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.

Netanyahu Wins and Obama Loses

Wednesday, March 18, AD 2015
Kathie Lee Gifford and Matt Lauer Share an Awkward Kiss for the Twizzler Challenge

With nearly all votes counted, Likud appeared to have earned 30 out of parliament’s 120 seats and was in a position to build with relative ease a coalition government with its nationalist, religious and ultra-Orthodox Jewish allies. Such a government would likely put Israel at odds with the international community over settlement construction and its opposition to Palestinian statehood, and continue clashing with the White House over hard-line policies.

The election was widely seen as a referendum on Netanyahu, who has governed the country for the past six years. Recent opinion polls indicated he was in trouble, giving chief rival Isaac Herzog of the opposition Zionist Union a slight lead. Exit polls Tuesday showed the two sides deadlocked but once the actual results came pouring in early Wednesday, Likud soared forward. Zionist Union wound up with just 24 seats.

Go here to read the rest.  This is a stinging defeat for Obama because his political operatives went all out to defeat Netanyahu:

Israel began this week abuzz with debate over whether or not the Obama Administration is trying to interfere in Israel’s upcoming elections, and if so, how deeply the White House is involved in seeking “regime change.”

It is by now no secret that President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu don’t get along, to put it mildly.

So when a new political organization going by the name of V15 (Victory in 2015) sprang up with the sole purpose of bringing Netanyahu’s premiership to an end, it didn’t take long before Israelis were pondering the level of Obama’s association.

Reports that V15 had brought on board Jeremy Bird, national field director for Obama’s 2012 campaign, as its “secret weapon” only fueled the fire.

The Senate is currently investigating Obama’s involvement in the Israeli elections:

Continue reading...

15 Responses to Netanyahu Wins and Obama Loses

  • What hits you is the degree to which Obama and Kerry are either (a) clueless about some of the abiding features of inter-state politics in the Near East or (b) motivated by personal pique. It does not matter much whether Israel is governed by a Likud ministry (with allies) or a Labor ministry (with allies) or a grand coalition. The disposition of the Arab publics on the West Bank and Gaza, of the Arab political class in both loci, and of the murderous government of Iran remain pretty much the same. The options for addressing the first two are pretty much the same. The options for addressing the third are altered only by the degree of fortitude in Washington (which is not impressive as we speak).

  • I personally am overjoyed that Benjamin Netanyahu won if for no other reason than it pi$$es the heck out of Barack Hussein Obama who in turn reminds me more and more of King Herod.

  • it’s not over though “they bring a knife we bring a gun” or something to that effect. There will be lot more effort against Israel, against Netanyahu and for Iran and other islamic states.

  • I am startled how nasty the Dems have been about Israel of late– and how open the hostility to observant Jews has become.
    Wonder if it’s creeping anybody else out.

  • There seems a common DNA shared by modern progressives and those of the early Twentieth Century. Yes, it is creepy.

  • I include Hitler’s National Socialists among the mix of early progressives. Many Democrats I know are not fully aware of the extent their party has drifted during the past generation or so. As to the current Administration, I have no idea of what they are trying to accomplish with Iran and view their entire agenda with grave trepidations. It’s as if the government has been taken over by aliens.

  • Drifted, or returned to a prior state?
    I’m not especially well grounded in history, but a lot of the stuff I only ever heard about in Liberal Fascism (although once I asked, the information was there) is pretty dang familiar.

    Seems like WWII snapped some folks into a different mode, for a while. It’s taken a long time, and some really big destruction of the knowledge of logical reasoning, for “life unworthy of life” to be mainstream. (The mutation of the rule that started as “the longer a discussion continues, the more likely it is that the Nazis will be mentioned” is a symptom of this irrationality.)

  • Foxfier wrote, “I am startled how nasty the Dems have been about Israel of late…”

    Years ago, Robert Redeker, writing in Le Monde, pointed out that post Cold War, the Left has replaced “sovietophilia” with “islamophilia,” and that “Palestinians and the contemporary Muslim masses replace the proletariat in the intellectuals’ imagination” as the pure, ideal alternative to Western capitalism. (Le Monde, 11/21/01). In other words, absolute anti-Zionism is post-colonial contrition coupled with a fetishisation of the “innocent” Palestinians, which, in turn, results from the ideological need to fill the post-Soviet vacuum.

    Similarly, Pierre-Andre Taguieff in Le Nouvel Observateur observed that for many “Christian humanitarians, Third-Worldists and Anti-Globalisation activists,” the world is divided between the “cosmopolitan Satan,” the unholy trinity of the United States/Israel/The West on one side and, on the other, the “dominated and the oppressed.” Thus, they recycle the old anti-Semitic stereotypes, such as the rich Jew and the dominating Jew under the “varnish of progressivism.” The Jew is once more the stand-in for capitalism, imperialism, cosmopolitanism, indeed the whole economic order.

  • Boys floating on some agenda in some political undercurrent gather to drag down men with knowledge of right and wrong.

    Taxpayer funded V15 of OneVoice Movement?? This must be an example of how the low/no info voter is used to make noisy ‘stands’ for the way the current flows.
    Balancing the budget planks burned. Taxpayers spending it on reinforcing the D’s.

  • The difference in the two is plain as “night and day.”

    Netanyahu loves his country. Obama hates us. And, there is a large dose of stupidity in the man and those that he has miscast to run off a cliff what was once the greatest country on the planet.

  • Drifted, or returned to a prior state?

    The alt-right is awash in anti-Semitic tropes and obsessions, but I suspect most of the hostility to Israel in the occident arises from the same impulses which lie behind the hostility to law enforcement or the military. Israel is also unapologetic about defending its interests against a political formation which trafficks in grievance. I suspect that accounts for the hostility of political elites and students in much of the 3d world, who fancy that grievance-mongering must always trump.

  • The who?
    A search for the term brings up mostly folks explaining how horrible they are, without many details about who is actually involved.
    I know exactly one guy who can be classed as on the right who has anything that might be considered anti-Semitic– he believes that “vast Jewish conspiracy” thing. (Not that all Jews are part of it, but that there is one– I believe he believes they’re working with the Catholic One-World conspiracy, too, but it never came up.)
    I know several guys (in person) who can only be classed as on the left who have an actual hostility to observant Jews, and especially to Israel.
    The only folks I’ve even heard (in person) that are hostile to Israel that could be on the right are the isolationist libertarians, who are at least coherent. If one really believes that all it takes to be left alone is to hide inside your borders, then Israel defending herself would be a bad thing. Similarly, as you point out, the Victim mongers on the left have reason to hate Israel because there’s no doubt that the Jews were chosen as victims– and they fought, and survived. With some hands (or arms, rather) UP, not “let me come in and do everything for you, you poor little victim” type help.
    There might be a generational thing as well, since there was a tradition of the upper classes joining into the whole Jew hate thing because it’s European.

  • Obama loses also by showing himself no statesman. petty and pitiful

  • The Left will start loving the Jews again about 5 minutes after the Palestinians have driven the last Isreali Jew into the sea.

  • Drifted, or returned to a prior state? Good question Foxfier. I suppose if it is the Democrats per se we are evaluating, they have been vacillating back and forth for a long time. The founders had a healthy skepticism in regard to democracy. Is a majority vote ever a substitute for wisdom? Perhaps I’m thinking of the changes apparent during my lifetime. Maybe it’s better to look at the progressive mindset as an ideological consistency. Whether those who consider themselves progressives also may consider themselves Agnostics, Baptists, Catholics, Jews or whatever, the fundamental assumption of the progressive policy is atheism. Indeed many of the more stalwart progressives are assertively atheist. I think the progressive’s adoption of Islamic clients is just another expression of an anti-Western bias. Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism is a convincing documentation of the common roots of the Communists, the Nazis, and the dominant faction of the Democratic Party. The people are deemed stupid, a peasantry clinging to God, guns and prejudices, and a herd to be managed by their intellectual betters. The ultimate solution to problems is seen in Government not God and that on a worldwide basis. This notion is viable only in the abstract. When it is applied, it falls apart. Israel faces a clear and present reality. They know that a UN derived top-down solution will expose them to an existential threat. Obama is just an inexperienced, poorly educated and terribly indoctrinated man of straw propped up, it seems, by unseen others. And, I say that in all charity. Netanyahu is better informed, and a mensch who knows where his duty lies. May God prosper the work of his hand.

Quotes Suitable For Framing: Bobby Jindal

Saturday, February 7, AD 2015

8 Responses to Quotes Suitable For Framing: Bobby Jindal

  • What’s the matter with the blonde bimbo? Obviously she is breathless over every utterance that proceeds from the mouth of O’Bumbler.

  • She has her mouth puckered like she drank lemonade,not koolaid

  • The “blonde bimbo” is Mika Brzezinski, daughter of Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. She’s a Democrat raised in an Ivy League (Columbia) academic family, which is probably sufficient to explain the puckering, not to mention the repeated attempts to hush up Joe Scarborough’s justified and accurate rant against the Faculty-lounge-lizard-in-Chief.

  • I have mixed feelings about that quote. I like Jindal a lot – he’d be my #1 choice among the likely Republican primary candidates. (I live in Maryland, so my vote doesn’t matter, but it’d be for him.) I’m a big fan of experience in a candidate, and I love his resume. I even agree with what I’ve heard him saying on the issue of radical Islam. But it feels forced. It’s like a political consultant told him that he needs to be able to check off the foreign policy box, and the easiest way for a governor to do that is to bluster. The worst thing about it is that Bobby Jindal is a small guy. He can pull off “crisis manager” or “smartest guy in the room” or “American dream”, but he can’t swagger. If he tries to, he’s going to look like a fool.

  • “Please deal with the Radical Islamic Threat today.”

    He IS! He is dealing with it. Open borders! Don’t ever mention the truth, just say “workplace violence,” when a gunman opens fire on others while screaming praises to Allah.
    He is keeping his word about transparency…he just doesn’t know what transparency is. BO and Mongo are just pawns in the game of life.

  • I like Governor Jindal. I would like to hear more about his conversion from Hindu to Protestant and then Catholicism. When I hear him speak I listen because I think he is authentic.

  • Joe Scarborough wants to know where the President could get such ideas, “where does he go to church.” The President’s two main assaults on Christian history, the crusades and the Inquisition, are the two most popular attacks on the Catholic Church in the post reformation Protestant world. These attacks, full of error and exaggeration, were not the invention of modern secular leftists, they are centuries old anti-Catholic protestant propaganda.

  • I agree with you, Anzlyne. Gov. Jindal’s comment was short and on point. Finally someone in elected office called the president on his stupid remarks.

They Serve Sauron and have Forgotten Their Own Names

Monday, February 2, AD 2015

Obama as FDR

 

John C. Wright, Science Fiction author and convert from atheism to Catholicism, is on fire:

 

Something rotten, very rotten has happened to the Left just in my lifetime.

They used to be champions of free speech; and now they are its most vehement opponents.

They use to be able to give some sort of argument or logical reason for their position, even if an incorrect argument; now they have no argument, none of them, aside from wild and insincere accusations delivered in a mechanical fashion without any hope of being believed, phony as a three-dollar bill.

They used to be firmly on the side of the workingman; now they hate the workingman as a white racist oppressor.

They used to be in favor of free love and the sexual liberation; now they object to rocket scientists wearing shirts with cartoon women printed on them, they object to science fiction magazines showing a scantily clad warrior princess slaying a monster, and they call all sex rape, and demand strict segregation of women and men. On the same day as these protests, they appear in front of the Pope, writhing on the ground naked with crosses and crucifixes inserted into their vaginas. So the Puritan rules apply arbitrarily, without sense or order, to anyone or no one.

They used to be in favor of Blacks and other minorities; now their disgust for all the impoverished and dispossessed is plain to see. All they want is to keep the Blacks on the plantation, addicted to welfare, addicted to crack, their children aborted, their parents unwed.

They used to be in favor of the Jews, and other minorities; now they kneel to Islamic Jihad at every opportunity, vowing that those who slander the prophet of Islam will no be in the future, and ergo the Left now curse the Jews, and pray daily for the destruction of Israel, and a new Holocaust in the warhead of a Muslim nuke.

What? You say that his the not what the Left says? That they say they are creatures of purity, goodness, and sweetness, who live only to help others out of the depth of their hearts and the depth of your wallet? No, that was the old Left, back when the Left still had some scraps of sanity and intelligence.

They serve Sauron and have forgotten their own names.

Continue reading...

14 Responses to They Serve Sauron and have Forgotten Their Own Names

  • He makes such very good points. “They make common cause with Jihadists.”
    ” Every time some Leftist says “But not all Muslims are terrorists” he is accusing you, Christian man or woman…”

  • I should love to know when the Left were the “champions of free speech” or of any other “bourgeois” freedom.

    Thus, we had Alain Badiou, who for so long held the chair of philosophy at the École Normale Supérieure: “If you say A – equality, human rights and freedoms – you should not shirk from its consequences and gather the courage to say B – the terror needed to really defend and assert the A.”

    For him and most of the Hard Left, it has always been axiomatic that “Materialist dialectics assumes, without particular joy, that, till now, no political subject was able to arrive at the eternity of the truth it was deploying without moments of terror. Since, as Saint-Just asked: ‘What do those who want neither Virtue nor Terror want?’ His answer is well-known: they want corruption – another name for the subject’s defeat.” (Logiques des mondes, Paris: Seuil 2006)

    That other grand old man of the Left, Eric Hazan also used to quote Saint-Just: “That which produces the general good is always terrible,” adding, “These words should not be interpreted as a warning against the temptation to impose violently the general good onto a society, but, on the contrary, as a bitter truth to be fully endorsed.”

  • Roosevelt’s New Deal, for all its disastrous long term consequences, was originally a good hearted attempt to enlist government to improve the lot of the American people.

    A complaint here: you’re conflating injuries inflicted by the New Deal with injuries inflicted by congeries of officials who came of age or had their professional debut during the years running from 1933 to 1947. There was an incipient disaster in the National Industrial Recovery Act, but the courts strangled that one in the crib. There was another nexus of injuries inflicted by federal labor law which had some similar sources: efforts to enforce a high minimum wage and promotion of Gompers style business-unionism. I think these did have real-time effects. The manipulation of the farm sector also had real-time effects (though most of the trouble was manifest downstream).

    Ronald Reagan supposedly one said that his task was not the repeal of the New Deal, but of the Great Society.

    1. Detroit is a disaster, but that does not have much to do with the New Deal per se, but with the confluence of three or four different streams of poison, only one of which had a New Deal origin.

    2.The catastrophic decline of public order in American inner cities after 1958 was a disaster, but that’s the loopiness of the social work industry influencing the legal profession. That’s not a New Deal disaster. To a degree, it was an Earl Warren disaster later compounded by an odd alignment of black particularists and suburban voters.

    3. Another mess was collective bargaining for public employees, something no less a personage than Fiorello LaGuardia regarded with reservation and skepticism. You have Gaylord Nelson, Robert Wagner II, and John Kennedy to blame for that, among others.

    4. Another mess has been the chronic incapacity of the political class to put Social Security on an actuarially sound footing. The main perpetrator here was Tip O’Neill, who showed Democratic officialdom how to win votes by rousing the geezer rabble. O’Neill was a junior state legislator during the New Deal.

    5. And, of course, you have several sets of injuries done to primary and secondary schooling (some of which were manifest already in the 1930s, some of which appeared ca. 1955, and some of which appeared after 1965. Discrete policy measures promoting many of these were Johnson Administration initiatives, not New Deal era. The New Deal era problems were circumstantial, having to do with the effect on secondary schools of large numbers of youths the labor market could not absorb and with the early influence of child-centered education.

    6. And then there is the mess that is higher education. You have the GI Bills and the Johnson era higher education subsidies to thank for much of that.

    7. And, of course, what civil rights law had decayed into, for which courts and administrative agency rulings are most to blame. There was little of it during the New Deal. That also derives from Johnson Administration initiatives, though some of the most acutely awful court decisions were during the Nixon Administration.

  • I forgot rent control. That actually was a New Deal-era notion, but it’s ill effects were pretty confined to New York City. Yes, public housing as well…

  • I agree with MPS’s comment.

  • For what happens to tyrants who use terror to impose what is “good” for us all, google the death of Robespierre – his Reign of Terror came back to bite him. Curiously he tried also to impose a new state religion on France after the extirpation of Catholicism. Guy McClung, San Antonio

  • No surprise the left and Islam would be aligned. Both complain about persecution when out of power; and then carry it out with a vengeance once in power.

  • I agree with MPS’s comment.

    I’m pleased someone can make sense of it.

  • I hope everyone is starting to figure out that left and right are the wrong labels. Who has been manipulating the left for the past 80 years through Hollywood, the press, and liberal fronts. Who has control of the right at this point it time and is promoting the “right” to support war in the middle east. What you are seeing is the shadows of puppets on the cave wall, to borrow Plato’s allegory. There is more to the story. Get out of the cave and shake these labels that you are clinging to.

  • “Get out of the cave and shake these labels that you are clinging to.”
    I personally blame the Elvis impersonating cattle mutilators who are in a secret alliance with the Trilateralist gnomes of Zurich.

  • I personally blame the Elvis impersonating cattle mutilators who are in a secret alliance with the Trilateralist gnomes of Zurich.

    Soon to be subject to a 10,000 word treatment by Ron Unz, just as soon as he finishes with his latest installment about the Jewish cabal at Harvard.

  • Personally, I think you give the New Dealers too much credit.

  • Over generosity with opponents has ever been a weakness for me. 🙂

The Old Issue

Thursday, November 20, AD 2014

 

“Here is nothing new nor aught unproven,” say the Trumpets,
“Many feet have worn it and the road is old indeed.
“It is the King—the King we schooled aforetime !”
(Trumpets in the marshes—in the eyot at Runnymede!)

“Here is neither haste, nor hate, nor anger,” peal the Trumpets,
“Pardon for his penitence or pity for his fall.
“It is the King!”—inexorable Trumpets—
(Trumpets round the scaffold at the dawning by Whitehall!)

.     .     .     .     .

“He hath veiled the Crown and hid the Sceptre,” warn the Trumpets,
“He hath changed the fashion of the lies that cloak his will.
“Hard die the Kings—ah hard—dooms hard!” declare the Trumpets,
Trumpets at the gang-plank where the brawling troop-decks fill!

Ancient and Unteachable, abide—abide the Trumpets!
Once again the Trumpets, for the shuddering ground-swell brings
Clamour over ocean of the harsh, pursuing Trumpets—
Trumpets of the Vanguard that have sworn no truce with Kings!

All we have of freedom, all we use or know—
This our fathers bought for us long and long ago.

Ancient Right unnoticed as the breath we draw—
Leave to live by no man’s leave, underneath the Law.

Lance and torch and tumult, steel and grey-goose wing
Wrenched it, inch and ell and all, slowly from the King.

Till our fathers ‘stablished, after bloody years,
How our King is one with us, first among his peers.

So they bought us freedom—not at little cost
Wherefore must we watch the King, lest our gain be lost,

Over all things certain, this is sure indeed,
Suffer not the old King: for we know the breed.

Continue reading...

15 Responses to The Old Issue

  • I cannot remember a President doing so much damage as this guy is doing.

  • People rather like a king.

    As Walter Bagehot explains, “The best reason why Monarchy is a strong government is, that it is
    an intelligible government. The mass of mankind understand it, and they
    hardly anywhere in the world understand any other. It is often said that
    men are ruled by their imaginations; but it would be truer to say they are
    governed by the weakness of their imaginations. The nature of a constitution,
    the action of an assembly, the play of parties, the unseen formation
    of a guiding opinion, are complex facts, difficult to know, and easy
    to mistake. But the action of a single will, the fiat of a single mind, are
    easy ideas: anybody can make them out, and no one can ever forget
    them. When you put before the mass of mankind the question, “Will you
    be governed by a king, or will you be governed by a constitution?” the
    inquiry comes out thus — “Will you be governed in a way you understand,
    or will you be governed in a way you do not understand?” The
    issue was put to the French people; they were asked, “Will you be governed
    by Louis Napoleon, or will you be governed by an assembly?”
    The French people said, “We will be governed by the one man we can
    imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.””

