Who is Obama?

Thursday, September 20, AD 2012

When it comes to Obama and most of the Mainstream Media there are two salient facts:

1.  Most members of the Mainstream Media have a crush on Obama that would embarrass many a teen-age girl with its intensity and its studied indifference to facts.

2.  Most of the Mainstream Media have been reluctant\hostile to doing elementary investigative reporting into Obama’s past.

The Washington Examiner is now doing the job that other members of the Mainstream Media simply will not do.  Go here to read their series The Obama You Don’t Know.  The series is a tribute to what reporting, the gathering of facts, can be at its best.  I consider myself reasonably well-informed as to Obama’s biography, and I found out things I didn’t know.  This is a must read series.  It would have been nice to have this information before the election of 2008, but we at least have it now before the election of 2012.

Continue reading...

9 Responses to Who is Obama?

  • I’m not worried about whatever Soetoro did years ago, it’s what he’s doing to me now.


    3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . RACISTS!

  • Well, beloved Americans….. better late than never. Now you can see what you elected as your President. A shameless fraud. May the Holy Spirit speak to your hearts before the Voting Day so that you can save your country from total ruin.

  • Mary, we also need to remember America at the 3.00 O’Clock Hour of Great Mercy and pray the Divine Mercy Chaplet specifically for your beloved country. If a country ever needed Divine Mercy it is America just now with the defining Elections around the corner.

  • [email protected]: “for the sake of His sorrowful passion have mercy on us, and on our country and on the whole world.” Yes. [email protected]

  • [email protected]: Truth: Four more years it will be “total ruin.”

    May God bless you and keep you.

  • Interesting information, but I fear it won’t sway true believers. Hopefully, it will convince enough fence sitters if not to vote for Romney, at least to not vote for Obama.

  • Thank you, Mary and T. Shaw. We, the Eucharistic Apostles of the Divine Mercy, Kenyan Chapter are praying for your country daily. Obama mocked God and God is going to dethrone him through your Votes. Don’t let Him down. I just heard Obama saying “you cannot change Washington from the inside, you can only do it from the outside”. Well, if that is not an admission of defeat, then I am not Mary Moll of Nairobi Kenya!!!!! Anyone else you elect will definitely “Change Washington from Within”….that is the only way to save your country. If you believe the man Romney can do it – as I do from where I live thousands of miles away – get into that Voting Booth and vote him in, overwhelmingly. God bless you, God bless your beloved Country.

President of All the People

Wednesday, September 19, AD 2012

President Barack Obama went on the David Letterman show last night and responded to the leaked video where Mitt Romney explained why 47 percent of the electorate was basically shut off to him. Obama took the softball and hammered one out of the park, waxing poetic about being responsive to all the people.

Such stirring words, and certainly President Obama has repeatedly demonstrated his commitment to respecting the values of those who disagree with him.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to President of All the People

  • I stand by my statements on Barack Hussein Obama that I wrote in other com boxes here at TAC. He advocates the murder of the unborn and newly born. He sanctifies the filth of homosexual sodomy and lesbianism. He bankrupts the nation by increasing debt and stealing from the public treasury. He is evil – as evil as his predecessor, King Manasseh of Judah. Yes, he is in the style of Chicago gangsters. Yes, he has contributed nothing new to the liberal, progressive cause, but only enacted what they already supported. But like every murderous gangster thug before him, he is evil.

    I suppose now I should take another OxyContin and calm down. Jeremiah never had that option when he confronted the King in Jerusalem (not that I am a Jeremiah – I don’t qualify).

    Sorry, Paul Z. Yours is a good post. But I get so angry and frustrated at all this. That godless man has time to go on David Letterman’s TV show and campaign against Romney, but he doesn’t have time for national security conferences, attendance at which is necessary for the protection of ALL the people.

    Barack Hussein Obama is NOT my President. NOT! And never ever will be.

  • So, does Mitt merit equal time?

  • I understand that Obama also claimed in this interview that the national deficit is “not a problem”, and when asked what the deficit was when he took office, said he doesn’t remember. He is artful at rhetoric, and at denying our most critical problems! As a Catholic, I would like to hear the alternative to Obama tell us that he cares about all Americans even though he knows they won’t all give him their vote, and that as a society, our goal is that dependency is a temporary status on the road to self-sufficiency through good jobs and better incomes (with exceptions, of course, such as retired or disabled.)

  • It wasn’t too long ago that former congressman Patrick Kennedy did an interview
    where he briefly touched on the necessity of raising funds for the White House in
    order to insure continuing good relations. He seemed to regard it as only natural
    that POTUS should closely track monies forwarded by congressmen of his own party
    and cause his face to shine only upon those who coughed up enough. Naturally, the
    flip side of that coin is the implication that this president is less of a president for
    those who are unwilling to pay to play.

  • “So I feel that I’ve been President for all Americans – the stupid Cambridge Police, the members of my security detail who wouldn’t think twice about shooting a black guy, doctors who perform unnecessary amputations out of greed; bankers and pitchfork-wielding mobs; Hispanics and their enemies, who I encouraged them to attack; the people who were entitled to money when GM went bankrupt, and the people who got money when GM went bankrupt; filmmakers critical of Islam who give me lots of money, and filmmakers critical of Islam who are invited to come downtown for routine questioning.”

    “It’s on behalf of all of those people that I have worked as hard as I can. That’s what you’ve seen the past few years. Me, working as hard as I can. Barring only occasional moments of rest – a couple of rounds of golf each month, watching less than half of the college basketball that ESPN and ESPN2 televises, a bit of daily exercise, and the odd date night flight to New York or Chicago or Los Angeles or Paris or Rio or Casablanca or Majorca or Fiji or Maui or only a couple of dozen other places – I’m at work every waking moment.”

