that the funding of it simply does not not exist. “Apres moi le deluge” might as well be Obama’s personal motto.

    “the question though is whether it will continue to exist in its current form, or whether someone like Jon Huntsman will come along and transform it into a less conservative party that has policy differences but no deep philosophical disagreement with the Left.”

    The GOP will be the conservative party, or another conservative party will arise to displace it. THe RINO wing of the party has actually never been weaker.

  • Greg Mockerigde: ” In any event, my main point is that Ryan is not a leading movement conservative.”
    Paul Ryan did support the Right to Life and our founding principles at the RNC, and it appears these principles may be found in his work. My reference to his integrity, is to these points.

    Donald McCleary: “The GOP will be the conservative party, or another conservative party will arise to displace it. THe RINO wing of the party has actually never been weaker.”
    This is absolutely true. You are correct, Donald.

  • “The GOP will be the conservative party, or another conservative party will arise to displace it. THe RINO wing of the party has actually never been weaker.”

    But at this point it’s the RINO wing that controls the party.

  • I have read that many times on conservative sites T. Shaw and it is rubbish. If the Republicans had done nothing severe tax increases would have been imposed on the American public. Now the Republicans have made permanent the Bush tax cuts for 98% of American taxpayers and solved the problem of the Alternative Minimum Tax by having it finally pegged to inflation. In regard to spending cuts I am disappointed but not surprised. With the Democrats in control of the Senate, the best the Republicans can do is to attempt to block new spending and I believe they will do that. So there will be no new trillion dollar “stimulus” and Obama can forget about Congress allocating large funds for new programs. In the wake of an unnerving defeat in November I actually believe the Republicans haven’t done too bad so far.

    Thank you, Donald! I have seen very few conservative commentators make these points, but I agree completely. Of course I would have preferred an even better fiscal cliff deal, but I think that the deal we got is just about the best that anyone should have realistically expected considering we have a Democrat-controlled Senate and Obama in the White House, and considering that the tax cuts were originally implemented with an automatic expiration date.

    If Congress had done nothing, the tax situation would have been much worse. At least many of the Bush tax cuts were extended — and not only temporarily but permanently. Of course, Congress could raise the tax rates in the future, but now the tax rates will not be raised automatically at some point in the future. So as long as conservative Repulicans control at least one house of Congress or the presidency, a major tax increase is unlikely.

    I think that the Republican caucus in the House and Senate got the best deal that they could get, and I hope to be able to say the same about the spending battle that is coming up soon.

  • “But at this point it’s the RINO wing that controls the party.”

    Disagree Greg. The only reason Romney was nominated was due to conservatives forming a cirular firing squad, too many no-hopers (Yeah, Michele Bachmann was going to be President.) running and Romney’s cash advantage. If Perry hadn’t self destructed Romney would have gotten an early start on his retirement from politics.

    The GOP controls more states now than at anytime since the twenties. (After the 1976 election the Republicans controlled one state.) Most of those state Republican parties are dominated by conservatives.

  • the thing about the RINO vs. true-blue conservative dichotomy is that it’s not always clear what the latter is supposed to be.

    my view on this may be a little “out-of-touch” in that it’s filtered through certain conservative blogs (not talking this one,) but there seems to be a not-insignificant number of self-proclaimed true-believers who dislike the cultural conservative aspect of the party as much as the RINO consultants. they’re hardcore anti-Obamaites but their conservatism seems to be of a generic anti-government sort. the liberal “Randian right” meme was overdone but it does appear to be true in certain strains of thought, this framing of government as the Great Oppressor, every issue talked about in 10th amendment terms, and no real vision laid out for what an ideal conservative government would do.

    as far as politicians i thought the dichotomy was overdone this last year. i’m not gonna gloss over his chameleon political style but Romney was the best of a weak field. other candidates had flaws that were totally separate from whether they were moderate or conservative, as he did. a “true conservative” would’ve been able to do better than him based on political talent and general appeal, the latter of which doesn’t have to = pivoting to the center.