  • “The issue was put to the French people; they were asked, “Will you be governed by Louis Napoleon, or will you be governed by an assembly?” The French people said, “We will be governed by the one man we can imagine, and not by the many people we cannot imagine.””

    You have got to be kidding MPS. That plebiscite was a complete fraud, and no wonder. At least Napoleon I had military skill, which Napoleon III completely lacked.

    Marx, for once, was right on the money with Napoleon the Sawdust Caesar:

    “Hegel remarks somewhere that all great world-historic facts and personages appear, so to speak, twice. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce. Caussidière for Danton, Louis Blanc for Robespierre, the Montagne of 1848 to 1851 for the Montagne of 1793 to 1795, the nephew for the uncle. And the same caricature occurs in the circumstances of the second edition of the Eighteenth Brumaire.”

  • Let’s put this crap in numerate perspective. The numbers of illegals they won’t (cannot deport 5,000,000, in any case) send packing is greater than the numbers of jobs “created” since this rodent began tearing apart the nation in 2009.

    The so-called executive order is bu!!$#!+ and GOP-baiting. (Orwell) “Politics are essentially coercion and deceit.” Pay back taxes! Don’t make me laugh . . . Register? Not receive medicaid, public schools, welfare? Like Gruber, this useless, inexperienced dolt thinks we are effing idiots.

  • ” He shall break his judges if they cross his word;
    He shall rule above the Law calling on the Lord.

    He shall peep and mutter; and the night shall bring
    Watchers ‘neath our window, lest we mock the King—

    Hate and all division; hosts of hurrying spies;
    Money poured in secret, carrion breeding flies.

    Strangers of his counsel, hirelings of his pay,
    These shall deal our Justice: sell—deny—delay.

    We shall drink dishonour, we shall eat abuse
    For the Land we look to—for the Tongue we use.

    We shall take our station, dirt beneath his feet,
    While his hired captains jeer us in the street.

    Cruel in the shadow, crafty in the sun,
    Far beyond his borders shall his teachings run. ”

    In a land where the right to abomination and injustice is promulgated, such as a mother killing her baby, or forbidding innocence in the name of education and advertising, or behaving like bullies, or using the sound of gunfire as music on car sound systems, or denying the existence of or reference to something out of this world, it is good to remember what the coming Sunday celebrates.

  • Barack Hussein Obama gave a rather good speech that will appeal to all liberal progressives and social justice Katholycks. The examples he used were heart-rendering. He even twisted around the Scripture passage about welcoming the stranger to justify overruling Constitutional process. I could not help but think that the Devil knows Scripture, too, so why not his spawn? This man lifts his face up against both Constitution and Scripture. The example of King Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel chapter 4 comes to mind.
    .
    I have always liked the first part of Cicero’s speech against Catiline recently used so eloquently by Senator Cruz. I quoted it to my father during the Watergate scandals some 40 plus years ago when as a high school student I was translating Cicero for the first time. My dad was a country boy with only an 8th grade education and unlike his son, had no knowledge of Latin or Greek, Calculus or Physics, but he remained ever wiser that his son and he saw immediately the parallel with modern politics. Perhaps because he read his Bible nightly and devoutly prayed with ever greater frequency as he aged, he was able to see things that today’s American citizenry cannot see.
    .
    Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet? quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia? Nihilne te nocturnum praesidium Palati, nihil urbis vigiliae, nihil timor populi, nihil concursus bonorum omnium, nihil hic munitissimus habendi senatus locus, nihil horum ora voltusque moverunt? Patere tua consilia non sentis, constrictam iam horum omnium scientia teneri coniurationem tuam non vides? Quid proxima, quid superiore nocte egeris, ubi fueris, quos convocaveris, quid consilii ceperis, quem nostrum ignorare arbitraris?
    .
    O tempora, o mores! Senatus haec intellegit. Consul videt; hic tamen vivit. Vivit? immo vero etiam in senatum venit, fit publici consilii particeps, notat et designat oculis ad caedem unum quemque nostrum. Nos autem fortes viri satis facere rei publicae videmur, si istius furorem ac tela vitemus. Ad mortem te, Catilina, duci iussu consulis iam pridem oportebat, in te conferri pestem, quam tu in nos [omnes iam diu] machinaris.

  • a king is one thing, a tyrant is another.

  • Paul W. Primavera.

    I like your fathers wisdom.
    He in turn would say how pleasing and proud he is to have a son like you.
    Blessings Paul.

  • As Walter Bagehot explains, “The best reason why Monarchy is a strong government is, that it is an intelligible government. The mass of mankind understand it,

    Somehow, MPS, we’ve managed with republican institutions in this country for 400-odd years, Walter Bagehot’s wisdom notwithstanding. Come to think of it, they’ve managed in Canada and in the Antipodes with parliamentary institutions with regard to which the monarch treads very lightly.

    If people fancy a monarchy, it’s because Elizabeth manifests so many virtues (and leaves the expression of political viewpoints to confidential discussions with the prime minister).

  • You have got to be kidding MPS. That plebiscite was a complete fraud,

    One might remark also that European publics keep passing up opportunities to restore monarchies (Roumania, Bulgaria, and Serbia being the most recent examples), in spite of the congenial quality of the political life in those countries which have them.

  • “I cannot remember a President doing so much damage as this guy is doing.”

    I am convinced that every bit if it is on purpose.

  • “Let’s put this crap in numerate perspective. The numbers of illegals they won’t (cannot deport 5,000,000, in any case) send packing is greater than the numbers of jobs “created” since this rodent began tearing apart the nation in 2009.”

    These illegals have limited places they can go in our societies. 1. Crime, courts, jails, etc. 2. Low paying jobs bringing the wages even lower for Americans and those who have come here legally. 3. Public schools, hospitals, colleges, universities, nonprofits, etc adding an additional pull on already overloaded systems 4. Highly skilled jobs that would have been taken by Americans and/or other legal immigrants 5. Democrat party voters to keep their subsidies coming 6. Government jobs/contract which recruit/mandate employment of/contractual work of/to minorities before white males.

    “The so-called executive order is bu!!$#!…” “Pay back taxes! Don’t make me laugh . . . Register? Not receive medicaid, public schools, welfare? Like Gruber, this useless, inexperienced dolt thinks we are effing idiots.”

    I agree in part. He is inexperienced in what matters. He knows that whole entire demographic of the US population are effing idiots. He also knows that he will get completely away with this because those in charge of the RNC are “effing idiots” who don’t care what the truth is or what damage is done as long as they can push their liberal leaning agenda through The Republican party. He is also taking steps to destroy our economy, national sovereignty, & constitutional republic–with malice and forethought. He knows exactly what he is doing & is acting on purpose.

  • Refuse the illegal invaders citizenship. There, they cannot VOTE, apply for benefits, etc. etc.

  • “Refuse the illegal invaders citizenship. There, they cannot VOTE, apply for benefits, etc. etc.”

    Technically, they cannot vote or apply for benefits.

    In reality they vote & receive govt benefits with predictable regularity. II have had personal experience in ministering to illegals here in our state through the church, and in this state they are given benefits no matter what anyone says. I have also worked in elections over the last several decades & can guarantee that voter fraud takes place regularly in this state–though Iniave never witnessed an illegal being allowed to vote. Also, the following link is relevant to the topic of illegals being allowed to vote:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2014/10/30/New-O-Keefe-Video-Allegedly-Shows-Democratic-Poll-Workers-Assisting-Illegal-Non-Citizen-to-Vote-in-NC

  • Refugees from tyranny or escapees from responsibility to grow their nation into a Republic? Abortion has decimated our population of innocent individuals who bring Justice. These illegal deserters from the work of patriotism and education take the form of victims, but, in reality, they are deserters from civilization, refusing to build their own country into Republics of freedom, civil rights, love of neighbor and/or acknowledging the sovereign person.
    .
    These illegal refugees are abandoning their neighbors in need, deserting their work to establish the civil rights and freedom for their state, and refusing to acknowledge “their Creator”. The illegal immigrants come to America as though Americans are the only human beings created and endowed with unalienable rights. The illegal immigrants have the same gifts and unalienable rights as Americans. The illegal immigrants come here to absorb our prosperity wanting to give nothing in return.
    .
    It is not amnesty, until they have earned amnesty. It cannot be diplomatic immunity because they have not been invited as diplomats or welcomed as refugees. They can only be described as illegal invaders, mercenaries and potential trouble makers as Barbara Gordon has explained.

King Obama

Thursday, November 20, AD 2014

 

 

In Federalist 69 Alexander Hamilton responded to the criticism that the Presidency under the proposed Constitution established an elective monarchy which would be a perpetual threat to American liberties:

 

Hence it appears that, except as to the concurrent authority of the President in the article of treaties, it would be difficult to determine whether that magistrate would, in the aggregate, possess more or less power than the Governor of New York. And it appears yet more unequivocally, that there is no pretense for the parallel which has been attempted between him and the king of Great Britain. But to render the contrast in this respect still more striking, it may be of use to throw the principal circumstances of dissimilitude into a closer group.

 

The President of the United States would be an officer elected by the people for four years; the king of Great Britain is a perpetual and hereditary prince. The one would be amenable to personal punishment and disgrace; the person of the other is sacred and inviolable. The one would have a qualified negative upon the acts of the legislative body; the other has an absolute negative. The one would have a right to command the military and naval forces of the nation; the other, in addition to this right, possesses that of declaring war, and of raising and regulating fleets and armies by his own authority. The one would have a concurrent power with a branch of the legislature in the formation of treaties; the other is the sole possessor of the power of making treaties. The one would have a like concurrent authority in appointing to offices; the other is the sole author of all appointments. The one can confer no privileges whatever; the other can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies. The one can prescribe no rules concerning the commerce or currency of the nation; the other is in several respects the arbiter of commerce, and in this capacity can establish markets and fairs, can regulate weights and measures, can lay embargoes for a limited time, can coin money, can authorize or prohibit the circulation of foreign coin. The one has no particle of spiritual jurisdiction; the other is the supreme head and governor of the national church! What answer shall we give to those who would persuade us that things so unlike resemble each other? The same that ought to be given to those who tell us that a government, the whole power of which would be in the hands of the elective and periodical servants of the people, is an aristocracy, a monarchy, and a despotism.

 

One can only imagine what Mr. Hamilton and the other Founding Fathers would make of this:

According to a senior Democrat familiar with the plans, Obama will announce on Thursday that he is providing temporary protections to up to 5 million undocumented immigrants. His orders will make up to 4 million undocumented immigrants eligible for temporary protective status and provide relief to another 1 million through other means.

Continue reading...

24 Responses to King Obama

  • Sorry Mr. Franklin, we couldn’t keep it.

  • Our tax dollars pay for this. This cannot be put on the ballot? If Obama wants these illegal immigrants as constituents, he ought to pay for them out of his own pocket.

  • David Burge – “American voters repudiated in historic landslide 1-0 vote.”

  • Oh but wait Mary De Voe…where is your compassion for these poor? (sarcasm) Where are these children going to sleep eat or receive health care? (sarcasm)

    This is the tidal wave of social justice from the left that see’s a baby seal as sacred yet an unborn human baby as blob of tissue. Now what?

    I agree with you. Michelle Badrock and Uncle Joe can personally fund these immigrant’s. Or, respect the rights of the legal voters!

  • My compassion for the poor begins with the virtue of Justice (no sarcasm) and praying for Divine Providence to care for them. (Truth)

  • This action shows not only deep contempt for the Constitution and the Congress, but also the American people.

    Obama’s spent his life in and among subcultures where a systematic appreciation of ordinary people is not to be found. His grandparents might have attempted to impart it, but Stanley Dunham was so confused as to how to proceed with his grandson that he thought spending time with Frank Marshall Davis and exporting his grandson to a random liberal arts college would be salutary.

    You recall that Edmund Morris — not a bien pensant, really, but a man who had spent his adult life among the word-merchant element — could not make sense of Ronald Reagan. Reagan gave him a brief and explicit précis of interpretive tools – “my life’s an open book”, and Morris was still baffled. For people who manipulate words and images for a living, a man as straightforward as Reagan cannot be who he appears to be; everyone just has to be a poseur (but they cannot figure out what the pose was concealing).

    We’ve had some accomplished men in the White House. Then we have men whose principal accomplishment has been cadging and holding political office (Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Bilge Clinton, and BO being examples of that). There’s little doubt Nixon and Ford could have done something else and been someone else; both had military service, Ford had 10 years practicing law in a city of middling size in a firm he himself formed with Phillip Buchan, and Nixon still had enough left upstairs to return to law practice after a 17 year hiatus (electing to go back into politics because the law bored him). Roosevelt, Truman, and (arrgh) Clinton had at least spent time superintending public agencies. As for Kennedy, you cannot take the man’s bravery away from him, nor is oratorical skill. The man sitting in the White House now has to be the most bogus character who has ever sat there. His adult life since 1985 has consisted of waste of time positions in political eleemosynaries, of patronage jobs handed him, and of clever marketing. That’s pretty much the same deal with his wife, whose vital $300,000 a year position at the University of Chicago hospitals was eliminated when she vacated it.

    Not only was he not taught the value of ordinary people, simply assessing his own life honestly would be very painful. The contempt keeps reality at bay.

  • King Obama. Daniel 4:28-33:
    .
    28 All this came upon King Nebuchadnez′zar. 29 At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, 30 and the king said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” 31 While the words were still in the king’s mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnez′zar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, 32 and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field; and you shall be made to eat grass like an ox; and seven times shall pass over you, until you have learned that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” 33 Immediately the word was fulfilled upon Nebuchadnez′zar. He was driven from among men, and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles’ feathers, and his nails were like birds’ claws.

  • “The contempt keeps reality at bay.”

    Bingo.

  • Obama, as president, does not decide for any citizen how much charity, the citizen, in good conscience, has the ability to donate. Since Obama refuses to identify the citizens’ conscience as a valid indicator of charity, he must behave like lord of the world.

  • Amnesty announced. Champagne bottles popping heard at USCCB. The Constitution wept.

  • How the word “discretion” is used….
    🙁
    It used to imply a particularity. Singling out a case for a different reaction than what had been expected. Looking at exceptional cases and applying a discretionary judgment.
    You could look at one case details and say, I will decide not to prosecute.
    NOT to look at millions of cases, where the identities of the person are not even known and applying a discretionary judgement en masse.

  • Art Deco wrote, “For people who manipulate words and images for a living, a man as straightforward as Reagan cannot be who he appears to be; everyone just has to be a poseur (but they cannot figure out what the pose was concealing).”
    One recalls Prince Metternich’s remark, when informed of the death of Talleyrand – “I wonder what he meant by that.”

  • Another aspect of this lawlessness is the abdication by 95% of the media to ACCURATELY report the difference between the “tweaking” of a duly passed law by Congress by Presidents Reagan & Bush & the impatient unilateral action of this emperor. Shame on the presidents “water carriers” in the media!

  • Agreed. Some of the Fast and Furious e-mails Judicial Watch has managed to pry out of the Department of Justice are revealing as to what the pr flacks for the Regime expect of the major media. They expect them to act like Democratic operatives with bylines, and by and large they do. They do not have the budgets to do much anymore, but by and large they’re not motivated, which is why Sheryl Atkisson is out of a job. As recently as 1998, the print media (while biased) were not shills of the Democratic Party and broke inconvenient stories (per Brent Bozell, television news was already suborned at that time).

  • What follows has been read into the Constitution by the President. So long as nothing is done, he does have the powers he has usurped and this is de facto the new law of the land.

    Article VIII

    Notwithstanding any Power granted in Article I above or in Article III above, in time of declared emergency or crisis, all Power shall be vested in the President and officers duly appointed by him, said Power including, but not limited to, all legislative powers, all judicial powers granted herein, and all powers reserved to the States or to the people under Amendment X hereto. The President alone is vested with the Power to declare an emergency or a crisis. In an emergency or crisis, the President and his duly appointed officers shall, as deemed necessary by the President, suspend any and all rights protected under Amendments I – XXVII.

    Guy McClung, San Antonio

  • Malone (Connery) from the movie, “The Untouchables”, “And ‘then’ what are you prepared to do?”

  • Obama has chosen to introduce millions of illegal aliens into our country, our towns, our schools, our hospitals, our neighborhood, our charity, into our personal space and our privacy; into our countenance without our permission, our invitation, and our informed consent. Entering into a sovereign person’s privacy and personal space without his welcome, his permission, his invitation is assault and battery.
    .
    As constituents of the President, all citizens are spoken for by the President. If we cannot agree with what the president is doing we actually remove ourselves from citizenship to protect ourselves. So, now Obama owns the whole America without the citizens. and any citizen who chooses to remain will have his personal space violated and his countenance assaulted.
    .
    As far as the Catholic Church goes, after tithing, the Church must pay the bill.

  • “de facto the new law of the land.” must be ratified by three quarters of the states. The states have un-ratified Obama’s new law of the land.

  • Seen at Zero hedeg: “Me the People . . .”

    .
    La republique c’est moi!

  • “Malone (Connery) from the movie, “The Untouchables”, “And ‘then’ what are you prepared to do?”

    “01:47:33 Your Honour, the truth is that Capone is a killer and he will go free.

    01:47:39 There is only one way to deal with such men, and that is hunt them down.

    01:47:44 I have. I have forsworn myself. I have broken laws I swore to defend.

    01:47:49 I am content that I have done right. That man must be stopped, you must…

    01:47:53 I’ll be the judge of what I must do, Mr Ness.”

    Thus far this country has avoided that. Obama is setting some terrible precedents that may eventually some day produce a whirlwind.

  • I told people Osama (misspelled on purpose) was like this before he was elected president the first time. So no one can blame me because “I told you so!” Nothing this man could do–short of lining us up on the White House lawn & executing us with a firing squad–would shock me. There are no words for how angry his actions make me. We are no longer a constitutional republic.

  • “Thus far this country has avoided that. Obama is setting some terrible precedents that may eventually some day produce a whirlwind.”

    Do what? We are in the middle of the whirlwind right now! Check out how many violent crimes are carried out by illegals in this nation.

The Anti-FDR

Sunday, November 9, AD 2014

The Anti-FDR

 

Overshadowed by Republican victories in Congress, Republican control of state legislatures is the real story out of last Tuesday’s elections:

 

The Republican wave that hit the U.S. Congress in Tuesday’s midterm election also boosted the party in state races, where it gained control of 10 chambers and could be on track to holding the largest number of legislative seats since before the Great Depression.

Democrats lost their majorities in the West Virginia House, Nevada Assembly and Senate, New Hampshire House, Minnesota House, New York Senate, Maine Senate, Colorado Senate, Washington Senate, and New Mexico House to Republicans, who also won enough seats to tie control of the West Virginia Senate, the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) reported on Wednesday.

“Everyone knew it was a Republican year, but they really blew away expectations at the state legislative level,” said Tim Storey, the bipartisan group’s election analyst.

With Tuesday’s vote, Republicans took over the U.S. Senate, beefed up their majority in the U.S. House and won the governor’s office in several key states. The vote also increased the number of state legislative chambers with Republican majorities to 67 from 57. Party control of the Colorado House and Washington House was still up in the air.

The number of states with Republicans in control of both legislative chambers came to 27 ahead of the election and has now edged closer to the high mark of 30 in 1920, according to Storey. By contrast, Democrats will control the lowest number of state legislatures since 1860, he said.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to The Anti-FDR

  • I think some might look at Obama with regretful gratitude because his mishaps woke up the country to how far afield we’ve been drifting.