    “I don’t think most Americans realize how much is involved in this job, probably because I make it look so easy, but I have to give a lot of speeches in front of a lot of admirers, and I feel like I owe it to them to make it the greatest experience of their lives. It’s not just speeches, either. There are a lot of dinners where I have to listen to other speeches, and campaign material to film, interviews to sit through, donation reports to review, photo shoots of me working to arrange, state dinners to host, just many different things. Tonight alone, Dave, I’m not just here talking to you, I have to go have dinner next to Beyonce later. Again.”

    “And then there’s the foreign affairs component – of course my opponents are new to diplomacy – but it’s a very important component of my job to meet with foreign leaders, smooth over damage that has been done to our relationship due to missteps by previous administrations, and explain to them what I have noticed about how they can fix various problems in their countries.”

    “The truth is, I don’t think Mitt Romney is capable of doing what I’ve done over the past three and a half years, and frankly I think deep down he knows it.”


  • ‘Cept us bitter people clinging to God . . . guns . . . ‘stills . . .

    And, Catholics that oppose abortion and artificial contraception . .

    And, GM bondholders from whom he stole . . .

    And, the evil rich that don’t pay their fair share to house, feed and clothe looters, moochers, and 17,000,000 bureaucrats and politicians . . .

    And, “stupid” cambridge police . . .

    And, filmmakers critical of Islam who are invited to come downtown for questioning.

    And, he’s a Chicago gangster/politician.

    St. Augustine, “Government without justice is mass brigandage.”

    “It is better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.”

  • Except the innocent. He has a real affection for killing children in the womb.

  • Paul, you comment is an oasis of reason.

  • UNEXPECTEDLY: Obama Campaign’s Flag Poster No Longer Appears In Store.

    – From an instapundit post this evening.

Romney and Voters Who Don’t Pay Taxes

Tuesday, September 18, AD 2012

It seems like leftist pundits have decided that remarks by Romney at a fundraiser that were secretly taped and distributed by Mother Jones constitute the latest “now Romney has lost the election” moment. In the video, Romney tells supporters that Obama starts out with a huge base of 47-49% of voters who pay no income taxes, are dependent on government, and thus cannot be reached by Romney’s low tax message.

Of course, for those whose memories go back further than the most recent “Romney is finished” moment declared by Andrew Sullivan and Co., the obvious comparison to this is when Obama famously announced back in 2008 that the big difficulty for his campaign was that it was difficult to reach people who are see no evidence of progress in their daily lives and so they become bitter and cling to their guns and their religion.

Both comments spring from a degree of party mythology. It’s not the case that all 47% of people who don’t pay income taxes are Democrat supporters. Because our tax code is so progressive and because of the hefty child tax credit and earned income tax credit (both of which are things Republicans generally support) a lot of middle income families do not pay taxes. That certainly doesn’t make them default Obama supporters. Many of them are in fact die-hard Republicans, because they don’t participate in the modern Democratic Party’s vision of government dependence and social engineering as the solution to their problems.

That said, I think this particular media tizzy is particularly silly, and the pundits declaring Romney to be badly hurt by this are mostly reflecting the beliefs of a bubble in which the GOP is already hated.

Obama’s remarks were, if anything, far more offensive to potential swing voters. He categorized whole sections of the country, demographically, as being given over to bitterness because they hadn’t seen progress and explained that this bitterness came out in their becoming attached to guns, religion, hating minorities and immigrants, etc. There are a lot of small town people who like to hunt and go to church and don’t think of themselves as racist who nonetheless were potential Obama swing voters in 2008.

By contrast, Romney’s analysis may be off (and I don’t think that does him any credit) but it’s really hard for me, at least, to picture someone saying, “Gee, I was really thinking Romney might have some answers on the economy, but now I heard this clip where he says that people who don’t pay taxes and want to be dependent on the government are in the bag for Obama, and I’m proud of the fact that I don’t pay taxes and depend on the government, so forget about him! I’m supporting Obama.”

A lot of people who don’t, on net, pay taxes don’t really think of themselves as not paying taxes. The tax code is complex enough to make it tricky to tell in some ways. (And they pay other taxes even if they don’t pay federal income tax.) Nor do many people who are potential GOP voters think of themselves as dependent on government. If anything, the argument that Obama already has a huge advantage because he’s bribing voters with lots of government handouts seems to fit with Romney’s overall campaign message. Whether that’s a winning message I don’t know (I hope it is) but it’s hard for me to see how this is actually all that damaging.


Continue reading...

37 Responses to Romney and Voters Who Don’t Pay Taxes

  • It’s damaging because it’s being spun as Romney “despises” the 48%.

    As for the other question, remember to think in terms of the economic life cycle. Many of the people who aren’t paying taxes are young or old. The youth are more likely to vote Democratic, but have a poor turnout rate. The old are more likely to vote for the party they’ve always voted for, and have a high turnout rate. It’s a big (but common) mistake to think of the poor or the non-taxpayers as a permanent underclass, urban with low education.

  • It was dumb. Some people on social security did back breaking work their whole life like beef luggers and meat cutters back in the day but were paid at such a level as to need social security when they aged and they now in retirement hear Romney picturing them badly. I think the comments will do real damage in the debates wherein moderators will bring it up and by then, factcheck dot org will estimate the other taxes everyone is paying. Cigarette taxes (Federal $1.01 a pack), half of which are paid for by low income people, are paying some real bills in the Schipp programs. Everyone pays sales tax and even renters pay property taxes indirectly in the exact price of their rent. Ultimately even the welfare check does not stop in the welfare person’s wallet but moves on to the Bodega and the landlord who pay taxes.