  • Umm, Donald, the RINOs control the party at the national level and that’s what really counts. Romney get the nomination because he was the next in line. The only reason why Santorum got as far as he did is because he was the last not-Romney standing. He wasn’t even on the radar until after the other not-Romney hopefuls fizzled out.

  • the “RINO” vs. true argument seems to boil down to generic “fight harder” sentiment, not meaningful policy differences (though of course there’s occasional exceptions)

    i roll my eyes at “GOP is sooooo extreme these days” rhetoric but it’s definitely true that the parties have become much more ideologically distinct

  • “Romney get the nomination because he was the next in line.”

    No he got the nomination because he got more votes in the primaries due to a fragmented conservative field, his money advantage and because Rick Santorum could not exercise message discipline.

  • But at this point it’s the RINO wing that controls the party.

    The RINO discourse is silly and should cease. When you are the Republican presidential nominee, you define what an authentic Republican is. The term would not have made sense in any circumstance. Prior to about 1980, the parties had programmatic tendencies, but programmatic preferences were not a boundary condition. There was a difference in priorities, associations, and sensibility that made Thomas E. Dewey distinct from Tip O’Neill; neither was spurious in his affiliations. The odd exception to this was Jacob Javits, who enrolled as a Republican and made his career within the Republican Party at the recommendation of the president of the Hatters Union, who told him he would be more utile to them as a Republican than in any other venue. His preferred affiliation was with the American Labor Party and its successor, the Liberal Party of New York.

    If you can find a politician whose affiliation is purely opportunistic – and Robert Dole did once say he enrolled as a Republican because they exceeded the number of Democrats by a margin of two-to-one in his home county – that would be a RINO. The thing is, who would that be? Olympia Snowe may be an irritant, but her portfolio of expressed preferences would be troublesome to Senate Democratic whips as well. Robert Dole, Capitol Hill apparatchik though he was, was a pure product of the old-line, rural, impecunious bourgeoisie. That social stratum is very foreign to the post-1980 national Democratic Party, and Dole’s most salient preference was a distaste for public-sector borrowing. Mitt Romney is opportunistic, but would an unalloyed opportunist have attempted to build a political career in Massachusetts as a Republican?

  • In the above mindless video, in a low and subdued voice, almost subliminal suggestion, Obama claims to be “like Jesus.” Wish that he were.

  • No he got the nomination because he got more votes in the primaries due to a fragmented conservative field, his money advantage and because Rick Santorum could not exercise message discipline.

    The political parties might consider attempting to rid themselves of the interminable idiot media donnybrook and hold their caucuses and primaries the 3d week of June. Hold the conventions in August and decide the nominee there. We might just be able to break the candidate-centered process and have the selection repair to local elected officials and county chairmen, re-introduce an element of peer review and deliberation into the choice (no more B.O.s), and curtail the advantage the current process gives to knuckleheads inclined to career around Iowa and New Hampshire for 18 hours a day for 18 months to the exclusion of gainful employment. William Scranton’s candidacy in 1964 lasted all of two months. More of that, please.

Klavan, Smith and Friedman On Crony Capitalism

Wednesday, November 28, AD 2012

Ah the next four years are going to be so enjoyable.  When it comes to crony capitalism Adam Smith said it well:

“The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order [that is, ‘those who live by profit’], ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.”

Milton Friedman was eloquent on the subject of government supporting private enterprises:

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Klavan, Smith and Friedman On Crony Capitalism

  • This adminstration will serve as an example for generations to come of the havoc that can be wreaked on an economy through government folly.

    Just to point out the principal promoters of crony capitalism (Barack Obama, James Johnson, Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, Steven Chu, and Timothy Geithner) include not one civil servant. The legal profession, academe, the PR biz, and that weird netherworld where everything seems to run on connections produced this crew.

  • Oh, cannot forget Barney Frank (who has not had a normal job since 1968) and his boi, Herb Moses.