    As Jonah Goldberg once put it:
    http://m.townhall.com/columnists/jonahgoldberg/2014/10/03/wrong-ideological-choice-has-cost-obama-dearly-n1900144/page/full
    “Obama set out to restore faith in government and liberalism. He ended up throwing them both under the bus for the sake of his party.”

  • The FDR comparison made sense to Democratic pols (Jerrold Nadler) and their auxiliaries in the press corps who seem get their American history from the likes of Ken Burns. The two resembled each other in one particular: neither put many years into law practice. Roosevelt had 11 years under his belt as a line administrator and had put in some years with commercial companies; Obama had no time as a line administrator and his time with commercial companies was limited to a two-year stint as a copy editor. Roosevelt made some severe mistakes in policy (from which the federal courts saved him by disallowing them) and had some confused notions of how to proceed, but he also hit on some tonic measures as well that made a huge difference during the period running from 1933 to 1936. With regard to our current situation Obama’s vapidity is unrivaled. Everything was subcontracted to the Democratic congressional caucus (or Turbo Tax Timmy), who produced predictable masses of spaghetti logic with side-payments to their clientele and an institutionalized role for Democratic appointees as benefit brokers.

  • Well, at least they’ve got the electoral college going for them. Not that that will stop them from trying to do away with it.
    .

    Also, I suspect Amity Shlaes would disagree with Art Deco. But since that hasn’t moved off of the reading list and on to the pile of books being read, I really have no way of knowing.

  • Obama’s economic posing (can we really call it a policy?) strongly resembles FDR’s bungle-fest of the 1930s. FDR’s interventions in the US economy worsened and prolonged the Great Depression, much as we see Obammunism doing today.

    The generation that went ga-ga for FDR had a strong belief that the Federal government could be trusted and was competent. Obama’s preaching of hopeychangitude milked what remains of that trust to get himself elected. (Some people never learn.)

  • Both the old New Deal and the new New Deal were born in the belief that coveting thy neighbors goods is not a sin but a good deed–as long as the State does the grabbing on behalf of the envious and covetous. It’s all lies, of course.

    By the way, when will our bishops call this covetousness and theft what it is?

  • FDR’s interventions in the US economy worsened and prolonged the Great Depression, much as we see Obammunism doing today.

    Um, no. The economic contraction began around Sept. 1929 and lasted until about May 1933. FDR was not in office. There was a secondary contraction, much smaller, running from the beginning of 1937 to the middle of 1938. On average, real gdp grew by 9.7% per year over the period running from 1933 to 1941 and domestic product per capita in the latter year was higher than it had been in 1929. There were a number of ill-advised policies pursued during those years (the cartels set up by the National Recovery Administration and their analogues run by the USDA) and the labor market was badly injured. If you wish to complain that policy was not optimal, that’s valid. The thing is, policy never is.

  • Art, the 2nd contraction was the great depression and it was caused & prolonged by FDR’s policies. See here and here.

  • Actually, Obama is FDR in diapers.

    Pacem Art and Nate:
    .

    Additionally, the depression of 1920 -1921 (which was caused by the Fed) “healed” itself without Federal government, fiscal intervention. James Grant (interesting commentator) recently wrote a book on the subject.
    .

    If the New Deal et al were successful, why didn’t the economy “heal”, i.e., restore jobs and pay to full employment pre-1929 levels, until 1946? Becauise it was about replacing one elite with another.
    .

    New York Herald Tribune, May 16, 1939, Walter Lippman regarding the thrust of the New Deal, “ . . . one group is interested primarily in social reform and the other is interested in the control of the economic system.”
    .

    From Robert L. Bartley (RIP), WSJ, 10/20/2003, “The New Deal: Time for a New Look”: “The New Deal was not about economic recovery, but about displacing business as the nation’s predominant elite. FDR harked back to the founder of his party. In his 1832 veto of renewing the Bank’s (Second Bank of the United States) charter, Jackson complained that its profits went to foreigners and a ‘few hundred of our own citizens, chiefly of the richest class.’ Daniel Webster replied that the message was a ‘wanton attack on whole classes of people, for the purposes of turning against them the prejudices and resentments of other classes.’” The tradition runs even stronger today in the party of Obama.

Back When We Had A Real President

Friday, July 18, AD 2014

45 Responses to Back When We Had A Real President

  • It appears that rebel Ukraine insurgents are responsible, mistaking the Malaysian Airlines plane for a Ukrainian military transport – tape is on you tube apparently.

  • More than likely. This is directly at Putin’s door.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znjJzBvfAtA

    Don – here’s the you tube link.

  • The only man on the planet that is happy about this is Jimmy Carter. He is (by far) no longer the worst POTUS in history.

  • The question is: can the Republicans muster a real President again? The Democrats with their open advocacy of baby murdering and sexual perversion are clearly disqualified. That their President would think so lightly of a terrorist act against a civilian jet liner is simply consistent with their overall disregard for the sanctity of human life – that is to say, every human life but their individual own.

  • Paul, most of the Republicans at the national level are just as compromised as the Dems. If we get a real president again, he will have to come from an independent political movement not controlled or compromised by either party.

  • Stephen E Dalton: “If we get a real president again, he will have to come from an independent political movement not controlled or compromised by either party.”
    .
    My thoughts exactly for many months.

  • And he would have zilch chance of becoming President and ensure the election of the Democrat.

  • Don, the Republican Party is a dying party. The leadership is totally out of touch with its base. Any candidate who dares to run as a traditional American is either ignored or shot down by the national leadership. Even the Tea Party groups are disillusioned with the GOP. It’s the suicidal policies of the GOP, if continued, that will ensure it will never have a truly American president in the White House again. So why even bother to vote GOP if all they’re going to do is offer us a donkey in an elephant’s skin?

  • Which is why we should elect a liberal Republican like Jeb Bush or Chris Christie, so we can (maybe) teeter on the brink instead of plunging over the cliff with a progressive Democrat like Hillary Clinton or Elizabeth Warren? Yeah, that’ll work.
    .
    I realize I’m getting ahead of events, what with a midterm still coming up. Still, I’d rather have somebody in office I could actively oppose that somebody I’d have to passively not support.

  • “Don, the Republican Party is a dying party.”

    Actually by number of seats in Congress, legislative chambers controlled and the state houses occupied, the Republican party has not been stronger since the time of Calvin Coolidge.

    “The leadership is totally out of touch with its base.”

    No, the problem is that too many conservative candidates run in presidential primaries, especially too many no-hopers, and divide up the conservative vote. Perry would have probably been the nominee last time even so, if he had not self destructed.

    In 1960 at the Republican convention Goldwater told his fellow conservatives to grow up and take control of the party, and that is what happened under Goldwater and Reagan. That is what needs to happen again. A third party is a colossal waste of time and a dead end, as even a cursory study of American political history reveals.

  • If Republican’$ we’re focused and united in beliefs would there of been a movement such as the Tea Party?

    Was not the birth of the mvt. brought about by weak divided Republicans that caved into the liberals mentality. I am asking seriously speaking. Not sarcastically.

  • I would happily vote for Romney Ryan. If the republicans could unite, we could stand a chance. Some are so in the clouds ( or maybe the weeds) That they don’t use their common sense.
    Romney Ryan are two honest people who love. Obama and the people around him lie and manipulate. They don’t have that good foundation of truth and love. They are Self serving. Prone to lies, seek power for power sake. Romney Ryan are the polar opposite of Obama people.
    O’reilly not in favor of Romney, neither rove nor buchanan nor Krauthammer – what if God sent us good people for these particular times and we refused to recognize them because of intra-conservative bickering. If conservatives would agree to bury their high minded hatchets once and work together! They could elect their tea party or their Paul next time. Right now we need a competent president. We could rely on Romney Ryan but I don’t think republicans will do it . It would be sensible.

  • A new party can gather momentum very quickly and an established one can collapse spectacularly.

    The Labour party, formed in 1900, won 28 seats in the 1906 election, mainly because of a 1903 pact that the Liberals and Labour would not oppose each other in that election.
    In 1910, they won 42 seats, but in 1922, they won 142. In 1924, they won 191seats, against the Liberal’s 158, with whom they formed a coalition government, under the first Labour Prime Minister, Ramsay MacDonald; the Conservatives won a mere 258 seats.
    In a snap election that year, the Conservatives won a landslide with 412 seats and Labour won a mere 151.
    The really significant result in that election was that the Liberal party, the party of Palmerstone and Gladstone, of Asquith and Lloyd George, won a mere 40 seats and a rump party it remained for the rest of the century. In 1935, they held on to only 17 seats, 174 fewer than they had won only 11 years earlier and, in 1945, to only 12. In that election, Labour won 393 seats and the Conservatives 197. By contrast, 8 Independent candidates were elected.
    In 1951, the Liberals won a mere 6 seats, in five of which they Conservatives did not field a candidate. It is said that, on one occasion, they shared a taxi from the House of Commons to the Reform Club.

  • Don, that fact that the GOP has all these people in the state houses and in Congress is meaningless if they don’t vote right. Besides, where were all these people when we needed them in2012?
    The GOP not out of touch? Yeah, they were so in touch they gave us a Mormon candidate for President, sometime that really went over well with evangelical Protestants and Catholics. At least the Dems had a candidate who was not out of touch with his base of queers, socialists, abortionists, welfare clients, and other deviants.
    “Take control of the party”. The big money, country club people hate the Tea Party type people, and have done their worst to neutralize anything they have tried to do. They’re not going to allow us to have any say in the GOP. Oh, they will court us at election time, but when it’s all over, they will ignore us for the next four years like they have been doing all along. And you say 3rd parties are a waste of time? Well Don, what’s your winning strategy?

  • “Don, that fact that the GOP has all these people in the state houses and in Congress is meaningless if they don’t vote right.”

    The great deal of pro-life legislation that has passed in the states the GOP gained control of in 2010 indicates that most of them are voting right. As for Congress we control only one of the chambers.

    “Yeah, they were so in touch they gave us a Mormon candidate for President, sometime that really went over well with evangelical Protestants and Catholics.”

    Please. Romney’s Mormonism was a non-issue. What hurt him was a general wish-I-wash-I-ness on the issues, his frequent change of stances over the issues and a lack of fire in the belly to win. No shadowy cabal foisted Romney upon the party, but rather his winning the primaries in a divided field of conservative losers with no A-list conservatives choosing to run, with the exception of Perry who self-destructed.

    “And you say 3rd parties are a waste of time? Well Don, what’s your winning strategy?”

    Taking control of the party which should be relatively simply if in 2016 an A-list conservative runs and if, once again, the field does not consist of 5 or 6 conservatives and one moderates. As for third parties being a waste of time, please name me the last president to be elected by a third party. The most successful third party candidate in recent times was the paranoid lunatic Ross Perot in ’92 who succeeded in getting Clinton elected, and even he, with all his wealth, only got 19%.

  • “A new party can gather momentum very quickly and an established one can collapse spectacularly.”

    Not in American political history for over a century and a half. Major political parties have died twice in American history: the Federalists and the Whigs. The Federalists left no organized successor. Most Northern Whigs formed the Republican party in fusion with anti-slavery Democrats and free soilers. America has never had a shortage of third parties since then, but their chief characteristic in common has been an abysmal lack of success at the ballot box.

  • “If Republican’$ we’re focused and united in beliefs would there of been a movement such as the Tea Party?”

    The Tea Party was a spontaneous manifestation of outrage at the break the bank spending of the Obama administration. The label Tea Party is a misnomer. It is not a party and has had political success only by electing Republicans who sympathize with the movement. It has zero influence in the Democrat party, and any third party aspirations by “leaders” in the Tea Party have been stillborn.

  • “Which is why we should elect a liberal Republican like Jeb Bush or Chris Christie”

    Then work to ensure that they are not nominated. This is not directed at you Ernst, but too many conservatives are great at griping and simply do not learn to do nuts and bolts politics at the local level that allows them to gain influence within the party.

  • The utter callousness of this public appearance of Mr Obama yesterday, where in about 40 seconds he dispensed with the instantaneous erasing of 295 or so lives and preferably proceeded to his more suited inanely superficial cocktail-style jollity, only highlites even more his supremely self-adoring coldness with regard to others’ lives. This is evident whether seen in regards to those men and women whom he daily disregards being blown up in distant Afghanistan, or to those military now frantically being re-missioned to a situation called “dire” by the head military commandant in Iraq, or to his frank abandonment of 4 lives (it should have been a score or so more) in Benghazi, Libya.
    Only the Great Supreme Coryeanth’s life is of import; only the spotlight and focus should be on the Immortal Leader; only the nation cannot live without him.
    Usquequo, Domine?

  • If immigration reform regularizes the status of illegal aliens who will then become eligible to vote (this assumes they aren’t already voting), will it matter which candidate traditional Americans select to run for the Presidency or any other political office?
    .
    Catholic apologist Michael Voris has suggested that the heavy influx of illegal aliens into Texas will alter the electoral college vote of that state which will then permanently swing election results in favor of the Democrat Party.

  • Steve Phoenix.

    Great observation regarding his (Obama ) nonchalant segue into Biden humor.

    Might it be his years of blood stained hands supporting the murder of innocent lives? After all, life is cheap in the pro-death camp. What’s 298 more?
    Just a drop in the bucket for old Barry.

    Prayers for the heartless Nero coming.

  • Obama commented in May that he was going to turn Texas blue

  • “Don, that fact that the GOP has all these people in the state houses and in Congress is meaningless if they don’t vote right.”

    Many of those not voting right in our state are RINOs and/or neocons. Several of them were Democrats until recently when it became obvious that they would have to have an R by their name or would not get elected to their coveted political position. Changing the capitol letter by their name does not change their political positions/personal convictions–hence the less than conservative votes.

    “The great deal of pro-life legislation that has passed in the states the GOP gained control of in 2010 indicates that most of them are voting right. As for Congress we control only one of the chambers.”

    In our state there have always been state elected Democrats who would vote with Republicans to pass moderate pro-life and pro-family legislation. Now that many of the Rs are really Ds in R clothing, they are still willing to vote pro-life. In our state, the Republican Party was unable to achieve majority party status for the first time since reconstruction only with the fire power of the TEA Party working in the trenches along side the Republicans. Having the majority status allows the Republicans to have the chairmenship of relevant committees as well as the majority of the membership of given relevant committees–as well as a greater number of pro-life legislation being run. When the Ds were in the majority in both chambers in the past–thereby controlling the bills that were passed out of committee for votes by the full state house and state senate–pro-life bills were simply voted down in committee out of the sight of the public usually with no vote records of how each legislator voted in committee.

    I am finding that many of these new Rs call themselves conservative, when in reality the new Rs don’t have a real understanding of conservative political philosophies–they are really just Democrat-lights.

    There are a few, truly conservative matters outside of abortion where the Rs in our state vote correctly as a whole–but not many.

    Our Republican US Senator and US Congressmen also fail to vote consistently conservative.

  • Sorry.

    I meant to say:

    In our state, the Republican Party was ABLE to achieve majority party status for the first time since reconstruction only with the fire power of the TEA Party working in the trenches along side their side.

  • Barbara, thanks for elaborating on what I already knew to be true. The GOP is nothing more than a slightly conservative liberal party. The last half way conservative that we had in the White House was Reagan, and it’s been downhill ever since.

  • I assume you are from the tarheel state Barbara. On the pro-life front 2013 was a busy year:

    “What Happened in 2013:
    •North Carolina enacted an omnibus measure that includes a provision prohibiting sex-selection abortions and giving the state Department of Health discretion to apply ambulatory surgical center standards to abortion facilities.
    •The state limited funding for abortion through the health insurance plans offered through the health insurance Exchanges required by the Affordable Care Act or offered through local governments.
    •North Carolina enacted legislation requiring a physician to be present during the performance of the entire (surgical) abortion procedure. Physicians administering chemical abortion must be present for the administration of the first drug in an abortion-inducing drug regimen.
    •In a busy legislative session, the state also enacted a measure requiring public schools to teach children that there is a link between abortion and pre-term birth. The instruction will be part of a mandated public health curriculum.
    •North Carolina appropriated $250,000 to Carolina Pregnancy Fellowship.
    •The state enacted “Lily’s Law,” a measure providing that the crime of homicide includes situations where a child is born and dies from injuries received in utereo.
    •North Carolina considered legislation that would make assisted suicide unlawful; however, the bill lacked a criminal penalty for violations.
    •The state enacted a provision protecting individual healthcare providers who object to participating in abortions. The state also considered legislation offering or expanding protection for healthcare payers, but such legislation would not be enforceable against the so-called “HHS mandate” that requires nearly all health insurance plans to provide full coverage (without co-pay) of all “FDA approved contraceptives.””

    None of this would have been possible of course without both legislative chambers and the statehouse in North Carolina being controlled by the Republicans.

  • “If immigration reform regularizes the status of illegal aliens who will then become eligible to vote (this assumes they aren’t already voting), will it matter –which candidate traditional Americans select ..”— Slainte.

    Back in Phoenix, Arizona in the 2000’s, an in-law family member who is quite identifiably Mexican-American (because she is, but a legal US citizen, if it matters these days) sidled up to several Spanish-speaking, Mexican mothers (they said so in their conversation with her) meeting at the local elementary school up the street before a school bond election. They admitted in the course of their conversation that each of them were Mexican citizens and not legal US citizens or residents, but since they had children in the schools, the school district personnel “had invited them to vote” in the election.

    Our in-law, Diana, asked them how it was that they could vote: they explained that the school showed them how to obtain voter registration, ostensibly when they signed up for a drivers’ license; or, a second means were the many Democratic party registration workers who completed and turned in voter registration forms for them. It was all so easy. And once on the voting system, they were rarely purged. This is still why in one or two of the congressional districts in Arizona a reliably D. candidate will always be elected.

    So, look out, Texas: coming your way next.

  • I admit to being perplexed by those who strongly advocate for the elimination of producing proof of identity at voting precincts. It seems a reasonable measure to ensure the integrity of the voting process.

  • I don’t know if Barb is from the Tarheel state, but one thing that is overlooked about these victories is that a federal judge can declare some or all or these victories unconstitutional, just like all the state laws forbidding same sex marriages that were recently overturned by judicial fiat. So, what will the Tarheel GOP do then? Nullification anyone?

  • And voting third party does zilch to deal with the problem of an out of control Federal judiciary. Making certain that the next President is not a Democrat would help, and no third party candidate, even Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, and if it could be done he was the man to do it, has ever come within shouting distance of being President.

  • Don, I didn’t even mention 3rd parties in my latest post. Besides, since federal judges are appointed for life, voting for any party wouldn’t get rid of them. And I doubt the GOP has enough clout to impeach a single one of them. The only possible ways I can see to deal with this ongoing mess is nullification and if worst comes to worst, secession. The GOP will continue to ‘listen’ to it’s conservative base every election time, and turn around and betray the base by not doing anything about the current problems or helping to passing laws like the so-called Homeland Security Act that left us with fewer liberties that we had before.

  • I’m mildly shocked that no liberal/progressive has jumped on all this and called you “racists!”

    Of course, the definition of “racist” is someone that wins an argument with a liberal.

  • “since federal judges are appointed for life, voting for any party wouldn’t get rid of them.”

    It certainly radically impacts the new judges appointed, since they all nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The only way to do anything about the Federal judiciary is not to have the Democrats in control of the Senate and the Presidency. The Hobby Lobby case is a prime example of the usual difference between Republican nominated judges and those nominated by the Democrats. Neither secession nor nullification is a solution since neither would hold up in court, and any attempt to implement them by force would be a prime example of attempting to cure a patient by killing him.