  • I think Romney’s comment will resonate positively with most Americans, especially those who are picking up the tab for the rapid expansion of the Welfare State under Obama. Romney should take advantage of this to launch an ad offensive attacking Obama’s policies as directly leading to more and more dependence on government by an ever increasing share of the population. I don’t think Romney will be hurt among Americans who do not pay income tax and who do not receive government benefits and that is a fair amount of the 47% who do not pay income tax.

  • Bill,

    What I’m wondering, though, is: Will a retired meat cutter who hears this Romney clip here on the news going to think, “He despises me because I’m dependent on the government?” or is he going to think, “By golly, that’s right. I worked hard my whole life, paid my taxes, and I live on the Social Security that I paid into my whole life. I don’t want to support people who aren’t willing to take care of themselves!”

    At least among those likely to vote Republican anyway, I don’t think most people on Social Security and MediCare think of themselves as being “dependent on the government” or not paying taxes (actually, a lot of them do pay taxes, even though their income is very low, because they don’t have dependents and they often don’t have mortgages).

    I may well be wrong. I’m just not sure that many people who could be persuaded to vote for Romney in the first place are likely to think of themselves as being insulted by this remark. (Though I think it was slip on Romney’s part, because it’s clearly not the case that all people who don’t pay taxes support Obama.) It seems like a remark that’s callibrated to pretty much only offend those who are already die hard Democrats.

    That said, if it adds to the “Romney is an out of touch rich guy” meme, it could well end up hurting him. Sadly, elections in the US don’t tend to be decided by the people with any real kind of political awareness (they mostly have their preferences already set) but by the sort of people who don’t have strong or clear political beliefs and base their decisions of vague ideas of “what sort of person” each candidate is.

  • I think Romney can salvage this one by expanding on his point. It’s not just the poor who don’t pay income tax who are government dependent. It’s the fat cats in academia who live off of public university subsidies, the public sector unions who depend on laws from state governments mandating union dues be collected automatically and who get their pay from the government, the fourth rail (the media) who live on insider access to beltway folks, the big investment banks that Obama bailed out with Federal funds, and all the rest who live on government pay and therefore have stake in government remaining unsustainably large.

  • and the pundits declaring Romney to be badly hurt by this are mostly reflecting the beliefs of a bubble in which the GOP is already hated.

    That bubble of GOP-haters includes large sections of Republicans, including the likes or Karl Rove, who live in a perpetual state of pessimism and despair.

    Pinky might have a point that this could be spun by a complict media in a way that Obama’s comments were not. That said, the post-9/11 “gaffe” did no apparent harm to Romney, and I think this will largely be a kerfuffle only in media circles, but will have no lasting impact one way or the other on the campaign.

    Finally, as one who has been – to put it mildly – no fan of Mitt Romney, I have to say that this Mitt Romney is someone I could have gotten behind (or at least disliked less) in the primary season. I will say this in his favor: he hasn’t exactly run to the middle as I thought he would once he secured the nomination.

  • The greatest insult to another, in terms of the Left, is to be insensitive (or even perceived as insensitive) to another’s feelings, unless those feelings are couched in either orthodox Christianity or non-intellectual turn of life (hunting, Nascar, etc.). Therefore, Romney is being insensitive to the poor, the lower classes, etc., and must pay for his insensitivity.

  • This would be a great time for the Romney campaign to remind them of the Obama campaign’s Life of Julia, that celebration of reliance on government:


    The Obama campaign has not been subtle: Vote for us and we will give you freebies! (Sandra Fluke, that is your cue!) When it comes to giving away things Romney can’t compete with Obama, but when it comes to pointing out that this Welfare State on steroids is sending the country off a fiscal cliff, Romney can make that case very effectively if he has the intestinal fortitude to do so.

  • Darwin,
    In an extraordinary situation of 8+% unemployment, 45 million people received food stamps in 2011 according to Judicial Watch. But that’s 12% of the country not 47% which tells me and others that Romney is dissing anyone getting a check and not paying income tax. And that is the meatpacker on social security. But it’s also every young widow with children because each of them gets a social security check for the children. A Merrill Lynch manager with a wife and three children was stabbed to death on the train platform in Jersey City four years ago by an insane person off his meds. That widow just to roughly keep that standard of living would have to accept social security. I presume she lost her home given the loss of income involved. TV showed a woman living in a shelter with her three children and working two low paid jobs. She receives
    medicaid for medical coverage because privately that would be $12,000 for the four of them. She is in Romney’s 47% as perhaps is the Merrill Lynch widow….receiving government help…earning too little to pay tax since three children and no real career in perhaps both situations.

  • The comments undercut Romney’s “the President is dividing us” theme. Now, I don’t know if that theme was resonating, but Romney would have been better off going into the debates with that theme intact. It would have made a great rebuttal. But now, Obama can dismiss any such criticism with a single reference.

  • The upside is that lots of members of the 47% who don’t pay income tax probably don’t realize it and may even be upset at the thought of so many people not paying taxes.

    On the other hand, writing off 47% of the American public, for whatever reason, is generally not a good idea for a presidential candidate.

  • I definitely think the worst part of it is the optics of apparently writing off 47% of the electorate. Sure, it’s highly unlikely that Romney could squeak out of win of more than a couple percentage points, but it never looks good for a presidential candidate to say that he just can’t reach nearly half the country (even if it’s true.)

    Bill: Again, I think it’s mostly only people on the left who are going to take the comment in those terms. I’ve known plenty of tea party sympathizers who due to their individual circumstances don’t pay federal income taxes, but aside from the fact that many people who don’t pay taxes don’t realize that they don’t pay taxes (after all, even people on Social Security pay taxes on it — though if they have low enough total income and enough deductions they may get it all back and more), people aren’t necessarily consistent in their political impressions. It’s not at all unlikely that someone who doesn’t pay income taxes would at the same time be angry at the idea of “freeloaders” not paying taxes and being dependents.

  • This “tempest in a teapot” is meant to distract the unoffocial Obama re-election camaign flaks/MSM and the OWS crowd from Obama’s lethal failures in foreign policy and GWOT and the fact we are being run into the poor house.

    Obama and his people gave us the “Julia” vids.

    This re-states the same theme.

    Vote for Obama. He will take care of all your needs.

    Hope and change: will 197,000 new, August food stamp recipients largely vote Obama?

    Will 96,000 that got jobs in August largely vote Romney?

  • Hi GOPers.

    I’m surprised none of you have made a post about the LUNACY of Paul Ryan’s economic plan.

    Cutting govt spending to 20% of gdp its currently just under 40% removing that much money is large scale austerity and would make things absurdly tight in the states plus would have alot of negative consequence also a tax system of just two rates 25% and 10% isn’t something that could ever work.

    Margaret Thatcher’s austerity programs, British government spending never went below 40% of GDP. 20% of GDP would lead to mass unemployment and even starvation.

  • Darwin – You reminded me of something. Romney’s statement uses tea party phrasing. It may alienate some people, but it’s going to energize the tea partiers, who are potential contributors and volunteers. They haven’t been particularly vocal so far this election.

  • Pinky,
    The whole tape is being released later today as per his request by Mother Jones. Who knows what lurks therein. Boredom is not an option in U.S. elections now that cameras with speakers rule.

  • Coolio,

    Your numbers are wrong. According to White House numbers (table 1.2) federal spending was 24% of GDP in 2011 and federal tax receipts were 15% of GDP. The Ryan plan is to get both of those numbers to around 20%. That’s far from crazy, it’s the post WW2 norm for the US.

  • How exactly does that link support your numbers?
    I clicked on it and it’s just a bunch of more links.

  • bah!
    I’m an idiot.

    I see you mentioned table 1.2.

  • Hmmmm.
    if I’m reading this right was fed spending well below 20% of GDP in the past?
    My prof is saying that going under 20% of GDP is absurd.

  • Your prof is, well, a college prof. Private-sector folks have a different perspective.

  • If hunting in non-intellectual, it’s only seen that way by people who have never bothered to go hunting.

  • Coolio,

    If you go back to before the Korean War, and certainly before WW2, federal spending was way under 20% of GDP. Back then, the federal government did a lot less (Dept. of Agriculture didn’t have all the subsidies it does not, welfare didn’t really exist, nor did Social Security or Medicare or Medicaid, there weren’t appreciable Federal education subsidies, even the military was a lot smaller.) Since the late 60s the federal budget has pretty consistently been 20% of GDP. The main reason it’s higher now is that with an extended recession the GDP hasn’t grown as much as usual and the government has spent more than usual both trying to help people directly (unemployment, foodstamps, etc.) and also via stimulus spending (spending programs, GM bailout, Wall Street bailout, etc.)

    It may be that your professor was thinking of the total government spending number (federal + state + local) for which I think I’ve seen some numbers that approach 40% of GDP, though I don’t know how good those numbers are. However, obviously, the Ryan budget wouldn’t cut state and local spending.

    Whatever one may think about the details of the Ryan budget, the overall size of it in relation to the economy is pretty much the same as what existed under Clinton.

  • We didn’t hit double digits until World War I (Civil War excepted). Generally federal spending as a percent of GDP was in the 5% range, and then has continually ramped up since the rise of the Progressives. But Darwin’s correct – the 40% number must encompass all government spending, not just federal.

  • “Watch this “campaign-changing gaffe” become a nonstory as soon as the press decides it’s hurting Obama instead of helping him.” Instapundit

  • Gallup: 54% of voters think government does too much and 39% think the state doesn’t do enough. Go figure.

  • Generally federal spending as a percent of GDP was in the 5% range, and then has continually ramped up since the rise of the Progressives.

    I believe federal spending stood at ~1.4% prior to the 1st World War. It was ~1.7% as of the fiscal year concluding in June of 1929 (while state and local spending stood at ~9%). It increased to around 3% by 1933 as nominal federal spending was maintained while nominal domestic product declined severely. During the period running from 1933 to 1940, a plateau of 6.5% was reached. Over the course of the period running from 1947 to 1974, proportionate federal spending and state and local spending was on an upward trajectory (initially from an increase in the baselines devoted to the military). The sum of these reached a plateau around about 1974 and then fluctuated around a set point of ~ 33% of domestic product until 2008/09.

  • That bubble of GOP-haters includes large sections of Republicans, including the likes or Karl Rove, who live in a perpetual state of pessimism and despair.

    If the topic is the dynamics of an electoral campaign, Rove is about as informed an opinion as you are likely to find. One of the annoying features of those insipid things called Presidential campaigns is the amount of kibbitzing from people who know little or nothing of either promotional campaigns or the mechanics of electoral politics.

  • What I’m wondering, though, is: Will a retired meat cutter who hears this Romney clip here on the news going to think, “He despises me because I’m dependent on the government?” or is he going to think, “By golly, that’s right. I worked hard my whole life, paid my taxes, and I live on the Social Security that I paid into my whole life. I don’t want to support people who aren’t willing to take care of themselves!”