  • Don, the voting demographics changed the last presidential election. Obama was elected by what amounted to a coalition of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities that our flawed immigration policies made possible. The Government giveaway programs will also insure that no matter who gets in power, if his party want to stay in power the freebies will have to continue to appease the minorities. The minorities are also increasing in population, while the British, German, Scandinavian, and French descended population is decreasing. Unless something’s happen to change this picture, the type of people who support the Republican party now will have no power or influence by 2050.

  • “Unless something’s happen to change this picture, the type of people who support the Republican party now will have no power or influence by 2050.”

    Precisely the same thing was said in the 1890’s when huge waves of immigrants came from Southern and Eastern Europe. Such projections ignore plunging birth rates among Hispanics on both sides of the border, and the steady process of assimilation. Italians were once regarded as solid Democrats. Now they are mainly Republicans.

  • Don, the people coming into this country right now don’t want to assimilate into our culture. They want to impose their third world culture on us. I don’t see large groups of Muslims wanting to join our churches or eat a pork chop. Rather, I have a mosque in my neighborhood, and halal food featured at the local restaurants. The Indians who have moved into our area have their temple in my neck of the woods. I don’t think large numbers of them are going to be eating a beefsteak or showing upo for baptism any time soon either. And these people who are coming across our border, may be nominally Catholic, are not here to become good Americans, but to make our southwestern states a part of what they call Aztlan. And based on what I’ve heard, they tend to drift away from even nominal Catholicism in a few years and become secular. Just what we need more of in America, eh? Assimilation was only possible when the founding stock was the majority population in this country. We are no longer the majority, and unless our population increases, assimilation will go the other way. BTW, how’s that Republican outreach to minorities doing? From what I’ve heard, they don’t give a damn about becoming GOP members. You don’t have any free stuff.

  • Couldn’t disagree more. With the possible exception of the muslims all these groups will assimilate into America over time. Your comment about the Republican outreach to minorities reminded me that prior to 9-11 most muslims in this country voted Republican. The idea that any minority group in this country is irrevocably locked into one party is historically false.

    Precisely the same arguments were made against the Irish immigrants in the 19th century by the Know-Nothings, that they would never assimilate into the American mainstream. Such fears betray a fundamental lack of faith in this ongoing experiment in self-government. We need to control the borders, but given time I have no doubt that assimilation will occur with the groups currently in this country.

  • @slainte, I realize your question is likely rhetorical, but since you are a lawyer, you tell me: Those who seek to enfranchise all, are playing off the ideal that voting is so important, such a sacred right, that to accidentally disenfranchise one person for lack of identification at the polling place would be tantamount to civic murder. ?

    Somehow based on the principle that “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.” The presumption of innocence. ?

    We’re never going to turn this thing around until a statesman or stateswoman stands up to defend the ideal that voting is so important, such a sacred right, that to accidentally enfranchise one person who is not a citizen is… stupid? Which requires a heartfelt defense of citizenship and sovereignty. But really, can it be so hard to say: Why should Mexican citizens vote in US elections? Why should US citizens vote in Mexican elections? And so forth.

    Politicians are too afraid to say this, even though it might appeal to legal immigrants of all nationalities, including legal immigrants from Mexico et al.

  • Of course, the focus of this article is on Ronald Reagan, “Back When We Had a President..”; and the contrast, with smoothly arrogant, cocktail-joking Barry is painfully evident, meanwhile as military personnel are trying to hold the fort at Afghanistan and their counterparts are getting the consolate roofs ready for a Miss Saigon exit in Iraq, bargaining with their lives in the process.

    And what about who is next in line? Well, consider this excerpt from Ronald Kessler’s newest book, “The First Family Detail”, soon to be released:
    Kessler also reveals that Hillary is routinely rude to the agents who are sworn to take a bullet for her.

    ‘”Because she is so nasty to agents and hostile to law enforcement officers and military officers in general, agents consider being assigned to her detail a form of punishment,” Kessler wrote.’ (Pagesix, Richard Johnson, 7/22/2014)

  • Tamsin,
    .
    I think many would agree that the integrity of the voting process depends on a careful balancing of a qualified voter’s “right to vote” subject to the state’s enacting measures reasonably calculated to minimize fraud and other abuses at polling precincts.
    .
    In light of the intentional disenfranchisement of members of the African American community (mostly in the southern states) in the 20th century, it makes sense that courts should carefully scrutinize the reasonableness of such security measures to ensure that they don’t, directly or indirectly, act to dissuade or disenfranchise any qualified voter from voting.
    .
    That said, however, laws requiring production of identification at polling precincts (ie., a driver’s license, a passport, employee photo identification, or a state issued ID from the Department of Motor Vehicles) constitute measures which don’t unduly burden or disenfranchise individuals or classes of persons. People routinely produce proof of identity to open bank accounts, cash checks, register their children with schools, and conduct a myriad of commercial transactions, why then would producing ID at a polling precinct be deemed oppressive? The integrity of the voting process trumps the small inconvenience experienced by the qualified voter’ some Courts disagree.
    .
    Producing ID at voting precincts might also help dissuade those who are not “qualified voters” from engaging in an illegal act by casting a vote he or she is not authorized to do.
    .
    Unfortunately there are some within the national political sphere today whose political philosophy is more closely aligned with that of 19th century NYC politician Boss Tweed (head of New York’s infamous Democrat club Tammany Hall) who, with his fellow political operatives, reminded beholden immigrant constituents of the 1850s and 1860s to “Vote Early and Vote Often”; whether Tweed was suggesting that his constituents cast multiple, rather than single votes is open to conjecture
    .
    But there is no doubt that Tammany paved the way to pressure large numbers of immigrant constituents (then the famine Irish) to follow the direction of political operatives. History does repeat.
    .
    National Public Radio recently interviewed author Terry Golway who claims that Tammany, corrupt to the core, has now been reinterpreted and found to have advanced progressive principles which historically benefitted immigrant communities thus qualifying it to be placed on the “right side of history”. What happened in New York in the 1800s is re-occurring on a national scale.
    .
    Here’s NPR’s interview of Terry Golway.
    .
    http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=286218423&m=286383330

  • “The party that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on Paul’s support.” G. B. Shaw
    .

    In other words, Golway is saying, “The end justifies the means.”
    .

    Zero Hedge: “What is the shelf life of a system that rewards confidence-gaming sociopaths rather than competence? Those in power exhibit hubris, arrogance, bullying, deception and substitute rule by elites for the rule of law. The status quo rewards misrepresentation, obfuscation, legalized looting, embezzlement, fraud, a variety of cons, gaming the system, deviousness, lying and cleverly designed deceptions.
    .

    “Our leadership was selected not for competence but for deviousness. What’s incentivized in our system is spinning half-truths and propaganda with a straight face and running cons that entrench the pathology of power.”

  • Yes, a free photo ID is not oppressive. Given there are so many other ways to stuff ballot boxes, amazing that Democrats resist this one measure to improve (at least the appearance of) ballot box integrity. They must figure it is a greater benefit to them, now and forevermore, to use this one facet of voting to scare black people, and soon enough brown people. The cynicism makes me sad.

  • In the UK, at polling stations, the clerk, having found the voter’s name and address in the Electoral Register, asks for the date of birth, which appears on the Returning Officer’s copy of the Register, but not in the published editions.

    The Register is updated annually, by returning a form sent to each household, or on-line, using a serial number on the return form. Anyone moving between return dates can still register individually.

    Most scandals have occurred around postal voting and properties in multiple occupation, where the names of former occupants have been kept on the register by the landlord. Jury citations provide a sort of (unintended) random check on this practice.

Impotence as Foreign Policy: Part II

Monday, May 12, AD 2014

Bring back our girs

Fresh off their laurels of establishing that the US has no policy regarding Vladimir Putin except to post disapproving internet pics, go here to read all about it, the Obama administration is trying the same thing in regard to the kidnaping of hundreds of Christian girls by the Boko Haram Islamic terrorists in Nigeria.  Needless to say that the pictures mention nothing about the main problem in Nigeria:  an inept and corrupt government and their Keystone Kops military, both of which are terrified by the terrorists who enjoy a fair amount of support among the half of Nigeria which is Muslim.

 

Mark Steyn gets to the heart of why the Obama administration does these idiot dog and pony shows:

 

 

The blogger Daniel Payne wrote this week that “modern liberalism, at its core, is an ideology of talking, not doing“. He was musing on a press release for some or other “Day of Action” that is, as usual, a day of inaction:

Diverse grassroots groups are organizing and participating in events such as walks, rallies and concerts and calling on government to reduce climate pollution, transition off fossil fuels and commit to a clean energy future.

It’s that easy! You go to a concert and someone “calls on government” to do something, and the world gets fixed.

There’s something slightly weird about taking a hashtag – which on the Internet at least has a functional purpose – and getting a big black felt marker and writing it on a piece of cardboard and holding it up, as if somehow the comforting props of social media can be extended beyond the computer and out into the real world. Maybe the talismanic hashtag never required a computer in the first place. Maybe way back during the Don Pacifico showdown all Lord Palmerston had to do was tell the Greeks #BringBackOurJew.

As Mr Payne notes, these days progressive “action” just requires “calling on government” to act. But it’s sobering to reflect that the urge to call on someone else to do something is now so reflexive and ingrained that even “the government” – or in this case the wife of “the government” – is now calling on someone else to do something.

Continue reading...

18 Responses to Impotence as Foreign Policy: Part II

  • Precisely.

    What defines a man is not what he imagines but what he does or does not do.

  • When I saw her # bring back our girls, I just wondered who she is addressing? Who does she want to bring them back? Just makes no sense at all.

  • I posted this on the original ‘fecklessness’ thread:
    More fecklessness: Dr Meriam Yahia Ibrahim (the wife of U.S. citizen Daniel Wani and the mother of 20 month old Martin Wani, who also is a U.S. citizen) was arrested and jailed in Khartoum in February 2014 on a charge of apostasy for being a Muslim woman – her father is Muslim – who married a Christian and adultery since Islamic law does not recognize their marriage, pregnant, has been beaten, denied medical care, and threatened with 100 lashes and death upon conviction. Her son is incarcerated with his mother because Islamic law prohibits his Christian father from having custody. The U.S. Embassy will not assist him without a DNA test proving that he is the son of Daniel Wani but the jail will not allow the testing.

    Yesterday the Sudanese court officially sentenced Dr. Ibrahim to 100 lashes and death. Her son, a U.S. citizen, will now pass into the Sudanese foster care system. Happy Mother’s Day. See http://www.persecution.org/2014/05/11/pregnant-mother-found-guilty-sentenced-to-death-by-sudanese-court-as-u-s-celebrates-mothers-day/

    “Modern liberalism, at its core, is an ideology of talking, not doing“. It seems we are usually too scared to even do any talking. Groupthink at work.

  • Someone should be buying those girls via undercovers posing as rich muslims but…days ago. I think they will machine gun the girls at the approach of any forces and they are not going to feed them much longer if he was partly unwittingly signalling that cash is needed in his “selling them” video. The Bin Laden thing is different in that no hostages were at risk.

  • Every time I see a photo of Moochelle, I think of Jezebel the wife of Ahab, and the story of Naboth the Jezreelite. The Obamas fill me with such loathing and contempt.

  • Let’s imagine for a moment TR lived in the digital age:

    #Pedicaris Alive or Raisuli Dead!

    Even our sloganeering isn’t what it used to be.

  • “Someone should be buying those girls….”
    .

    Because if you want more of something, incentivize it, right?

  • “Even our sloganeering isn’t what it used to be.”

    Yep. Teddy had Perdicaris released within less than a month and a half. His threat was backed up by battleships and several companies of Marines, and the fact that everyone knew that when TR made a threat it was a promise.

  • Maybe Obama could go apologize for something and offer Michelle up as a swap??? Better yet, he could give Boko Harim a case of autograph copies of “Dreams of my Father whoremongering drunkard Socialist.”

    This is a serious and tragic event…..the presidency of the first Muslim of the U.S.A. And yes the inability to tell Americans the truth. The girls and their families are in my prayers.

  • Ernst,
    How do you picture an armed attack working on suicidal men who think they get many girls in paradise if they die fighting for Islam? You can kill them later when you’ve bought the girls into safety.

  • This is pathetic.
    The girls were kidnapped nearly a month ago; having tested the waters of public opinion, they decide to do something as a token of their concern.

    Wife to husband: ” What are you doing today?”
    Husband: “Nothing.”
    Wife: ” But you did that yesterday!”
    Husband: ” I haven’t finished yet.”

  • Buying the girls back only gets more girls kidnapped for ransom.

    Doing this right means using American Special Ops backed up by a Marine Expeditionary Force and Naval Air assets.

    So the Nigerians’ best bet would be to kidnap about twice as many Muslim girls and do a straight up exchange.

  • “.. girls were kidnapped nearly a month ago; having tested the waters of public opinion, they decide to do something as a token of their concern.” Don the Kiwi

    Everything is a play, a ploy! Shallow selfish amateurs who talk and preen and game the world.
    How do we get out of this?

  • Repealing the 17th and 19th amendments would be a good start. So would restricting the franchise to the 53% of adults who actually pay taxes, or some other kind of skin-in-the-game type requirement. Requiring would-be voters to demonstrate a minimum of civic literacy awareness wouldn’t hurt either, but that would go over about as well as Voter ID laws.

  • Pingback: Politico Wants Envoy for Persecuted Christians - God & Caesar
  • “Requiring would-be voters to demonstrate a minimum of civic literacy awareness wouldn’t hurt either, but that would go over about as well as Voter ID laws.”
    .
    Voter ID laws prevent fraud. Land ownership, literacy and the rest rely upon the age of informed consent at emancipation. Otherwise, the voters represent the minors.

  • As effete as they are in international affairs, they are efficacious in ruining America . . . [sigh]

    Ballots?

    Soon enough it will be bullets.

  • I disagree with you T.Shaw. Obama in 2008 led the Democrats to the peak of their political power since their win in 1964. Under Obama’s presidency, the Republicans have taken control of more state legislatures than at any time since Calvin Coolidge was President, retaken the House and it looks like the GOP will probably retake the Senate. It is possible that historians will look back on Obama as the last gasp of FDR’s New Deal, the swan song of the welfare state in this country. We shall see.

The Chicago Way: Bernardin and Obama

Friday, February 7, AD 2014

Seamless Garment

I have long thought that the Church is quite able to deal with outside enemies.  The true difficulties for the Church are from forces within the Church who aid and abet outside enemies.  Nicholas G. Hahn III, editor at Real Clear Religion, gives us a prime example of this in a riveting article in The Wall Street Journal on the late Cardinal Bernardin and Barack Obama:

 

That might not be such a good idea. There is an irony in the Catholic Church’s current legal clashes with Washington over the Affordable Care Act’s restrictions on religious freedom: The Obama administration is very much a creature of the Chicago church under Bernardin. When Notre Dame University bestowed an honorary degree on President Barack Obama in May 2009, the veteran community organizer told graduates that the “saintly” Cardinal Bernardin inspired him to become an activist.

As Phyllis Schlafly and George Neumayr noted in “No Higher Power: Obama’s War on Religious Freedom” (2012), much of Mr. Obama’s education in public policy came in the rectories of Chicago’s South Side churches and, in part, on Cardinal Bernardin’s dime. The archdiocese in 1986 paid for Mr. Obama to attend a community-organizing training session with a    Saul Alinsky-founded group in Los Angeles.

Cardinal Bernardin, who led the archdiocese from 1982 until his death in 1996, espoused a liberal line that has helped give pro-abortion Catholic supporters of the Obama administration theological cover. Mr. Obama told reporters in July 2009 that “his encounters with the cardinal continue to influence him, particularly his ‘seamless garment’ approach to a multitude of social justice issues.”

The president was alluding to a widely noted 1983 speech wherein Bernardin applied the Biblical story of Jesus’ tunic “woven in one piece from the top down” to public-policy issues. He maintained that matters as varied as the death penalty, the minimum wage and how to wage war should be considered on the same moral plane as abortion. This pernicious idea has been rebuffed by many Catholic intellectuals, not the least of whom was the future Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger, who in a 2004 memo wrote that “not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia.

Continue reading...

24 Responses to The Chicago Way: Bernardin and Obama

  • Of course, no one in his sound and sober senses would claim that “all moral issues have the same moral weight.”

    However, in one of his University Sermons, Bl John Henry Newman noted a “peculiarity in developments in general, is the great remoteness of the separate results of a common idea, or rather at first sight the absence of any connexion. Thus it often happens that party spirit is imputed to persons, merely because they agree with one another in certain points of opinion and conduct, which are thought too minute, distant, and various, in the large field of religious doctrine and discipline, to proceed from any but an external influence and a positive rule; whereas an insight into the wonderfully expansive power and penetrating virtue of theological or philosophical ideas would have shown, that what is apparently arbitrary in rival or in kindred schools of thought, is after all rigidly determined by the original hypothesis.”

    In that sense, surely, we can reasonably speak of the demands of the Gospel as a seamless garment.

  • The “seamless garment” worn by Christ is purity, virtue and innocence. Crime is a tear in the fabric of society. The tear must be mended by restitution and reconstruction and return to Justice. Putting an innocent person to death for the crimes of his parents, rape, incest, failing, is the forfeiture of Justice, the annihilation of the state constituted to promote the common good and general welfare and most of all “the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our (constitutional) posterity.”

  • The criminal in the White House is not covered by the “seamless garment”. The “seamless garment” does not dry rot. The “seamless garment is woven of truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

  • Cardinal Bernardin’s name was released in the required published disclosure by the current Diocese of Chicago for his part in aiding and abetting sexual child abuse by transferring around abusive Priests and keeping their activities secret.

    CCC: ” 1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
    – by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
    – by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
    – by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
    – by protecting evil-doers.”

  • I read it on the LIRR this AM. This op-ed article is one of the infrequent causes for me to nod my head and say, “This was worth the subscription price.”

    Sound advice from Glenn Beck, “If your priest pushes social justice, find another parish.” And from me, don’t give any money to your bishop.

    Money quote: “. . . [the polished liar/racial racketeer/community agitator] Obama’s education in public policy came in the rectories of Chicago’s South Side churches and, in part, on Cardinal Bernardin’s dime. The archdiocese in 1986 paid for Mr. Obama to attend a community-organizing training session with a Saul Alinsky-founded group in Los Angeles.”

    Only thing: New Yorkerslikley would challenge Chicago as the lead for Catholics in the section of this Vail of Tears known as the USA.

  • Chicago is a very interesting city, even ecclesiastically. Chicago’s presbyterate (the priests as a whole) is extremely complex, and to give them a broad brush stroke would be unfair, but it is certainly well known that some priests of the Archdiocese of Chicago have been involved with a particular bent on what is commonly called ‘social justice’. It is safe to say that Catholic Social teaching and the principles of Saul Alinsky do not coincide. It is safer to say that they are opposed to each other. The radicalization of some of the priests [as the article puts it-on the South side of Chicago] took place within the civil rights movement of the 60’s and then moved into the anti-war movement and then other ’causes’. In many ways, like the ‘nuns for choice’ etc. they said they were basing this on the Church’s call for justice etc but had actually had gone off the rails themselves.

    Cardinal Bernadin did not come from Chicago. His journey is complex but he became a protage of Cardinal Deardon of Detroit who himself was a protage of Archbishop Hanlon of Atlanta. Cardinal Bernadin was not responsible for the radicalizaton of some of his priests, however he was responsible for the way he led his Archdiocese and led the American Bishops toward a more ‘progressive’ approach to various subjects during his long presence in the USCCB, especially in the “seamless garment’ metaphor.

    The situation in Chicago has not changed very much. Poor Cardinal George, a brilliant as well as orthodox Cardinal Archbishop could only effect certain things within Chicago. Now past retirement age and in very poor health, he awaits Pope Francis to accept his resignation and appoint a younger and hopefully very able successor. The more radicalized priests (again a minority in Chicago) are rapidly aging and will soon disappear from the scene. The well known Father Robert Barron is now the rector of the Chicago seminary so we can expect very good things coming from there.

    As for Cardinal Bernadin, we entrust his soul to God and His mercy. History is already beginning to judge his tenure as Archbishop, but it might be some time before we have a real good insight just how good or bad he was for Chicago and the Church in America.

  • “. . . the “’seamless garment’ metaphor.”

    That is not an implied comparison but a twisting of Scripture to rationalize a humanistic agenda.

    The “seamless garment” is not a parable; not something that Jesus said or taught. It was St. John’s narrative of the Roman executioners divying up Jesus’ possessions and, thus, fulfilling the prophecy, “They divided my clothes among themselves and gambled for my robe.” And, exactly that is what bernadin and his ilk did with Christ’s Church.

  • Certainly there are various degrees of gravity. I would agree that in some sense the seamless garment metaphor, properly understood, has some value. What I never understood is, if you are a seamless garment subscriber, that means you must agree abortion is at least as important as ony other issue – so how can you be justified in voting for a pro-abort? The seamlessness seems to be sewn in only one direction.

  • A seamless garment can cloak Cthulhu too. And because of the Bernardin-oids, one does!

  • He maintained that matters as varied as the death penalty, the minimum wage and how to wage war should be considered on the same moral plane as abortion.

    As our esteemed host might say, rubbish on stilts. Bernadin specifically said in two addresses on the topic of consistent ethic of life that abortion and euthanasia were not interchangeable with capital punishment, because the former involved the deliberate taking of innocent life. His view (and that of John Paul II and Benedict XVI) on capital punishment was that while the state retained the right to execute criminals to protect the common good, modern day techniques of incarceration made the majority the the executions carried out today unnecessary.

    One can argue that his consistent ethic of life argument was flawed, that it led to politicians treating all the life and justice issues as a kind of zero sum game (if I am extra-against poverty or capital punishment I can be as pro-abortion as I like). But if that was the effect, then that was not his intent.

  • When it came to abortion, Cardinal Bernardin occasionally said the right thing but he almost always gave Catholic pro-abort politicians enough wiggle room to neuter the strong condemnation of them by the Church that might well have made a difference. A good example is this story from the New York Times in 1990:
    http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/21/us/cardinal-accepts-discord-on-abortion.html

    “Cardinal Bernardin seemed to be trying to chart a middle ground for Catholics, including a number of his fellow bishops who have been unhappy with these confrontations.

    He took issue both with public officials who say they are personally opposed to abortion but do not want to impose their views on others and with abortion opponents who reject the possibility of political compromise on the issue.

    Cardinal Bernardin, who is generally seen as a spokesman for the moderate to liberal wing of the Catholic hierarchy, said that ”moral consistency requires that personal conviction be translated into some public actions” to limit abortion. But he added, ”Many Catholics, politicians and ordinary citizens, will disagree on strategies of implementation to lessen and prevent abortions.”

    These matters, including the political stances taken by the bishops, he said, ”are open to debate.”

    Focus on ‘Protest and Power’

    Cardinal Bernardin said the public debate after the Supreme Court’s decision enlarging the powers of state legislatures to limit access to abortion had focused largely on ”protest and power” and the question ”who decides?” This emphasis, he said, ”reduces the compelling moral question -How do we recognize the human among us? – to a procedural problem.”

    Cardinal Bernardin said effective opposition to abortion had to address the ”60 percent of Americans who do not identify themselves completely with either of the major voices in the abortion debate.” He described this group as ”generally opposed to abortion on demand but ambiguous about how many restrictions to place on it.””

  • The bottom line is Bernardin sold out the catholic church to the contraception and abortion culture. Articles like this one help us to understand what really happened to the church in the past five decades. Imagine, church money used to send Obama to a Saul Alinsky inspired conference in California. Maybe the answer is to continue educating ourselves as to why there are so few homilies on the culture of death, specifically contraception and abortion. At the same time, we can reduce contributions to the collection basket and use it instead to buy media resources that expose this “crime of our age.” I moved to the Chicago area in 1986 and can tell you the majority catholic church culture is in an embrace of the culture of death. If this sounds like an exaggeration, consider 90+% of females in the child-bearing age group are contracepting. This is intrinsic evil and paired with weekly reception of the Eucharist brings condemnation on many including the priests and bishops that promote it and “look the other way.”

  • “His view (and that of John Paul II and Benedict XVI) on capital punishment was that while the state retained the right to execute criminals to protect the common good, modern day techniques of incarceration made the majority the the executions carried out today unnecessary.”
    i) Not I, nor the state, but only the victim can forgive his murderer. I can forgive my murderer. I cannot forgive your murderer without becoming an accessory after the fact in giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
    .
    ii) Only God owns the human person and God has endowed the human person with free will and freedom. The state does not own the victim or the murderer.
    .
    iii) It is the duty of the state to provide Justice.
    .
    iv) ““It in no way depends upon the caprice of the Pope, or upon his good pleasure, to make such and such a doctrine, the object of a dogmatic definition. He is tied up and limited to the divine revelation, and to the truths which that revelation contains. He is tied up and limited by the Creeds, already in existence, and by the preceding definitions of the Church. He is tied up and limited by the divine law, and by the constitution of the Church. Lastly, he is tied up and limited by that doctrine, divinely revealed, which affirms that alongside religious society there is civil society, that alongside the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy there is the power of temporal Magistrates, invested in their own domain with a full sovereignty, and to whom we owe in conscience obedience and respect in all things morally permitted, and belonging to the domain of civil society.” – John Henry Cardinal Newman
    .
    vi) Come forward all you who will exchange a prison cell for rigor mortis.

  • v) Like many, Bernardin did not know that the newly fertilized human egg was endowed with a rational, immortal human soul and sovereign personhood, created in moral and legal innocence and virtue. St. Thomas Aquinas knew when he said that the body is the form of the soul. No soul, no life, no growth, no need for abortion.
    .
    Bernardin ought to have known if he truly accepted and believed in the Immaculate Conception. God creates a pure soul. Only after the human soul is received into the human body must it deal with concupiscence. Our Lady said “YES” to God from the very first moment of her conception and said “YES” forever, and even now says “YES” to God for We, the people.
    .
    Faults and failing, yes, but Bernardin inserted his ignorance into matters of the state where it infested itself. Looking to become the next and the first American Pope, Bernardin ought to have held his opinions to himself until he had the Magisterium to correct him. That is papal behavior.

  • “…the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.”

    Preface to Rules for Radicals

    Saul Alinsky

  • I believe the book (Rules for Radicals, Aulinsky) is dedicated to Satan.

  • Sickening!! Absolutely sickening!! It makes you wonder about his relationship with God as he obviously had a VERY warped understanding of moral absolutes & what was necessary for the forgiveness of sin to be offerred to us!

  • That Lucifer gained his own kingdom by refusing God as Saul Alinsky said cannot be, since annihilation is not a kingdom. Annihilation is nowhere. Annihilation is annihilation, constant and forever.
    .
    Saul Alinsky begged God, (not an atheist) to send him to hell when he died. Obama is following him.

  • Say what you will about Cardinal Bernardin — he certainly had his faults and he was definitely not the greatest administrator the Archdiocese of Chicago ever had — I have never forgotten an incident reported in the Catholic press shortly after his death about an abortion provider in Northwest Indiana who was so moved by the wall-to-wall Chicago media coverage of the Cardinal’s death, that he renounced his abortion practice. How many other prelates — how many other Catholics in general — can say their example brought about even one such conversion? I know I can’t claim to have done anything like that. Perhaps it was a case of God writing straight with crooked lines.

  • Also, I dunno that Saul Alinsky’s “dedication” of “Rules for Radicals” to Lucifer was necessarily meant to be taken seriously. I suspect he did it simply because he was an agitator at heart and liked to get a rise out of people. Getting all bent out of shape about it and wielding it as “proof” that everything he did and everything he may have inspired, including Obama’s community activism, is all part of a Satanic plot is just playing right into his hands.

  • EK: God did not create evil. Satan is the enemy. He is evil. He is the father of all evil.

    Satan’s greatest victories come when people do not recognize evil/sin.

    St. Augustine says it (for me) best. “The only evils these people recognize are having to endure hunger, disease, and murder. It is as though man’s greatest good were to have everything good, except himself.”

    It appears that guys like Bernabin, Lfluger, Wright, et al came to think (maybe they don’t think, they “feel”) that fighting class/race wars and voting democrat qualify for some sort of a “Get Out of Hell Free” card.

  • “Saul Alinsky begged God to send him to hell when he died.”

    Given the perverse affection for Lucifer expressed by Alinsky, perhaps God expressed His infinite mercy by consigning to the Evil One the fate of Alinsky’s soul:

    Masochistic Alinksy: “Hurt me, hurt me!!”
    Sadistic Lucifer: “No, no!!”

  • Pingback: The Holy Souls of Purgatory - BigPulpit.com
  • Mike Petric: “Masochistic Alinksy: “Hurt me, hurt me!!”
    Sadistic Lucifer: “No, no!!” ”
    .
    LOL

PopeWatch: Obama and Limbaugh

Thursday, December 5, AD 2013

VATICAN-POPE-AUDIENCE

 

Well, what do you know.  The most anti-Catholic President in our nation’s history is suddenly quoting popes.

During a Wednesday speech on income equality, Obama remarked, “Across the developed world, inequality has increased. Some of you may have seen just last week, the pope himself spoke about this at eloquent length.”

He went on to quote a line from Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation “Evangelii Gaudium,” asking, “How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?”

Obama called the growing income gap the “defining challenge of our time,” along with the increasing difficulty of upward economic mobility, AP reported.

That is truly hilarious when one considers that Obama has been President now for almost half a decade and that his policies have succeeded only in exacerbating income inequality with his truly wretched stewardship of the economy.  Rush Limbaugh who, unsurprisingly, has been highly critical of the economic portions of Evangelii Gaudium, recognizes that the Pope’s popularity with the port side of our political spectrum is only fleeting because of the Pope’s position on abortion, the holy of holies for the Left:

Continue reading...

17 Responses to PopeWatch: Obama and Limbaugh

  • Did the writer of this article read The Popes letter? Pope Francis is not in agreement with the left on their anti capitalism views. His words were anti CONSUMERISM, greed and envy.

    He never once uses the word Capitalism. Please, go back and re-read his actual words.

  • Everything Obama spews out is counter-factual.

    If Obama was concerned about income inequality, he would confront the income inequality between Washington, DC and the United States of America. From 2006 to 2012, DC median household income (MHI) skyrocketed 23%, while America’s MHI crash-dived 7%.

  • Pingback: Pope Francis to Create Commission on Sex Abuse of Minors - Big Pulpit
  • So much social justice . . . so little charity.

    In NJ, 50,000 sign up for on-line gambling and 741 sign up for ObamaCare.

    Obama says, “We’re not going back . . . “ to that horrid time when 87% of Americans were happy with their health insurance.

  • I read the item by Adam Shaw on FoxNews. I thought it a bit…harsh, but also somewhat understandable. Most Catholics (I know anyway) do NOT get their news about this or that Church teaching from the Catechism, or from a Catholic Newspaper such as the NC Register (or even the NC Reporter), or Catholic blogs, or websites such as The American Catholic. Or even from the local Diocesan website. Assuming they even wanted to read Evangelii Gaudium themselves (assuming of course it occurred to them to actually read it for themselves), they wouldn’t know where to look. They get their news of things Catholic from CCN, NBC, NY Times, Time magazine, Fox News, Limbaugh, whatever. I suspect Mr. Shaw didn’t read EG, until after his mind had been made up for him about what the Pope said (tried to say?) by the secular news media.

    If all I had heard about the latest Apostolic Exhortation (I wonder how many of the Catholics I know understand the different between an AE and an Encyclical–heck, I am not sure I am clear on it) was what Limbaugh had said, I think I might have just thrown in the towel and said, “No more. I will no longer participate in an organization (the Church) that does not care about my children’s future and in fact, actively promotes the destruction of it.”

    Perhaps it is time for the Pope to abandon the “wide ranging” documents and interviews that can be massaged into the latest secular-news-media message, in favor of short, clear, precise twitter feeds and FB posts, although I hear the young people are abandoning FB since it is no longer a “cool” place. Too many middle aged moms posting pictures of soccer games, dinner recipes, and Grump Cat memes.

  • I will confess that I didn’t read the Pope’s Exhortation, and I’m trying really hard to ignore the secular media. I get the tidbits from here & other Catholic blogs & commentators who I know are faithful, practicing Catholics. And I haven’t read it because I am an overly busy homeschooling mom of 3. But, I want to ask a question. Are we even called to be “equal”? I was thinking about this last night for some reason. God made us each as completely unique individuals, each with our own strengths & talents. I don’t see how we could possibly be called to be “equal.” My definition of equal may be different than someone else’s definition, right? None of Jesus’ parables talk about Him giving the same things to anyone. He talked about one guy getting 10 talents, one guy 5, and one guy 1. That’s not equal. He talked about some people working all day long & some people working for an hour, and they got the same pay. In my mind, that’s not equal. All my life, I’ve been taught, and I am training my children, to be happy for those who have, and pray for & help those who have not. It seems like the left/progressives goes out of their way to find leaders, even if they hate them in principle, to agree with their messed up ideas on how other people should live… because as we all know, “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.”

  • What I don’t understand is why the Pope and his aides don’t realize and anticipate the problems his statements cause.. Intended or not, if you know anti Catholics like Obama and the liberals who have recently become fans of the Pope are waiting to USE you for their benefit and turn your words around to prove their point, you might be more clear about what you are meaning. Communication 101–right ??

  • From what I can tell thus far Dan, the Pope seems fairly unconcerned about how his writings and comments are interpreted. I think that is the best case analysis.

  • Liberals want to feed the poor, but they don’t want to make them work. They want to hand out money, but they don’t want to make sure it isn’t used fraudulently. Up the minimum wage irrespective of one’s qualifications or work requirements. Punish the rich with higher taxes they didn’t earn it all by themselves. Let anyone and everyone into the county it will all work out. Encourage women to be sex machines then when the free contraception doesn’t solve all problems give them free abortions. There is no responsibility for anyone’s actions and no respect for others property or accomplishments because it is up for grabs.

  • I’ve read about 1/3 of Papa’s Exhortation between my vocational duties as wife and mother and honestly – respectfully, I disagree with his economical stance. I spoke with this yesterday with my husband knowing that it wouldn’t be long before the exhortation became a weapon of the left’s. I don’t’ agree that it is just about Consumerism… he was clear in paragraph 54 that he believes Capitalism is wrong: 54.
    In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system.

    However, if what Phillip is saying from the Breibart report that there is a translation error, I will be the happiest free-market American Catholic around – I sure hope they fix this soon. If not, this too shall pass under God’s protective guidance.

  • I just wish people would speak and write and teach plainly! I read the document and as a cradle Catholic I read between the lines. I too feel that he was speaking in reference to the greed and avarice of making money a false idol. However “if you are not Catholic” or a liberal Catholic there is enough gaps to really confuse those who don’t read the Bible, or know the Catechism, or the Corporal Works of Mercy, or the seven sins, or the Ten Commandments, or the teachings of the Church on matters of faith and morals. Double speak leads to confusion. Diablo, Dante, Diabolical. The “irrational” mind, will “always” find a way to “rationalize” your personal self. “I feel so much better when I think I am not sinning or not as bad as that other guy”. Especially if you really don’t know the teachings of your faith and you choose to pick and choose your sources. Wah Lah! When I made money, I gave so much away without any fanfare. Now I am experiencing the other side of the tracks again I still understand my responsibility to the Lord and his people. I think that is what the Holy Father is talking about. Of course, dementia could be setting in and I am all wrong.

  • I must admit that I don’t read between the lines of most articles, most especially ones that hold such importance for the fear that I would be putting too much of my own ideas into somebody else’s writings and mis-construe the intention of the letter. I think that can become dangerous and cause miscommunication which leads to disaster. However, with that said, I agree that much of what was written on greed would be fixed, and so would most of our economic problems if all persons followed the example of Christ in charity of all kinds. As I read his exhortation I kept thinking of The Rich Man and Lazarus. The problem with the rich man wasn’t that he had money rather it was that he ignored the plight of Lazarus, the beggar. He did nothing to ease his medical problems or hunger. The rich man went to Hades because of his lack of charity, which was a spiritual issue, and would not have made a bit of difference if he was forced to give to the beggar. Trickling down our money to the poor should be a choice not a forced issue. God gave us our freedom to love Him – we show our love for Him by feeding, clothing, caring for His children. To do otherwise is evil. Simply said, to be forced to give takes our opportunity to love Him away. In equality, God did not make us equal. He gave specific talents of different kinds to His children so that together, we can help one another. Helping needs to come from our heart not the sword or government taxes. On this site alone I see the beautiful, philosophical writing of great Christians alongside those like me, who wish they could communicate better, but writes from the heart as best as possible. I believe being able to think and write clearly stems from first, a gift of wisdom then built upon by loads of studying and education.

    On a personal note: I know for my family, we went from living comfortably as middle-class American citizens to not even being able to buy the food we need to live week to week, and our charitable giving went down to feed our children and make the mortgage under this current administration. Our freedom to give has been taken away by higher taxes. We live in a modest home, with one car that has over 209,000 miles on it and is a gas guzzler. Our children do not have cell phones or decent clothes and our fence fell down last year. We are fixing it 10 boards at a time as money becomes more available. Trickle-down economics only hurts citizens – that has been proven across America, I know I’m not the only one suffering.

  • “Trickle-down economics only hurts citizens – that has been proven across America, I know I’m not the only one suffering.”
    .
    I think this is a good example of part of the problem–lack of a common definitions to economic terms, or at least the terms we use in everyday speech. To my way of thinking, pretty much every economic decision I make that requires money (not all economic decisions require money) is part of “trickle-down economics”–from the groceries I buy, the swim lessons, USTA tennis league fees, gasoline, the home-school curriculum I purchase, the Christmas presents, the tree and lawn services. And yes, I even gave to the my sons’ private school fund a donation (not tax deductible, although I get no direct benefit from it) to cover the teacher’s Christmas Bonus.

    I do not see how my spending my money on this or that thing I want (or need) is a bad thing. (If it were porn, yeah, that’d be a bad thing.) Yes, I suppose, instead of paying my son’s swim coach to teach him to swim, I could just give her the money as a “charity” and allow my son to rot in front of the television, but why not require her to work for 30 minutes in order to get my money? I could just give the school my sons attend part time money and teach them science myself, but why not pay them to do a service for me I’d rather not do? To me, that is all “trickle down.”

  • Just as one must avoid the same mistake when interpreting Sacred Scripture:

    “take a TEXT out of CONTEXT and you get a PRETEXT”

    Rush and others have taken Pope Francis’ words out of context

    http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/131130

  • People will quote Christ when it suits them and they will quote the Pope when it suits them.
    I’m getting a little tired of all the talk about theory…. would like a little less theory and a little more response to events. “How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?”
    I ask “How can it be that it is not news (what happened down Argentina way) and neither Obama nor the Pope nor Charlie Rose nor Bill O’Reilly have anything to say.
    Obama uses this opportunity to make it seem that he and the pope have the same theoretical priorities. Another quick movement of the walnut shell. We need to keep our eyes on thinking about the dignity of man, rich or poor.

ObamaCare Crashes, And So Does Obama

Thursday, November 21, AD 2013

One could not ask for a better symbol of ObamaCare than yesterday when HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the woman purportedly in charge of this mess, was meeting with ObamaCare “navigators”, and I love the Orwellian implications of that title, and the ObamaCare website crashed.