    A lot of doom-and-gloom-there-is-no-hope stuff requires that one believe most people are idiots.
    The retired folks that I know who would give Romney anything like a chance are bright enough, if pressed, to say something like “Sure, I don’t pay federal income taxes and would probably be in the forty whatever percent, but it’s just silly to expect him to say ‘the 40-something-percent minus people who were charged their whole lives for social security and may or may not be paying income tax part of the population that is getting free money from the government isn’t going to vote against getting their free money,’ what kind of loon are you? Now, about my medicare cuts and how none of the doctors I use can take it anymore because filing the paperwork costs more than the government will give them—”

    The retired folks that I know who wouldn’t do that are the same ones that blocked me when I pointed out that a 19 year old married woman having a kid isn’t proof that religious states have too many high school kids getting pregnant.

  • Foxfier,
    But in 2005, those totally dependent on welfare in the U.S. were 3.8% of the population. Another 11+% both work and receive food stamps etc. based on low wages for family size.
    A majority then of Romney’s 47% of the nation are already taking responsibility and care for their lives and he said he could not convince 47% to do so. At best Romney can’t convince 3.8% of the nation not 47%.
    Federal checks go to retired military, retired federal workers and pols, disabled on ss, elderly on ss, widows with children on ss, and all federal workers and active military if you go beyond
    Bottom line, Romney actually was trying to lower the polling hopes of the rich donors he was speaking to so he was explaining away the Obama voter base as 47% of the nation that doesn’t care for themselves when at best that figure is 3.8% and only if you are totally exacting on that group.

  • Because American’s median household income is down $2,000, or 4%, lower now than at the June 2009 end of the Great Recession.

    Because QEternity might raise the price pf an ounce of gold to $2,400 (Thank you, Ben!!!) and oil $190 a barrel.

    Because mortgage lending hits a 16 year low.

    Because food stamps unexpectedly hit an all-time high.

  • Rove is about as informed an opinion as you are likely to find.

    When it comes to analyzing political data and understanding the dynamics of each district – heck, each county – then yes, few are as savvy as Karl Rove. When it comes to taking the data and offering good political advice, Rove is no better than a snake oil salesman.

  • Bill-
    your response doesn’t have anything to do with what I wrote, and even goes on to conflate having any other source of income with not taking more than you give.

  • The networks are rabid about Mitt Romney’s simple objective observation about part of the entire population. People from all sectors hear the daily bias, and aren’t seriously listening to constant one-sided childlike whining.
    It seems as though DNC media is counting on idiots and trying to create some more.

    I wonder whether the DNC is giving prizes to the reporters and newcasters who best spin facts.

    Demerits when they don’t forget the President’s insulting those for clinging to religion and morals, his fruitless spending excesses and corporate bailouts, his promises to be flexible for Russia next term, his pandering to terrorists in countries where his Americans are slaughtered, and his racial bigotry division troublemaking, and his contrasting attitude to Muslims versus Christians. Or his wife’s video about the ‘damn’ flag last year. Or question or address his backing of law to let babies born alive after a failed abortion attempt to die on the table. Or the fact that radicals in the middle East and worldwide want to kill Americans due to things in his own immoral Democrat platform. Or his altering traditional references to and denial of his Creator to whose church he went with his family. Or a slew of other outrageous gaffes, facts and figures that no one else could ever live down. Symptoms of severe amnesia over the fact that as Governor, Mitt Romney helped better the lives of people on gov. aid by using responsible management. No one wants demerits for doing honest work.

    Anyway some neighborhood kids were bemused by his Presidency of the 57 states of America!

  • “many people who don’t pay taxes don’t realize that they don’t pay taxes”

    In the world of sound bites, I don’t know that too many people who would otherwise have been inclined to vote for Romney are going to connect themselves with the 47% who allegedly “don’t pay taxes” (or more accurately, do not OWE federal taxes under current law) and consider that such an egregious insult that they will run out and vote for Obama. However, this kerfluffle points out the weakness in this meme that the Tea Party has been flogging for some time and which I have always found particularly irritating.

    If you are told that a particular person or group of people “doesn’t pay taxes,” what do you immediately think? If you’re like me, the first thought that comes to mind is that they must be doing something wrong — that they are evading tax liability through deliberate action, or that they are failing to file tax forms or fill out W-4 forms to have taxes withheld from their wages. That’s why I would be extremely hesistant to equate not having a tax liability with “not paying” taxes.

    However, a good chunk of the 47% consists of people who do have taxes withheld from their paychecks every week (or 2 weeks, or month) and who file tax forms every year in order to claim a refund. How can they be accused of “not paying taxes” if they go through the hassle of filing income tax every year? What are they supposed to do — let Uncle Sam keep their refund, which they effectively lent him interest-free for the previous year?

  • I would say Rove has the point of view of Beltway Repubs. This is how he could support immigration “reform”, big entitlements and lavish spending. He also has their myopia so he could convince Bush in 2006 that they had no need to worry about the possibility of Dems taking over Congress. Rasmussen has consistently shown almost inverse opinions between the Northeast elites and the rest of the country on many topics.

  • Pingback: We Believe in Free People and Free Enterprise | The American Catholic

Barack Obama is Unfit to be President

Saturday, September 15, AD 2012

The Obama administration continues to show complete contempt for American liberties.

In the wake of the Benghazi and Cairo debacles, and the administration being caught completely flat-footed in regard to these coordinated assaults on our embassies, the Obama administration has acted to attempt to escape any responsibility.

First, they have had their lickspittle media friends blame Romney for speaking out.  Ah yes, Romney attacking the craven statement of the Cairo embassy is the chief problem and not minor issues like the Middle East going up in flames and the Obama administration being completely clueless as to what to do.

Second, the State Department is refusing to take questions, from those few members of the media who still occasionally act like reporters instead of unpaid Obama press agents, until their investigation is complete.  The Good Lord knows how long that would take, but I would wager Wednesday November 7, 2012.