The remarkable thing about this fiasco on stilts is that the Obama administration knew, or should have known, that the website was not going to work.  Obama could have simply announced that he was going to delay the individual mandate for a time period which would have given time to at least make the website operational.  Why didn’t they?

Overwhelming hubris I think.  Shielded by a sycophantic press from every other disaster that has hit the country under his misrule, I think Obama assumed that this would be the same.  Every problem encountered with the website or implementation of  ObamaCare could be blamed on those obstructionist Republicans.  Indeed, Obama is still trying to do this now, when it is obvious that such an absurd strategy is not working and cannot work.

Obama forgot the first rule of politics:  reality always wins in the end.  A website that does not work, mass cancellations of insurance policies, sky-rocketing premiums and deductibles, less choice regarding doctors and hospitals, these are the reality of the hilariously named Affordable Care Act.  No amount of speeches, no biased news coverage, no liberal true believers on blogs can alter it.

Continue reading...

21 Responses to ObamaCare Crashes, And So Does Obama

  • I entirely agree: it is pride that kept him from seizing the branch with a deal to avoid the shut down by delaying the role out. The President just cannot imagine admitting he is wrong. This is curious to me since the mark of maturity is the acknowledgment that one is all too human and, therefore, flawed. It is interesting that you mention FDR in your piece. I read three biographies and was left with the same impression I have of President Obama now. “Hubris,” a pretty sounding little word for a self-defeating human trait.

  • It is not fair to compare FDR to Obama. The former confronted a far more severe set of challenges than the latter and managed to meet them (with some bad decisions along the way and some other decisions that had unfortunate downstream consequences).

    Megan McArdle, who has never been a political partisan, is someone to read on this question among those who write for general audiences. Her tentative conclusion surveying the landscape is that it looks as if BO & co have managed to ruin the market for household medical insurance policies. Megan McArdle has in the past worked for several start-up firms in the IT sector. She has been shaking her head in dismay at what she hears coming out of the Administration’s flacks and also at the original decision to have the Center for Medicaid and Medicare Services manage the project.

    It implicates the President quite directly. He fancied that the person to put in charge of policy in the realm of financing medical care was a woman named Nancy-Ann deParle. She is, of course, an attorney (and a graduate of Harvard Law School).

  • As an agenda, liberalism is a fiasco. However, the oversupply of resentful, dull and illogical people keeps expanding. Ergo the push for “Common Core” brainwashing.

    And, the failures that caused the US to not recover from the Great Depression until 1946 can be traced to FDR and his gang of statist quacks.

    In addition to IRS apparatchniks quashing independent political speech in 2012, the regime lied about unemployment statistics.

  • D.S.,

    The zero’s problems are a hustler’s hubris and the abject absence of arete.

    Only in America: Aeschylus, Homer, Sophocles, et al would not include in their classics such a dud as Ofama.

  • This is great:

    http://rsc.scalise.house.gov/solutions/rsc-betterway.htm

    I just hope the backlash is strong enough to get a sufficient number of GOP Ken dolls off their polystyrene backsides and act, that there’s a big enouigh Republican capture in both House and Senate to either snowball the bill or, ideally, override any veto from Poobah Barry.

  • No, wait!

    Homer included at least one obama-like character in The Iliad. See Book I, Thersites.

  • the failures that caused the US to not recover from the Great Depression until 1946 can be traced to FDR and his gang of statist quacks.

    Once more around the block. Real gross domestic product per capita had returned to its 1929 level by 1939. By 1941, this metric was 20% higher than it had been in 1929, which is what you would expect from long-term trends in the growth of real gdp. The labor market remained in troubled condition.

  • The Prince. Written by Machivelli. Our current president is the closest I have seen to the spirit of that book. Just to appear to be like he cares is enough. And the sheeple buy it hook line and sinker. He can do what he wants and gets a free pass. How does this dibacle actually affect him? In all seriousness – it will not. Polls say one thing and if he ran for office tomorrow he would win again because of the blind sheeple out there that will vote themselves to the slaughter. My hope lies in Christ not in politics – thank you Lord.

  • Robert,

    That’s largely a result of the five-year “tongue bath” (see Iowahawk) he’s gotten from the so-called media. He enjoys a 97% approval rate from his cheerleaders. The people have him at 37%.

    Art:

    I love you, man!

    What was the unemployment rate in 1941?

    Answer: 9.66%. The year prior – 1940 – it was 14.45%.

    Beginning in 1933 when FDR took conrol the u/e rates were: 24.75%; 21.6%; 19.97%; 16.8%; 14.81%; 18.91%; and 17.05%. Plus, the people working often had lower wages, fewer hours.

    Here’s the point. President Thersites and his band of central planners are putting the US through an unnecesary weaker “recovery.”

    Average FDR real GDP growth (1934 to 1940) was 7.33%. Under Thersites it’s been, what (?): 2.1% – not adjusted for regime lies. Reagan’s recovery from a deeper recession averaged 5+% annual real GDP growth.

    Some recovery!

    Remember Einstein’s defintion of insanity.

  • A month before the site went online, the Republican Congress had shut down government in an effort to delay the rollout. If the White House had known what to expect from the website, they should have jumped at the chance. Not looking like they were jumping for it, of course. Let the government shut down for a few days then put out word that they’d be willing to delay Obamacare for six months in exchange for a budget including, say, a 20% increase in Head Start and the removal of the Social Security cap. The President would be called a statesman and a hero and the rollout could have been saved.

    So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.

  • I like T. Shaw’s reference to Thersites – how apt! We, however, need a modern-day Odysseus to give our Thersites a beating about the back and shoulders, and preferably in just as public a way as was done in those days of yore:

    He is said to be bow-legged and lame and to have shoulders that cave inward. His head is covered in tufts of hair and comes to a point. Vulgar, obscene, somewhat dull-witted, he “got up in the assembly and attacked Agamemnon in the words of Achilles [calling him greedy and a coward] . . . Odysseus then stood up, delivered a sharp rebuke to Thersites, which he coupled with a threat to strip him naked, and then beat him on the back and shoulders with Agamemnon’s sceptre; Thersites doubled over, a warm tear fell from his eye, and a bloody welt formed on his back; he sat down in fear, and in pain gazed helplessly as he wiped away his tear; but the rest of the assembly was distressed and laughed . . . There must be a figuration of wickedness as self-evident as Thersites– the ugliest man who came to Troy– who says what everyone else is thinking”.

    http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Thersites.html

  • “So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.”

    Disagree Pinky. They had every reason to expect that the website was going to fail.

  • Progressivism arrived in the U. S. very early in the 20th century and has colored our politics ever since. I can imagine it will continue to do so for quite some time irrespective of any repercussions.

  • T. Shaw, the salient metrics are production metrics. By those metrics, the economy had recovered and recovered prior to the war. Also, the unemployment statistics of the time do not include those working for the Works Progress Administration and like agencies.

    Roosevelt’s policies exacerbated trouble in the labor market extant when he took office, but even without that, it is a reasonable counter-factual that the labor market was going to take time to recover. Again, recall that Britain had a liberalizing ministry under Margaret Thatcher and yet elevated unemployment rates for nearly 20 years.

  • Pinky, I suspect that the hands-on technicians knew quite well the system was a mess, but the institutional culture of the Valerie Jarrett Administration is such that information does not travel up the hierarchy very readily, because bearers of bad news are ignored if not punished.

  • From the post:
    Obama forgot the first rule of politics: reality always wins in the end.

    Ah, but sometimes you get to die in harness first and have the entire nation participate (by command, with bullets for the disobedient) in a gigantesque travesty of a hero’s funeral. So it was for Stalin; so it was for Mao. Is Obama less worthy than they?

    From the combox:
    “So no, there’s no way they could have known that the system would fail so badly, or they would have acted differently.”
    Disagree Pinky. They had every reason to expect that the website was going to fail.

    Actually, you’re both right. They had every reason to see the failure coming; but because reason is not a tool used by the modern Left, they had no way of knowing. That would have required them to be sane and sapient, two qualities in which they are eminently lacking.

  • Mr. Simon. Thanks for passing the First Rule of Politics on to a grunt in the trenches. It fits BO.

    Damage control to our beloved Free United States is going to take time, however we are one nation indivisible and Under Our Gracious God.

    We will have leadership that is truly worthy of the blood poured out by our patriots of long ago. We will because the tide will turn. So help us God.

  • As I reread Dante’s Inferno I think BO. BO, BO and all the rest of the ilk that wants us dead and limited in numbers and under the rule of socialism/fascism(fine lines there) I never slept a wink the night of the first election of this scoundrel, nor the second, and with the same fervor hounded heaven for guidance. Ah yes, Dante.

  • For decades, the Democrats craved control of the health care system – all of it. A perfect disaster, brought about by mortgages handed out to people who could never afford to pay them – instigated by Democrats – caused the perfect disaster. then they took full advantage of it.

    The Democrat Party is the single worst organization of people ever to take root in the Western Hemisphere – organized crime and political suppression rolled up in one – and yet there are mindless lemmings who still vote for them.

    FDR was a crook. He used the IRS to attack his political adversaries. He left the Army decimated before WWII. He ordered the concentration camps of American citizens. He blatantly lied about Katyn and bent over backwards to help Stalin – a useful idiot if Lenin ever described one.

    The day he died he was in the company of his mistress.

    Obumbler is nothing but an empty chair as Clint Eastwood so aptly portrayed him. He is a puppet for people like Soros and Jarrett and Reid and Pelosi and he doesn’t even know it. His wife is the ultimate mooch.

    If Texas ever became independent I would be there the next day.

  • Evidently, Obama believes his own lies, but does he have Obamacare health insurance?
    About Katyn: Stalin blamed the Katyn massacre on Hitler and it was believed that Hitler was responsible (and Hitler was capable). About internment camps of the Japanese. They were more protective custody under martial law than anything else in times of war. I was born in 1940 and the animosity was ferocious. There was a picture in the newspaper with a Chinese man wearing a sign that read: “CHINESE”. In addition, there was the possibility of spying, after all, Pearl Harbor was a sneak attack. Nobody, but nobody smart a$$ wisecracked in those days. The churches were full morning, day and evenings.

  • Charlie has it…”Complete Denial..”
    Referring to this sloppy mess obamacare.

    The dem’s built it sold it and now cower under a “seat” that supports the largest buttocks that is ready to evacuate the vilest waist material known to man…obamafece’s.

    As they wallow in their new form of mud bath’s, claiming that the scent is Wicca friendly, we believer’s of free enterprise and smaller govt. can only pray that the rainwater will sweep the stench away….far far away…..say Kenya.

I Am Shocked! Shocked!: Obama Omits Under God

Wednesday, November 20, AD 2013

Obama reads a version of the Gettysburg Address that omits God?  Say it isn’t true!

 

President Obama irked some conservatives with his recitation of the Gettysburg Address, which he read aloud as part of a project celebrating the 150th anniversary of famous Lincoln speech.

For the project, spearheaded by documentarian Ken Burns, a number of politicians and other high-profile people recorded themselves reading the Gettysburg Address.

Some conservatives took offense to the president’s reading.

 “Lincoln added ‘Under God’ as he was looking out over battlefield. why would Obama remove?” Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said on Twitter.

Conservative Christian leader Bryan Fischer added “Obama’s omission of ‘under God’ is more evidence of his anti-Christian bigotry. He honors Islam but disrespects Christianity.”

 White House spokesman Jay Carney on Tuesday gave a simple explanation for the reading.

 “He read the version of the address that Ken Burns provided,” he said, noting that Burns is a “noted Civil War scholar.”

 Specifically, Carney said that Burns gave Mr. Obama the “Nicolay copy” of the Gettysburg Address — the first draft of the speech, named after John Nicolay, the White House staffer who preserved it.

 

Ken Burns is such a silly liberal squish that I can imagine him wanting to chase God out of the occasion.  However, in regard to Obama he either thought getting God out was a grand idea, or he was too unfamiliar with the Gettysburg address to realize the omission.  Here is the background story on the inclusion of the phrase under God in the original speech:

We have five drafts of the Gettysburg address that Lincoln wrote:  three have the phrase “under God” and two do not.  That Lincoln  spoke the phrase during the Gettysburg address we can be certain of, because three reporters were present when he gave the speech, and all three have “under God” in their accounts of Lincoln’s speech.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to I Am Shocked! Shocked!: Obama Omits Under God

The “Fix” That Fixed Nothing

Friday, November 15, AD 2013

 

Since Nixon’s “I am not a crook ” speech during a news conference, the fortieth anniversary of which will be this Sunday, I have never seen a more bizarre Presidential performance than that given by Obama yesterday.  In response to overwhelming alarm by Democrats in Congress to the fact that millions of Americans are seeing their insurance policies being cancelled due to ObamaCare, Obama at a news conference on November 14 announced the following:

Already people who have plans that pre-date the Affordable Care Act can keep those plans if they haven’t changed. That was already in the law. That’s what’s called a grandfather clause that was included in the law. Today we’re going to extend that principle both to people whose plans have changed since the law too effect and to people who bought plans since the law took effect.       

So state insurance commissioners still have the power to decide what plans can and can’t be sold in their states, but the bottom line is insurers can extend current plans that would otherwise be cancelled into 2014. And Americans whose plans have been cancelled can choose to re-enroll in the same kind of plan.       

We’re also requiring insurers to extend current plans to inform their customers about two things: One, that protections — what protections these renewed plans don’t include. Number two, that the marketplace offers new options with better coverage and tax credits that might help you bring down the cost.       

So if your received one of these letters I’d encourage you to take a look at the marketplace. Even if the website isn’t working as smoothly as it should be for everybody yet, the plan comparison tool that lets you browse cost for new plans near you is working just fine.

Well, what is wrong with this?  The glib answer is everything:

First, it is by no means clear that he has the power to do any of this.  The requirements of the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare) allow for none of this and Obama’s job title is President not Emperor.

Second, some state insurance commissioners will not allow this to be done.  The state insurance commissioner in Washington has already spoken up and said Obama’s policy would lead to great instability in the insurance markets of Washington and Obama’s suggestion is a dead letter in Washington.

Third, the insurance companies have responded and stated that it is impossible for them to comply with the time lines of the Affordable Care Act and do what Obama has said.

Fourth, it is only for one year, so people facing cancellation of insurance policies they like, even if their insurance company offers the same policy, would be facing the same dilemma in a year.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to The “Fix” That Fixed Nothing

  • Fool me once. Shame on you.

    Fool me twice. Shame in me.

    Fool me for five years. I’m an Obama voter.

  • 1. This whole cock-up implicates the whole top echelon of the Democratic Party. That’s not only the President, that’s the discretionary appointees of his administration, that’s about 90% of the Democratic congressional caucus, that’s the salient figures on the staffs of individual members and the staffs of the various committees. That’s the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office. That’s the state insurance commissioners. That’s the economist/pundits appended to the Democratic Party who did not clear their throats and educate their public on the problematic nature of this. (Yes, Mark Thoma, I am talking about people in your stable). That’s Warren Buffett.

    2. Sad to say, quite a large fraction of the public will never hold them responsible. One key to not being held responsible is to admit nothing a la Benghazi, so I cannot see the President acceding to outright repeal. He is too vain and too politically calculating to boot. (And you do encounter partisan Democrats in fora like this whose mind works in such ways that they will defend the IRS for conduct even the IRS admits was dodgy).

  • Net ACA health care enrolment: minus/negative 3.9 million people dropped from their “substandard” health care plans.

    In January 2014, tens of thousands will be unable to pay for vital chemotherapy. Of course, that will go unreported except at racist, teabagger FOXNEWS.

    Jonah Goldberg: “You can’t let Congress off the hook for the underlying driver of this calamity: the lie that ‘if you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period.’ This is now beyond dispute, though there’s still some squabbling about the ‘L’ word itself. It wasn’t a lie, Obama and his defenders insist, it was simply an “incorrect promise,” in the words of the New York Times. I somehow doubt that locution would provide much cover for an adulterer who tells his wife, ‘Honey, I didn’t break my wedding vows. That was just an incorrect promise.’

    “But whatever label you want to put on that untruth, Obama wasn’t alone in offering it. Moreover, even though the legislation may go by the moniker ‘Obamacare,’ the fact is the president didn’t write the law. Congress did, specifically congressional Democrats, with virtually no Republican input.”

  • In 2006 surveys, 80% of Americans were happy with their health plans.

    In 2014, it will be 20%.

    Another progressive victory! Every citizen is reduced to the same abject level of squallor and despair.

Thank You Mr. President

Monday, November 11, AD 2013

Lincoln

 

 

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 27, 1858

 

 

 

 

 

In nine days, this town will commemorate the 150th  anniversary of Lincoln’s speech with a ceremony at the same Soldiers’ National  Cemetery featuring the U.S. Marine Band, Gov. Tom Corbett and a reading of the  Gettysburg Address.

One person who will not be among those honoring  Lincoln is President Barack Obama. The White House gave no reason why the  president would not attend.

  According to the National Park Service, Obama  has never visited the battlefield as president.

 

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Low Information Voters Explain Why Obama Deserves His Nobel Peace Prize

  • That’s nothing.
    I used to listen to Howard Stern (yes, I have no taste) before, um, budget cuts took effect. He would send his staff out to do man in the street interviews.
    2008:
    “Who are you voting for?
    “Obama.”
    “Do you agree with hm about making homosexuality illegal[or bombing Iran, or deporting illegals]?”
    “Well, um . . . yeah . . . it’s the right thing to do”

    After the election:
    “Did you vote yesterday?”
    “No.”
    “Who would you have voted for?”
    “Obama.”
    “Are you aware he lost the election by ONE vote — McCain won.”
    “[expletive]!’

    Can’t we bring back literacy tests?
    Scratch that, literacy isn’t the problem.
    How about a quiz to ensure voters know the candidates and the duties of each office. I’d accept any general in-the-ballpark answer.

  • Sad and funny at the same time. I laughed out loud on the ONE vote win remark.
    Basic literacy test- a great idea; however, we live in a nation where a simple requirement to identify oneself at the poll as a legitimate registered voter is objectionable to many.

  • The carnival music is very appropriate.

  • I’m beginning to think a civics/political literacy/current affairs test should be required of all voters. If it were, it is certain Obama would not be president.

Speak Loudly and Carry No Stick

Monday, September 16, AD 2013

26 Responses to Speak Loudly and Carry No Stick

  • “Thou are weighed in the balance and found wanting.”

    Daniel chapter 5 well applies to Barack Hussein Obama, today’s King Belshazzar:

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=daniel%205&version=RSVCE

    “Mene, mene, tekel, parsin.”

  • Churchill mentions a first foretaste of the bitter cup to be offered year by year.
    ” … unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and … ”

    This idea of moral health has been trashed by people in education, entertainment, politics, government, finance, journalism, and art.

  • Thank our good God for answering the prayers of countless thousands and bringing about this first step towards peace in Syria.

    While it doesn’t end the violence, the cessation of the threat of US military intervention, which most religious leaders in the region–including Muslim–say would lead to further bloodshed to all and even more Christian persecution, is nothing short of a miracle.

    Thank you Pope Francis for leading the Prayer Warriors and bringing it to the world’s attention. God Bless you. God Bless all who prayed.

  • Rubbish on stilts. The Civil War in Syria will grind on and the body count will ramp up swiftly. There is absolutely nothing to celebrate in this debacle.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-24114746

    At the end of it all Assad will remain in power, or, more likely, after another year or two of fighting the rebels will win and a government dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood and/or Al-Qaeda will take his place. Syria is a lose-lose proposition except for tyrants and would be tyrants.