Third, the administration is still attempting to claim that these attacks are the result of the film attacking Mohammed.  Of course that was merely the pretext for the attacks.  The administration knows this, but its policy of appeasement of jihadists would be in jeopardy if they admitted that the silly film had virtually nothing to do with these revenge attacks on the anniversary of 9-11.

Fourth, when one is seeking to evade responsibility having a nice fat scapegoat is very convenient.  Thus we have the maker of the film, who is on probation for a bank fraud conviction, being taken into custody for questioning as to his alleged violation of the terms of his probation.  The alleged violation is for using a computer not connected with his work.  Of course the administration cares not a fig about that.  It wants jihadists abroad and Americans at home to see that Obama is getting tough with this fellow who stirred up all the trouble.  (Ignore all those jihadists!  It is all the fault of this guy!)  That this tramples over the man’s First Amendment rights is of absolutely no concern.  The Administration might wish to eventually haul in this fellow’s co-conspirators:  John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, James Madison and all the other Founding Fathers who gave us the freedom that Obama is seeking to shred.

Glenn Reynolds, Instapundit, speaks for me in reaction to this:

Continue reading...

48 Responses to Barack Obama is Unfit to be President

  • Let us pray for strength in the face of this assault on First Amendment Freedoms and unalienable rights.

  • I have been cognizant of the totalitarian situation since January 2009.

  • yes pray. And what else to do? Run the course until November? There could be a lot more go wrong before then.

  • The Dept. of Justice under E. Holder: Is that who administrates the Sheriffs?

  • He was brought in for questioning by Federal probation officers PM, and you are correct that they would be under Eric Holder’s (sic) Justice Department.

  • I don’t get it. I don’t see how anyone favorable to this administration could possibly think that hauling this guy in for questioning would play well with the American public. What am I missing?

  • Hmmm. It was the movie.

    9/11 was this passing week when solemn memorials and Masses were held.

    Also, around 9/11, the American flag was burned in Cairo, Ambassador Stevens and three others were murdered in a US Embassy , and other events and threats ( not so well reported ) occurred. Violence in the Middle East and serious threats in other countries around the world and here in the US with evacuations in Texas and another western state university, almost at Valparaiso in Indiana all close to the anniversary of 9/11. Not the movie.

    Something about a good movie to do with 2016, and then using a not-too-good movie that’s been around awhile for another cheap trick on the world comes to mind.

    The probation violator needed five or more officers to show – what – how big stopping the cause of this trouble in the world is. Wrong guy, Chicago style.

  • Slightly off topic – See there were riots in Sydney Australia yesterday for the same reason – the film.
    But the rioters who were asked about the film had never seen it. They were stirred up by their radical clerics. There is a photo of a 10yr. old kid holding a sign “Behead all who insult the prophet”, and many of the muslim protesters were yelling out anti-christian slogans.
    The Aussies in general will be highly p—-d off by this, and are already demanding the end of” multiculturalism and diversity” (gag 🙁 ), and the deportation of extreme muslims. Just hope our government takes notice of these events, and acts accordingly while we have only a very small muslim population.

  • On Tuesday, 9/11, there was a memorial Mass where I saw tears, solemnity, and, before the recessional, we prayed for our nation and for peace in all nations among men.

    The front pew was reserved for family of a person who lost life on 9/11/01. A recent widow of a veteran and Knight of Columbus left her pew in tears so she wouldn’t disturb the Mass. People, many unknown to one another, were quietly together.

    With not much acknowlegment of similar purpose from their president.

  • Kissing up to Muslims is a complete waste of time. If it is not this it will be something about a Qeeran in a toilet, or a mute Christian blaspheming their alleged prophet. One has to ignore these motivated Muslim concerns in theit totality. On the other hand nemesis has strange ways of working out. As Lawrence Auster indicates only a year ago the disgusting woman Hillary, was celebrating the brutal death of Gaddafi who made the mistake of giving up his nuclear program. I see some benefit accruing to the beleaguered Christians and Allawites in Syria from this, as all but the brain-dead left understands that the Muslims do not share your values.

  • Barry doesn’t have time to meet the Israeli PM Netanyahu, whose nation is in line to be nuked by Iran.

    The leader of the choom gang has lots of time to go “live” on the radio with FL radio star, “the Pimp with a Limp.”

    The filmmaker of the “Innocence of Muslims” is hauled in for questioning and Soetoro’s unofficial campaign apparatus (the lying, liberal so-called media) says nothing about the First Amendment. That is Freedom of Speech, Obama-worshiping imbeciles.

  • Yes, and according to a wonderfully written article on another website, it is no less than the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago which is responsible for launching Obama’s career? After watching selections of the Democrat National Convention, with its parade of virulent anti-Catholic Catholics, flaunting their belief in abortion, contraception, gay marriage and every other excommunicable offense, followed by deafening silence from the “Catholic” (yeah, whatever!) leadership, we must conclude the American Catholic church is in full-on schism. I continue to believe it is time to purge the membership, reduce the ranks to only those who actually profess the faith. By allowing the pollution of Catholicism by such unholy, satanic forces is destroying the faith of many. I will not be answering to my God for that.

  • Slightly off topic – See there were riots in Sydney Australia yesterday for the same reason – the film.

    The published commentary of Australia’s politicians was rote and insipid and both newspapers and broadcasting outlets appear to have disabled commentary by their readers.

    None of the Australian chapter of the international regime class at the top of the heap of every occidental country bothered to point out the lunacy of a violent protests in downtown Sydney over a Youtube video posted by a random individual living in California. What could possibly be the point of such a ‘protest’ other than ‘hear me roar’. If that is the point, the proper response is ‘go roar elsewhere’. It is not in the interest of any country to be importing masses of people whose vanguard are given to effrontery and efforts at intimidation. For the current foreign minister of Australia the issue is “the damage to Australia’s multicultural reputation” or some such, to which the response is to tell his diplomatic and consular staff to redouble their efforts bridge the gaps blah blah. Maybe one day Australia and other countries will have a set of public officials who actually give a rip about the peasants whose taxes pay their salaries.