  • Don’t we have to admit that we ARE already in a war and that it is multifaceted, and not against nations or factions but against an evil ideology that seeks our destruction. If we morally oppose Assad and seek justice in Syria but do not want to intervene because his opposition in Syria is no better than him, is that giving up—acquiescence of a sort on our part? Too many layers of evil for us to go against? Shouldn’t we find a way to actively oppose them both? perhaps one at a time, like the war against the Axis (actually divided into different war “theaters” followed by the cold war. I admit I am way out of my league here thinking of solutions on the world stage- but – those are my questions.
    I think about W. Churchill saying something about we will fight them on the beaches…etc.

  • Donald R. McClarey

    To say that a prayer of thanksgiving for Pope Francis and the world’s prayer efforts that helped prevent the US from getting militarily involved in the Syrian civil war is “rubbish” says a lot about a man’s character and his soul. That “there is nothing to celebrate” about the US not bombing the garbanzos out of President Assad –an effort which we had no authority to do—I heartily disagree. It is a great day to say a prayer of thanks.

    US intervention would have only brought about more bloodshed as Bishop Antoine Audo of Aleppo, the Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I, the Grand Mufti of Damascus Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun, the USCCB and the Canadian Bishops have all pleaded. You said that you didn’t support US military involvement but you didn’t like the US losing face in the global chess game. While I am absolutely not a supporter of Abortion President Obama I think it is better to lose face if it saves a single life—worth the whole universe.

    Then you dredge up Churchill’s criticism of the Munich Pact. That is absurd. Let me assure the readers that these circumstances have none of the gravity whatsoever of 1938. The fate of Europe, or the world, is not in the balance. There are no Panzer divisions or Stuka squadrons poised to go into Poland or in today’s setting Israel. Every time the US decides not to blow the barley seeds out of some tinhorn dictator some writer drags out the old Churchill/Chamberlain comparison

    Then you say that in “two years’ time the rebels will probably win.” I defer to Pulitzer Prize winning writer Charles Krauthammer who in his last two articles in Human Events says that Russian President Putin is pretty much in the driver’s seat and will keep Assad in power to keep the Russian naval base and other assets in Syria intact.

    And I say once again, “Praise be to the good Lord and Pope Francis for leading the world in prayer that helped keep the US out of Syria. May there be Peace there.” If you think such a prayer is “rubbish,” sir, what do you value?

  • “To say that a prayer of thanksgiving for Pope Francis and the world’s prayer efforts that helped prevent the US from getting militarily involved in the Syrian civil war is “rubbish” says a lot about a man’s character and his soul.”

    I know nothing about your character and your soul. I do know that your analysis of the situation is rubbish and I said so.

    “That “there is nothing to celebrate” about the US not bombing the garbanzos out of President Assad –an effort which we had no authority to do—I heartily disagree.”

    Of course you do, based upon a completely erroneous view of the situation. Your comment about the US not having the authority is rich. Who would give us that authority? The UN, that exemplar of corruption and hypocrisy?

    “US intervention would have only brought about more bloodshed as Bishop Antoine Audo of Aleppo, the Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I, the Grand Mufti of Damascus Ahmad Badreddin Hassoun, the USCCB and the Canadian Bishops have all pleaded.”

    All lacking any military knowledge whatsoever. The Grand Mufti is a tool of the Assad regime. Ditto Bishop Antoine Audo. The USCCB and the Catholic Bishops of Canada know zip about the Assad regime and its long history of brutality against the Syrian people. The simple truth is that with non-intervention the Civil War will grind on and all the men you cite are completely clueless as to any realistic plan to bring the Civil War to an end.

    “While I am absolutely not a supporter of Abortion President Obama I think it is better to lose face if it saves a single life—worth the whole universe.”

    Rubbish again. Weakness inspires war. Even a cursory study of history reveals that.

    “Then you dredge up Churchill’s criticism of the Munich Pact. That is absurd. Let me assure the readers that these circumstances have none of the gravity whatsoever of 1938.”

    Yeah, its only Syrians being killed. It’s not as if we know these people, right? Bishop Antoine Audo who you cite has actually said that intervention would lead to a World War. I suspect that is hyperbole, but since you cited him perhaps you agree with him. My citation of Churchill was due to the fact that the bumbling of Obama, who you support in this case, is like the bumbling of Chamberlain. A leader as weak as Obama inspires those who wish to do us harm.

    As to the outcome of the war, Assad pays cold cash for every piece of Russian equipment and his resources are limited, even with his support from Iran. The rebels are being bankrolled by the Saudis who do not want the Iranians to have a power base in Syria. Qatar and Turkey have also been supplying aid, and I suspect if they have to the Turks will intervene to topple Assad if they think the rebels cannot. Numerous border clashes have already occurred. The Turks shot down a Syrian helicopter yesterday and they have beefed up troops along the border with Syria in recent weeks.

    In regard to Syria there is no good solution, which is why I oppose US intervention, and that is very sad. Lots of innocent people are going to die and after an ocean of blood is shed the Syrian people likely will be no better off and still under a despotic regime and that is nothing to cheer about.

    In regard to foreign policy and national defense I value clear analysis and rigid attention to reality. Wishful thinking and platitudes tend to have a dire effect when they are adopted as national policy in regard to a crisis like Syria.

  • FWIW, my piece in the Catholic Stand.

    I opposed intervention in Syria, but to celebrate the lack of American involvement as a great victory for peace is awfully myopic.

  • Comment:
    If it saves one human life–which is worth the entire universe–and I am certain that it does, it is a cause for celebration.

  • Donald R. McClarey:
    Comment:

    “Who would give us that authority?”

    Yes, who would? Who would give us the authority to bomb another country? On the other side of the world? Right in Russia’s backyard? The Congress didn’t. Britain opted out. I guess Obama would give himself the authority. And why? Because we’re bigger and stronger? And because we can? Bullying is prohibited in the schoolyard and much of the international community condemns it on a global scale.

    “The USCCB and the Canadian Bishops know zip about the Assad regime and its long history of brutality against the Syrian people”

    Says who? You? By your authority? I hate to interrupt your rant with a few facts. Perhaps you should Google some of the Catholic publications, but the Bishops and everyone in Christendom and anyone who has seen an iota of news has been talking about this for months.
    Apparently you think you are the sole informed person breaking this earth shattering story. Who gives you the authority to cavalierly dismiss all these people as ignorant of your special knowledge? I guess you do—much like Obama.

    And Catholic Chaldean Bishop Antoine Audo is in Aleppo right in the heart of the bloodshed. He told the National Catholic Register, “That the only road to peace is through dialogue…not a new charge of hatred.” Sounds like he was addressing this to you. But I guess he doesn’t know as much as you do, right? By your authority? Wow, such hubris.

    “With non-intervention the Civil War will grind on and on and the men you cite are completely clueless as to any realistic plan to bring the Civil War to an end.”

    Obama has a realistic plan? Of course not. Your argument is untenable. You support non-intervention but then rant that it will only prolong the war. Did you forget to type in a few clarifying sentences? It doesn’t connect. It seems you just like to rant that nobody knows what to do but you. But then you don’t say what to do except “peace through strength.”

    I do know that the Muslim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda rebels have persecuted the Christians and a victory by them would lead to further persecution. A US strike on Assad would embolden them. That it looks like we won’t is a cause for celebration. And deep gratitude to our good Lord, also to Pope Francis.

    “Yeah it’s only Syrians being killed. It’s not as if we know these people, right?” Please leave the high school debating tactics in high school. The main thrust of your article was the Churchill quote on the Munich Pact implying that the fate of the world was in the balance today, much like 1938 when Hitler coveted Sudetenland, poised to strike Czechoslovakia and Poland. Give me a break. A reader who couldn’t find Syria or Russia, for that matter, on a map might believe this distortion but most would see right through it. I greatly admire Churchill but he would not have committed a single Tommy soldier or Manchester bomber to the madness of Syria. Assad can barely keep the rebels out of his bathroom and Putin can’t even quiet down the gays in Moscow.

    “Weakness inspires war. Even a cursory study of history reveals that.”

    But a deeper study of history reveals that, in the words of Pope Francis, “Only dialogue brings peace.” Bishop Aleppo echoes this and the Catholic Church has been saying this over and over for decades. Practically every speech or letter by the Popes or Bishops says this. Cardinal Dolan head of the USCCB– who “know zip,” by your royal decree—in his letter to President Obama asks him not to send financial or military aid to the rebels.

    It is a dreadfully tragic situation. 100,000 lives lost for nothing. But once again I am divinely thankful that the US did not get involved which would have made it even worse.

  • “Right in Russia’s backyard?”

    You have a rather expansive view of Russia.

    “The Congress didn’t.”

    Congress would have been the proper authority.

    “Bullying is prohibited in the schoolyard and much of the international community condemns it on a global scale.”

    I trust you really are not that foolish. The “international community” you celebrate was ever content to sit on its hands while tyrants have turned large segments of humanity into fertilizer. The simple truth is that most people are not really bothered by other people being slaughtered somewhere far away until whoever is doing the slaughtering turns their attention to them. That is an odd standard to raise as a moral guide.

    “but the Bishops and everyone in Christendom and anyone who has seen an iota of news has been talking about this for months.”

    The Bishops are reflexively against military intervention anywhere under any form. They know as much about Syria as a group as they do about military tactics and strategy, which is close to nil.

    “Apparently you think you are the sole informed person breaking this earth shattering story.”

    Certainly much more informed than you judging from your comments.

    “And Catholic Chaldean Bishop Antoine Audo is in Aleppo right in the heart of the bloodshed.”

    Yep and touting the Assad line. When the Civil War began in 2011 as a result of Assad unleashing his military against demonstrators, the Bishop participated in a demonstration in favor of Assad in Damascus.
    From an interview the Bishop gave in 2011 as the crackdown began

    “Do you think President Assad will be able to stay in power?”
    I think so. He’s a very loved man, young and well educated, and he’s working in the interests of Syria. Syria is not a perfect country – as all countries [in the Middle East], we have had difficulties with the international and economic situation. But I think he [Assad] is doing very well and wants to serve the interests of Syria. He’s defending our country with great dignity.”
    http://www.terrasanta.net/tsx/articolo.jsp?wi_number=3030&wi_codseq=++++++&language=en

    Now even making allowance for the Bishop living in a country where if you criticize the government you can quickly find yourself dead, that is pretty sickening stuff.

    “But then you don’t say what to do except “peace through strength.””

    No, what I actually wrote was that intervention will not work in this case due to the fact that the major contending factions are all bad, and that is a sad reality and not something to celebrate. Reading comprehension truly is not your forte is it?

    “I do know that the Muslim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda rebels have persecuted the Christians and a victory by them would lead to further persecution.”

    Yep, the problem is that for Christians Assad is no bowl of cherries either:

    http://freebeacon.com/christians-and-syria/

    In Syria it is largely bad guys fighting bad guys and whoever wins it is not going to be good news for the native Christians of Syria.

    “Please leave the high school debating tactics in high school.”

    Rubbish. You are the one hailing non-intervention as some grand victory for peace. As far as you are concerned the Syrians could continue killing each other from now to doomsday, as long as the US is not involved.

    “I greatly admire Churchill but he would not have committed a single Tommy soldier or Manchester bomber to the madness of Syria.”

    Actually Churchill as Secretary of State for War and Air after World War I was instrumental in establishing the boundaries of the Middle East and the British Empire was involved in the Middle East throughout his lifetime with constant interventions. Of course, once again you ignore why I raised the Munich debacle.

    “Only dialogue brings peace.”

    Not really. What peace we have on this Earth is almost always a result of war, from the flags we salute, the boundaries of the nations we live in, the laws we follow, the languages we speak, whether our churches are persecuted, etc. Pacifists and semi-pacifists may abhor this, but that is the fact. In the present case, who rules in Syria will be determined on the battlefields of Syria and not through negotiations.

  • If it saves one human life–which is worth the entire universe–and I am certain that it does, it is a cause for celebration.

    Bumper sticker jingoism does nothing to alter the reality of what is happening in Syria or elsewhere for that matter.

  • Paul Zummo:
    You’re using the word “jingoism” incorrectly unless the country you think I’m touting is the Vatican State in which case you would be correct.
    I do think that one human life is worth the whole universe.

  • Comment:

    “Who would give us that authority?”

    Yes, who would? Who would give us the authority to bomb another country? On the other side of the world? Right in Russia’s backyard? The Congress didn’t. Britain opted out. I guess Obama would give himself the authority. And why? Because we’re bigger and stronger? And because we can? Bullying is prohibited in the schoolyard and much of the international community condemns it on a global scale.

    “The USCCB and the Canadian Bishops know zip about the Assad regime and its long history of brutality against the Syrian people”

    Says who? You? By your authority? I hate to interrupt your rant with a few facts. Perhaps you should Google some of the Catholic publications, but the Bishops and everyone in Christendom and anyone who has seen an iota of news has been talking about this for months.
    Apparently you think you are the sole informed person breaking this earth shattering story. Who gives you the authority to cavalierly dismiss all these people as ignorant of your special knowledge? I guess you do—much like Obama.

    And Catholic Chaldean Bishop Antoine Audo is in Aleppo right in the heart of the bloodshed. He told the National Catholic Register, “That the only road to peace is through dialogue…not a new charge of hatred.” Sounds like he was addressing this to you. But I guess he doesn’t know as much as you do, right? By your authority? Wow, such hubris.

    “With non-intervention the Civil War will grind on and on and the men you cite are completely clueless as to any realistic plan to bring the Civil War to an end.”

    Obama has a realistic plan? Of course not. Your argument is untenable. You support non-intervention but then rant that it will only prolong the war. Did you forget to type in a few clarifying sentences? It doesn’t connect. It seems you just like to rant that nobody knows what to do but you. But then you don’t say what to do except “peace through strength.”

    I do know that the Muslim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda rebels have persecuted the Christians and a victory by them would lead to further persecution. A US strike on Assad would embolden them. That it looks like we won’t is a cause for celebration. And deep gratitude to our good Lord, also to Pope Francis.

    “Yeah it’s only Syrians being killed. It’s not as if we know these people, right?” Please leave the high school debating tactics in high school. The main thrust of your article was the Churchill quote on the Munich Pact implying that the fate of the world was in the balance today, much like 1938 when Hitler coveted Sudetenland, poised to strike Czechoslovakia and Poland. Give me a break. A reader who couldn’t find Syria or Russia, for that matter, on a map might believe this distortion but most would see right through it. I greatly admire Churchill but he would not have committed a single Tommy soldier or Manchester bomber to the madness of Syria. Assad can barely keep the rebels out of his bathroom and Putin can’t even quiet down the gays in Moscow.

    “Weakness inspires war. Even a cursory study of history reveals that.”

    But a deeper study of history reveals that, in the words of Pope Francis, “Only dialogue brings peace.” Bishop Aleppo echoes this and the Catholic Church has been saying this over and over for decades. Practically every speech or letter by the Popes or Bishops says this. Cardinal Dolan head of the USCCB– who “know zip,” by your profound royal decree—in his letter to President Obama asks him not to send Donald R. McClarey:

    “You have a rather expansive view of Russia”

    Russia has a naval base at Tartus, Syria. That might give them concern wouldn’t you say? And it’s certainly on the other side of the world from us.

    “I trust you really are not that foolish. The “international community” you celebrate was ever content to their on its hands while tyrants have turned large segments into fertilizer. The simple truth is that most people are not really bothered by other people being slaughtered somewhere far away until whoever is doing the slaughtering turns their attention to them. That is an odd standard to raise as a moral guide.”

    Pope Francis is head of the Vatican State, an influential country that you seem to ignore. He decries the violence in Syria every single day with speeches, letters to the G-20, meetings with political and religious leaders and of course his Global Day of Fasting and Prayer –the mere mention of which seems to inflame you and incite you to hurl insults of “rubbish on stilts” when I write about it. I think you would do well to heed Bl. Pope John Paul II’s remark that, “Prayer when united with fasting is the most powerful weapon in the history of mankind.” Or is he another one of those Bishops that “knows zip” about foreign policy? He was the Bishop of Krakow before he became Pope.

    The US and the western world and freedom loving countries everywhere decry every act of violence or barbarism or terrorism. Don’t you read the papers?

    It’s curious that you speak negatively of every religious leader and you write for “The American Catholic.” Maybe for those articles you should change the banner to “catholic” with a small “c” or call it “The American Gnostic,” because you write under the premise that no one in the world knows all the secret information that you alone know.

    “The Bishops are reflexively against military intervention anywhere under any form. They know as much about Syria as a group as they do about military tactics and strategy, which is close to nil.”

    Please see above comment.

    “Now even making allowance for the Bishop living in a country where if you criticize the government you can quickly find yourself dead that is pretty sickening stuff.”

    He is being diplomatic and accommodating and probably trying to save his head. Cardinal Dolan head of USCCB said on TV this week that “President Obama has done some good things. We might have disagreements…” Now Cardinal Dolan totally disagrees with Obama on abortion and military and financial intervention in Syria but he’s being diplomatic. He came away from a meeting with abortion monger Gov. Cuomo and said something to the affect that the Governor was very open to our discussion and we had a good exchange of ideas. And I know that Cardinal Dolan is absolutely opposed to abortion.

    And back to Bishop Assad he is right in the heat of the battle and he says, “The only road to peace is dialogue…not new charges of hatred,” directed at armchair generals in Illinois who know far more than him.

    “No, what I actually wrote was that intervention will not work in this case due to the fact that the major contending factions are all bad, and that is a sad reality and not something to celebrate. Reading comprehension truly is not your forte is it?”

    Apparently memory of what you wrote is not your forte. I was commenting on your statement “Weakness only inspires war.” Yes I paraphrase you. When your argument is weak you criticize the other guy for not quoting correctly. Pretty soon you’ll be criticizing my grammar and punctuation.

    “Rubbish. You are the one hailing non-intervention as some grand victory for peace. As far as you are concerned the Syrians could continue killing each other from now to doomsday, as long as the US is not involved.”
    You say in another article that “Flight of the Bumblebee” is your favorite song. Maybe you should turn it off for a while and listen to some Gregorian chant to calm your frenzy and maybe read what you are criticizing before you erroneously publish it to the whole world and make a fool of yourself.
    I have said repeated that I pray for peace and thank Pope Francis for his Global Day of Fasting and Prayer and all of his efforts to end the violence. Curiously you have not mentioned “pray” or “God” or any religious words in this “Catholic” article. Wonder why? Did you pray and fast on that day? I did.
    “Actually Churchill as Secretary of State for War and Air after World War I was instrumental in establishing the boundaries of the Middle East and the British Empire was involved in the Middle East throughout his lifetime with constant interventions. Of course, once again you ignore why I raised the Munich debacle.”
    Churchill actually opposed Gandhi and his quest for Indian independence so he could be wrong at times. But I’m sure that he would not get involved in the Syrian chaos, the same stance that Britain takes today.
    No I got your “deep thought” that Obama gave away his bargaining chip of the threat of military intervention. Did you get that from Charles Krauthammer? He wrote about it a week before. So if Obama came on TV every night still threatening to blow up every cotton field and fig grove in Syria, even though he wasn’t going, would that make our Gnostic genius who-knows-everything happy?

    “Not really. What peace we have on this Earth is almost always a result of war, from the flags we salute, the boundaries of the nations we live in, the laws we follow, the languages we speak, whether our churches are persecuted. Pacifists and semi-pacifists may abhor this, but that is the fact. In the present case, who rules in Syria will be determined on the battlefields of Syria and not through negotiations.”
    “The languages that we speak?” Maybe you should take a day trip into the city sometime. Here in NY Spanish is spoken everywhere and that is because of immigration not war. Please, please, don’t bring up Davey Crockett and the Alamo and the Mexican War.
    “The laws that we make?” Our laws are made by Congress and Legislatures and there may be some dirty battles there but I wouldn’t call them wars.
    “Whether our churches are persecuted?” In the US religious freedom came through dialogue and study. Jefferson, who got many of his ideas from St. Thomas Bellarmine, dialogued and argued and came to an agreement with the others. Please don’t say that without the Revolutionary War there would have been no dialogue and therefore no religious freedom. For the most part Britain was not curtailing religious freedom in the colonies.
    Did the computer you work on come from war? Or the Star Trek shows that you love—created by agnostic Gene Roddenberry—or the science fiction books written by Atheist Isaac Asimov that you quote come from war? I wish that you would quote from a Catholic once in a while, maybe a saint or a theologian or a snippet of a prayer. It might be refreshing on a “Catholic” website. You think you could try it?