  • Chicago style!? Gestapo style fits better.
    Holder & Goring (Hermann) could become synonymous. As our Freedoms are dissolved in a wash of Obamaclean I can’t help seeing Obama in Germany in 08′ giving his heroic speech in the infamous site. Hold on America, it isn’t over yet.

  • My biggest fear is that Obumbler will be reelected. Obumbler openly insulted Pennsylvania in 2008 with his “bitter clinger” remarks. His Misadministration has made an enemy of coal and wants to shut down every coal fired power plant. Next, the EPA will go after fracking. Gasoline is approaching $4 a gallon and is loikely more than that (suburban Philadelphia, I guess you love abortion and gay marriage so much that you would vote for Obumber if gas was $6 a gallon). Allegheny County would vote Democrat if Satan, Stalin or Hitler ran as a Democrat.

  • “Maybe one day Australia and other countries will have a set of public officials who actually give a rip about the peasants whose taxes pay their salaries.”

    My ladyfriend just called me and told me that she is afraid to fly to Medugorjie this Thursday. When the tourist profits dry up, the public officials will notice.

  • From facebook-
    who knew “buy this or the cute and fluffy animal gets it!” gag would be the basis for some folks’ foreign policy, or that claiming the guy that shot the cute defenseless animal when his demands weren’t met was somehow not at fault, while those who didn’t comply to his unjust demands were?

  • That photograph should cost Obama the election.

    If it doesn’t, it will say more about the living, breathing trash that comprises the American electorate than it does about the dull and illogical incumbent running America into the dirt.

  • “The Good Lord knows how long that would take, but I would wager Wednesday November 7, 2012.”

    Or the twelfth of never.

  • Only fasting and prayer will drive out this demon. And a daily rosary. Lord, have mercy on your people who put their trust in you.

  • “it is no less than the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago which is responsible for launching Obama’s career”

    Could you provide some further explanation?

  • John 14: 8: If God is all you have, you have all you need.

  • Elaine,

    There is nothing too absurd that it can’t be posted on the internet. If Obama wasn’t a useful cog in the Chicago machine, any other quality good or bad would have counted for nothing. Obama himself credited Rev Wright for giving him street cred so let’s leave it at that. He doesn’t cling to guns or religion does he?

  • Further to Don the Kiwi’s remarks about the demonstrations in Sydney, there were reports of a demonstration outside the American Embassy in Paris on Saturday.

    Now, Saturday was the Feast of the Seven Dolors and Monteverdi’s Vespers of the BVM was sung at the Madeleine that evening. The church is only a few hundred metres from the embassy and I noticed an American official I know slightly in the congregation. Afterwards, he and his friends walked down the rue Royale and turned right into the av. Gabriel, where the embassy is. There were no signs of any special security precautions and, yet, if the television reports were to be believed, Paris was in a state of siege.

  • County sheriffs aren’t under the auspice or jusrisdiction of the DJ. They are county officials, all deputized and hired by the County Sheriff who is most usually elected. He/She may answer to a County Council or other duly elected civil authority, but is not bound to follow orders from any Federal authority, including the AG or anybody in the Dept of Justice.

    The only reason I bring this up is because there is a nascent effort whereby Sheriffs around the country have closed ranks and said that they will oppose all Federal intrusion into thier counties that is of questionable Constitutional merit. Of course, the Lamestream Media have breathed not a whit of this and won’t until it can find an incident that it can spin into a negative.

    More on that effort here.

  • “County sheriffs aren’t under the auspice or jusrisdiction of the DJ”

    Yep, which means that the Sheriff of Los Angeles County made the decision to pick the film maker up for the Feds.


  • They warned us that if we voted for McCain/Palin Americans would be jailed for criticizing religion.

    And, they were correct.

  • Meanwhile, Obama’s vile, idiot occupy movement is playing its game down around Wall Street.

  • Don’t under estimate the demonic power behind Obama and I say this will all seriousness. Everything about this guy defies logic and commonsense. The fact that almost half the country still supports demonstrates the power of this delusion. Non-stop prayer, especially the rosary will be the only thing that defeats him. With that said, I still feel in my heart that on election night, we will be down on our knees giving thanks to God for pulling out a very close race.

  • Siobhan says “we will be down on our knees giving thanks to God for pulling out a very close race”

    Obama won’t lose a very close race. Just saying. And if it’s a few votes more than he and his team can “overcome”, the country is still on the downward path. Romney is not the Man of Steel and the Repubs would be blocked at every turn. It better be decisive in spite of Romney and the Repubs efforts to lose.

  • “County sheriffs aren’t under the auspice or jusrisdiction of the DJ”

    …unless Obama says so
    EXECUTIVE ORDER 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issued over a fifteen year period.
    -EXECUTIVE ORDER 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.
    -EXECUTIVE ORDER 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

  • I think some of you need to take a pill.

  • Agreed Art. Sheesh, some of you people are turning Obama into an arch fiend with the power of Lucifer behind him. He is an average politician from Chicago, who could deliver a good speech, and who lucked into the White House. He has been a disaster as President and the odds are that he will be looking for a new job come January. Rasmussen is the pollster to keep your eye on for the most accurate reflection as to the current state of the race.

  • Who, Art D., needs to take a pill, and what kind of pill?

    People are very concerned about the fate of the Republic, the possibility that Obama will be re-elected, and the impact that will have inevitably on freedom of religion in the public square. The very fact that a man like Obama could have been elected in the first place in very scary and points to something very fundamentally wrong in society.