  • (Very sorry my last post merged it with my former)

    Donald R. McClarey:

    “You have a rather expansive view of Russia”

    Russia has a naval base at Tartus, Syria. That might give them concern wouldn’t you say? And it’s certainly on the other side of the world from us.

    “I trust you really are not that foolish. The “international community” you celebrate was ever content to their on its hands while tyrants have turned large segments into fertilizer. The simple truth is that most people are not really bothered by other people being slaughtered somewhere far away until whoever is doing the slaughtering turns their attention to them. That is an odd standard to raise as a moral guide.”

    Pope Francis is head of the Vatican State, an influential country that you seem to ignore. He decries the violence in Syria every single day with speeches, letters to the G-20, meetings with political and religious leaders and of course his Global Day of Fasting and Prayer –the mere mention of which seems to inflame you and incite you to hurl insults of “rubbish on stilts” when I write about it. I think you would do well to heed Bl. Pope John Paul II’s remark that, “Prayer when united with fasting is the most powerful weapon in the history of mankind.” Or is he another one of those Bishops that “knows zip” about foreign policy? He was the Bishop of Krakow before he became Pope.

    The US and the western world and freedom loving countries everywhere decry every act of violence or barbarism or terrorism. Don’t you read the papers?

    It’s curious that you speak negatively of every religious leader and you write for “The American Catholic.” Maybe for those articles you should change the banner to “catholic” with a small “c” or call it “The American Gnostic,” because you write under the premise that no one in the world knows all the secret information that you alone know.

    “The Bishops are reflexively against military intervention anywhere under any form. They know as much about Syria as a group as they do about military tactics and strategy, which is close to nil.”

    Please see above comment.

    “Now even making allowance for the Bishop living in a country where if you criticize the government you can quickly find yourself dead that is pretty sickening stuff.”

    He is being diplomatic and accommodating and probably trying to save his head. Cardinal Dolan head of USCCB said on TV this week that “President Obama has done some good things. We might have disagreements…” Now Cardinal Dolan totally disagrees with Obama on abortion and military and financial intervention in Syria but he’s being diplomatic. He came away from a meeting with abortion monger Gov. Cuomo and said something to the affect that the Governor was very open to our discussion and we had a good exchange of ideas. And I know that Cardinal Dolan is absolutely opposed to abortion.

    And back to Bishop Assad he is right in the heat of the battle and he says, “The only road to peace is dialogue…not new charges of hatred,” directed at armchair generals in Illinois who know far more than him.

    “No, what I actually wrote was that intervention will not work in this case due to the fact that the major contending factions are all bad, and that is a sad reality and not something to celebrate. Reading comprehension truly is not your forte is it?”

    Apparently memory of what you wrote is not your forte. I was commenting on your statement “Weakness only inspires war.” Yes I paraphrase you. When your argument is weak you criticize the other guy for not quoting correctly. Pretty soon you’ll be criticizing my grammar and punctuation.

    “Rubbish. You are the one hailing non-intervention as some grand victory for peace. As far as you are concerned the Syrians could continue killing each other from now to doomsday, as long as the US is not involved.”
    You say in another article that “Flight of the Bumblebee” is your favorite song. Maybe you should turn it off for a while and listen to some Gregorian chant to calm your frenzy and maybe read what you are criticizing before you erroneously publish it to the whole world and make a fool of yourself.
    I have said repeated that I pray for peace and thank Pope Francis for his Global Day of Fasting and Prayer and all of his efforts to end the violence. Curiously you have not mentioned “pray” or “God” or any religious words in this “Catholic” article. Wonder why? Did you pray and fast on that day? I did.
    “Actually Churchill as Secretary of State for War and Air after World War I was instrumental in establishing the boundaries of the Middle East and the British Empire was involved in the Middle East throughout his lifetime with constant interventions. Of course, once again you ignore why I raised the Munich debacle.”
    Churchill actually opposed Gandhi and his quest for Indian independence so he could be wrong at times. But I’m sure that he would not get involved in the Syrian chaos, the same stance that Britain takes today.
    No I got your “deep thought” that Obama gave away his bargaining chip of the threat of military intervention. Did you get that from Charles Krauthammer? He wrote about it a week before. So if Obama came on TV every night still threatening to blow up every cotton field and fig grove in Syria, even though he wasn’t going to, would that make our Gnostic genius who-knows-everything happy?

    “Not really. What peace we have on this Earth is almost always a result of war, from the flags we salute, the boundaries of the nations we live in, the laws we follow, the languages we speak, whether our churches are persecuted. Pacifists and semi-pacifists may abhor this, but that is the fact. In the present case, who rules in Syria will be determined on the battlefields of Syria and not through negotiations.”
    “The languages that we speak?” Maybe you should take a day trip into the city sometime. Here in NY Spanish is spoken everywhere and that is because of immigration not war. Please, please, don’t bring up Davey Crockett and the Alamo and the Mexican War.
    “The laws that we make?” Our laws are made by Congress and Legislatures and there may be some dirty battles there but I wouldn’t call them wars.
    “Whether our churches are persecuted?” In the US religious freedom came through dialogue and study. Jefferson who got many of his ideas from St. Thomas Bellarmine dialogued and argued and came to an agreement with the others. Please don’t say that without the Revolutionary War there would have been no dialogue and therefore no religious freedom. For the most part Britain was not curtailing religious freedom on the colonies.
    Did the computer you work on come from war? Or the Star Trek shows that you love—created by agnostic Gene Roddenberry—or the science fiction books written by Atheist Isaac Asimov that you quote come from war? I wish that you would quote from a Catholic once in a while, maybe a saint or a theologian or a snippet of a prayer. It might be refreshing on a “Catholic” website. You think you could try it?

  • I do think that one human life is worth the whole universe.

    Except, evidently, for the ones slaughtered by dictators. They merit nothing but a polite yawn.

  • I’m pleased that the US will not likely intervene militarily, though the realites of continued bloodshed and Putin’s strengthened hand are odd things to celebrate or lay at God’s doorstep. This is a tragic situation to be celebrated only by the callous. The fact that prudence suggests that we are unable to effectively assist the innocent in this case is not good news for the innocent.

  • Bingo, Mike. There is nothing to celebrate about this situation.

  • “Russia has a naval base at Tartus, Syria. That might give them concern wouldn’t you say? And it’s certainly on the other side of the world from us.”

    Tartus was a relic of the Cold War. The Russians have recently reactivated it since they wish to use Assad as a client as the Soviets did his father, who was also a butcher of the Syrian people. This has nothing to do with Russian interests and everything to do with Russian adventurism, ably assisted by Obama’s weakness.

    “the mere mention of which seems to inflame you and incite you to hurl insults of “rubbish on stilts” when I write about it.”

    No, what I declared to be rubbish was your absurd claim that this debacle is a cause for celebration. In regard to the international community and its usual attitude to people far away being slaughtered, I cannot improve on James Thurber’s parable from 1939:

    “The rabbits who caused all the trouble

    by James Thurber

    Within the memory of the youngest child there was a family of rabbits who lived near a pack of wolves. The wolves announced that they did not like the way the rabbits were living. (The wolves were crazy about the way they themselves were living, because it was the only way to live.) One night several wolves were killed in an earthquake and this was blamed on the rabbits, for it is well known that rabbits pound on the ground with their hind legs and cause earthquakes. On another night one of the wolves was killed by a bolt of lightning and this was also blamed on the rabbits, for it is well known that lettuce-eaters cause lightning. The wolves threatened to civilize the rabbits if they didn’t behave, and the rabbits decided to run away to a desert island. But the other animals, who lived at a great distance, shamed them saying, “You must stay where you are and be brave. This is no world for escapists. If the wolves attack you, we will come to your aid in all probability.” So the rabbits continued to live near the wolves and one day there was a terrible flood which drowned a great many wolves. This was blamed on the rabbits, for it is well known that carrot-nibblers with long ears cause floods. The wolves descended on the rabbits, for their own good, and imprisoned them in a dark cave, for their own protection.
    When nothing was heard about the rabbits for some weeks, the other animals demanded to know what had happened to them. The wolves replied that the rabbits had been eaten and since they had been eaten the affair was a purely internal matter. But the other animals warned that they might possibly unite against the wolves unless some reason was given for the destruction of the rabbits. So the wolves gave them one. “They were trying to escape,” said the wolves, “and, as you know, this is no world for escapists.”

    Moral: Run, don’t walk, to the nearest desert island.”

  • “It’s curious that you speak negatively of every religious leader and you write for “The American Catholic.” Maybe for those articles you should change the banner to “catholic” with a small “c” or call it “The American Gnostic,” because you write under the premise that no one in the world knows all the secret information that you alone know.”

    Nope, no hidden knowledge is being conveyed. Merely a knowledge of history, current events and a refusal to allow interlocutors to take refuge either in bunkum or wishful thinking.

    “He is being diplomatic and accommodating and probably trying to save his head.”

    If he fears for his life don’t you think that would make his opinion fairly worthless as a result? How can we assume that he is speaking what he honestly believes?

    “The only road to peace is dialogue”

    Well what is stopping him? He could call up his good buddy Assad and have him sit down with rebel leaders tomorrow couldn’t he? Of course that is where ugly reality enters in. The Bishop knows that there is zero possibility that such a meeting would take place and less than zero possibility that anything productive would come about if such a meeting occurs. In this situation a call for dialogue is as meaningless as Bill Clinton giving a talk on marital fidelity.

    “I have said repeated that I pray for peace”

    And that will accomplish absolutely nothing in stopping the Civil War in Syria. It was the Rosary and the fleets of the Holy League that beat the Turks at Lepanto. Faith without works is useless, something that Catholics have traditionally understood when it comes to military matters in this Fallen World, but many, alas, do not today.

    “But I’m sure that he would not get involved in the Syrian chaos, the same stance that Britain takes today.”

    Churchill emphasized Britain being a close ally of the US and acting as a great power. I think he would have attempted to get approval from Parliament, but unlike the wet Tories of today, he would have gotten the votes.

    “No I got your “deep thought” that Obama gave away his bargaining chip of the threat of military intervention.”

    No, you truly do not understand my argument. Obama should never have threatened to intervene in Syria at all because both sides are equally bad. Once he put US prestige on the line, he then fumbled the ball so that he grasped upon the Soviet proposal to look even more like a clown. It is his weakening of the US through this farce that I deplore, as I made clear in my post.

  • “Here in NY Spanish is spoken everywhere and that is because of immigration not war. Please, please, don’t bring up Davey Crockett and the Alamo and the Mexican War.”

    Sophistry. We would not be speaking English but for a whole host of wars fought down through the centuries. The Mexicans would not be speaking Spanish but for the conquest of the Aztecs by Cortez.

    “The laws that we make?” Our laws are made by Congress and Legislatures and there may be some dirty battles there but I wouldn’t call them wars.”

    And we wouldn’t have a Congress or our system of government but for victory in the American Revolution.

    “In the US religious freedom came through dialogue and study.”

    Religious freedom in the US, at least for Catholics, is directly attributable to victory in the American Revolution. That is why Charles Carroll of Carrollton, the Catholic signer of the Declaration, tossed in his lot with the Patriots. If we had lost World War II or the Cold War our religious freedom would now be only a feeble memory.

    “For the most part Britain was not curtailing religious freedom on the colonies.”

    I can only assume that you are bone ignorant of the Irish penal laws and the Test Act. Try reading some Edmund Burke on the subject.

    “Did the computer you work on come from war? Or the Star Trek shows that you love—created by agnostic Gene Roddenberry—or the science fiction books written by Atheist Isaac Asimov that you quote come from war?”

    They all came from freedom which is very much a result of successful wars fought down through the centuries by those who cherished freedom.

    “I wish that you would quote from a Catholic once in a while”

    You might try reading my post on John Paul II and the Constitution yesterday. You obviously have read little that I have written on this site in the almost five years it has been in existence. Here is a quote to you from a saint:

    “King of England, if you do not do these things, I am the commander of the military; and in whatever place I shall find your men in France, I will make them flee the country, whether they wish to or not; and if they will not obey, the Maid will have them all killed. She comes sent by the King of Heaven, body for body, to take you out of France, and the Maid promises and certifies to you that if you do not leave France she and her troops will raise a mighty outcry as has not been heard in France in a thousand years. And believe that the King of Heaven has sent her so much power that you will not be able to harm her or her brave army.”

    Joan of Arc

  • The Catholic Church has a policy of incremental reduction of evil. In regards to abortion the Church is supporting legislation that prevents late term abortions. While the evil of abortion still exists at least the late term abortions can be stopped. This is the case in NY State and Cardinal Dolan has put great pressure on the Legislators and Governor here. The late term abortion bill was recently defeated. Hallelujah! Is that a cause for celebration? Yes. Do we still mourn the fact that abortions still go on? Yes, of course.

    In regards to Syria the US turning back militarily will save many lives. Many, many prayers were answered. That is a cause for gratitude and celebration. That the violence is still going on is a cause for mourning and continued prayer and action.

    Great Thurber story. You should check out Wikiquotes: GK Chesterton, (particularly “The Everlasting Man”) St. Francis, St. John Vianney, C.S. Lewis, and St. Augustine. Would really jazz up the site.

  • “In regards to Syria the US turning back militarily will save many lives.”

    Only if many means zero. A quick dumping of Assad would probably save many lives short term and a strong US intervention would accomplish that. The problem is what the rebels would do long term which is why I oppose intervention.

    I quote all of those you cite constantly, as faithful readers of the blog know.

  • Donald R. McClarey:

    “Sophistry. We would not be speaking English but for a whole host of wars fought down through the centuries. The Mexicans would not be speaking Spanish but for the conquest of the Aztecs by Cortez.”

    Were it not for Emperor Constantine’s Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. granting religious freedom to the Christians there would be no Western Civilization. The Christian Church sanctified the Roman Empire and the Empire continued to spread its culture and now with the holy teachings of the Faith to the whole Empire. And how was this conversion of Rome brought about? By war? No but by Christians living and teaching the Faith. The monks even continued to civilize even the barbarians. With force? No by applying the teachings of our good Lord of kindness, forgiveness and patience.

    “And we wouldn’t have a Congress or our system of government but for victory in the American Revolution.”

    All of the states had Charters before the Revolution such as the Virginia Charter that the Constitution was modeled after. These contained varieties of religious freedoms.

    “You might try reading my post on John Paul II and the Constitution yesterday. You obviously have read little that I have written on this site in the almost five years it has been in existence. Here is a quote to you from a saint:”

    What do you think of the Bl. John Paul II quotes: “War, never again war.” This was echoed by Pope Francis this week. Or “Prayer when united with sacrifice, is the most powerful weapon in the history of mankind.”
    You just said in another post that “(Prayer) will accomplish absolutely nothing in stopping the Civil War in Syria.” Whew! Sounds hypocritical. You say in one sentence to read JPII then in the next you say prayer will not work here. If you said that to JPII he’d march you right off to confessional. And you have the nerve to call yours a “Catholic” site. Why don’t you be honest and label it “The Militaristic Catholic?” Every other word is “war, war” or “military this or that.” The one saint you quote is the warrior saint Joan of Arc.

    There’s more in life, more in the news, than Syria. I sent in a short prayer of thanks that lives would be saved as a result of Pope Francis’ Global Day of Fasting and Prayer and the prayers of countless people of good will around the world –which you called “rubbish” then, and you continue to say that “prayer will accomplish nothing in the
    “Syrian Civil,” and it’s become a 3-day battle. How can I deal with someone who denies one of the basic tenets of the Faith? Do you also deny the Cardinal Virtues of Faith, Hope and Love? You’d probably say, “But not without military action.”

    Couldn’t we change the subject? Let’s talk about something we have in common such as that evil Dawkins. I just heard on Al Kresta’s Show on Catholic radio that Dawkins had been a supporter of eugenics in keeping the races from mixing. Could be a column for you.

  • Donald R. McClarey:

    “Only if many means zero. A quick dumping of Assad would probably save many lives short term and a strong US intervention would accomplish that. The problem is what the rebels would do long term which is why I oppose intervention.”

    I basically agree with you. I would go in to stop the monster Assad except that it would cause greater harm in the long run enabling the rebels to finally win. I am not a pacifist.
    Our disagreement seems to be on how many lives would be saved by the US standing down and I think it would be some, particularly Christians.
    I am not happy about the US losing power over this. I didn’t like Obama stopping the missile defense shield in Eastern Europe. I am totally against Communism. I have been opposed to practically everything Obama has done foreign or domestic. Except for quitting smoking—it has made him even more angry and hateful of the Church.

  • “Were it not for Emperor Constantine’s Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. granting religious freedom to the Christians there would be no Western Civilization.”

    Constantine was emperor solely by his victory at the Milvian Bridge. In hoc signo vinces and all that. On the other hand many historically Christian areas were lost to Christendom by military defeat at the hands of the Arabs centuries later. North Africa, Saint Augustine’s old stomping ground, was lost, and in the most Christian province of the Empire, Egypt, the Copts became a despised minority at the hands of their Arab overlords. Military events have played a tremendous role in the advance and retreat of Christianity.

    “All of the states had Charters before the Revolution such as the Virginia Charter that the Constitution was modeled after. These contained varieties of religious freedoms.”

    Which specifically left Catholics out, except for Rhode Island and Pennsylvania.

    “War, never again war.”

    That it was a hope that an intelligent man like the Pope realized would likely never come true in this Fallen World. I think he said it as an aspiration. Without the outcome of World War 2 he almost certainly would never have survived to become Pontiff as the Third Reich planned to eliminate most of the Polish population. The Pope often praised the courage of the troops who fought for Poland during World War 2, so I find the Pope’s attitude towards war contradictory.

    “You just said in another post that “(Prayer) will accomplish absolutely nothing in stopping the Civil War in Syria.”

    I stand by the statement. Unless you assume that God will work a miracle to end the War, how in the world will any amount of prayer stop the war in Syria as a practical matter? God does not give us prayer so that we can hide our eyes and not take practical steps to accomplish good. The Faith has never confused prayer with a genie like summoning of God. Prayer would not have relieved the suffering of the man helped by the Good Samaritan. God expects us to pray but he also expects us to take practical steps to work good in His world.

    “The Militaristic Catholic?”

    War takes up only a fraction of what I write about on this blog. However, I refuse to pretend that this great evil can be ignored with platitudes and pious good wishes. That is not the traditional Catholic position. Some would attempt to claim pacifism as the default position of Catholicism and that simply is not the case. Joan of Arc was sent by God on her mission to expel the English from France. She, a maid, started the process that led to French victory. God chose war as His method to accomplish His end, and that is why I quoted her.

    “and it’s become a 3-day battle”

    As faithful readers of this blog know, when someone challenges one of my posts I usually will respond. That is why we have com boxes for give and take.

    “Faith, Hope and Love”

    Indeed I believe in them. I have a long running series of posts on military chaplains who exemplify these virtues. In the midst of the evil of War they bring the love of Christ and I honor them for that.

    “I just heard on Al Kresta’s Show on Catholic radio that Dawkins had been a supporter of eugenics in keeping the races from mixing.”

    After his defense of “mild pedophilia” I would believe almost anything of Dawkins. Some atheists are wishing he would convert so they wouldn’t have to claim him any more!