    Perhaps when Jeremiah was going to confront the King, he should first have taken a pill and thereby avoided being thrown into the cistern. Perhaps he shouldn’t have walked into the King’s Court wearing that yoke. Perhaps he should not have said, “Thus saith the Lord God…” Personally, I thank God for the people at this forum (like Mary DV and T. Shaw and others) who are unafraid to say, “Thus saith the Lord God…” I say if anyone deserves a pill, it is the Obumbler. Perhaps he is already on drugs. His pagan adulators certainly seem to be.

  • Paul Primavera this reminds me of the homily yesterday by my pastor Rev. Robert Sirico of the Acton Institute fame. He said “thus saith the Lord God… and I tend to agree with Him.” This is the mental state of our dear leader. He has all the original ideas. And his ideas are the only ones that count.

  • Well, Mr. Paul, how’s this:

    Don’t under estimate the demonic power behind Obama and I say this will all seriousness

    And if it’s a few votes more than he and his team can “overcome”, the country is still on the downward path.

    Under the previous administration, the accusatory commentary crossed into lunatic’s territory. We do not need to repeat that. The institutional culture of the Democratic Party is quite bad enough as it is. I do not think that Obama adds much to that. The man’s a cipher.

  • I second what Art and Don have said. Barack Obama is a terrible president, and deserves much of the criticism thrown at him. But we don’t need to intimate that he is somehow evil or demonic.

  • Okay, I re-read my post and I didn’t mean to sound like a drama queen. I’m just very concern about this election because this election will say so much about who we are as a people. I also maintain the position that anyone who promotes abortion, sodomy, the complete disregard for the rule of law, etc., like Obama is evil. What else do you call it?

  • Pingback: Happy Constitution Day! | The American Catholic
  • We know him by his works. They can be characterized in no uncertain terms: destruction.

    There are few jobs because they don’t care about jobs. Slaves are easier to control. The regime cares about income redistribution and power. Either that or they’re utterly incompetent because in August, 197,000 American got new food stamps entitlements and 79,000 got new jobs.

    And, constant lies to camouflage the abject failure of Obama’s appeasement/foreign policy. The regime insults our intelligence by contending that a YouTube (the savages don’t have toilets, much less laptops) caused the coordinated, long-planned al Qaeda attack, and murders of four Americans, on the Libyan Embassy.

    Obama never held a real job; and neither will most of your kids.

  • elm says:
    “Paul Primavera this reminds me of the homily yesterday by my pastor Rev. Robert Sirico of the Acton Institute fame.”
    elm, you are truly blessed.

    Paul W. Primavera: one Holy Rosary…right now.

  • Yes Ma’m, Mary De Voe! I read and obey! Am flat on my back in bed with my injured leg immobilized, so instead of TV, a Rosary is most appropriate. I shall pray for our Republic.

  • •Elaine Krewer says:
    “it is no less than the Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago which is responsible for launching Obama’s career”
    Could you provide some further explanation?

    On EWTN World Over, Raymond Aroyo told that the Bishops’ Campaign For Human Development funded ACORN and thirty or so abortion groups, listing the groups. The Bishops’ Campaign for Human Development funded community organizations and organizers including Obama.

  • Paul: When I pass away, I have asked God to let me say the Rosary forever. I, too, said the Rosary. Take care of yourself. So sorry to hear you are invalid.

  • don’t be afraid to say it, the devil is active and has more influence on some people than on others. the warfare is spiritual.
    the people we can more readily identify with the angels may be more hidden from view, but they are here.

  • Rather than saying Obama is a cipher, it’s better to say that he reflects in his attitudes and statements what his supporters have believed for many years. He doesn’t add any new thought but neither does he subtract anything or question any of their beliefs. If Obama were singular in his unfitness he would not matter. He and his supporters mean to win no matter what. What’s going in Wisconsin is emblematic of their approach. Any belief that they can be stopped by a victory here or there is not facing facts. It will take a long term concerted effort to have any chance of success.

  • “The Bishops’ Campaign for Human Development funded community organizations and organizers including Obama.”

    The Catholic Campaign for Human Development was established by the USCC, which includes all U.S. bishops and its establishment would have to have been approved by a majority vote of all bishops (not just the Archbishop of Chicago). Moreover, since the campaign funds so many different organizations the amount of funding that it provides to any single organization is probably fairly small (though not insignificant, and still problematic). If ACORN’s sole source of funds was CCHD, I doubt that it would have survived. To say that the Archdiocese of Chicago “launched Obama’s career” because its parishioners contributed to CCHD collections is a bit of a stretch.

Ozymandias Obama

Sunday, September 2, AD 2012

I met a traveller from an antique land

Who said: “Two vast and trunkless legs of stone

Stand in the desert. Near them on the sand,

Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown

And wrinkled lip and sneer of cold command

Tell that its sculptor well those passions read

Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,

The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed.

And on the pedestal these words appear:

`My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:

Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!’

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,

The lone and level sands stretch far away”.

Percy Byyshe Shelley

Hattip to Christopher Johnson at Midwest Conservative Journal, both for the story and the Ozymandias reference.


For those who thought Obama worship was only a thing of the 2008 campaign:

A torrential downpour that struck Charlotte  Saturday afternoon damaged the  Mount Rushmore-style sand sculpture bust  of President Obama — an ominous  beginning to what many fear is a plagued  convention.

Workers were trying Saturday afternoon to reform the base of the  sculpture,  built from sand brought in from Myrtle Beach, S.C., pounding  and smoothing out  the sand that had washed off the facade of the waist-up rendering of the chief  executive.

The sand sculpture was protected from above, and Mr. Obama’s face didn’t  see  too much damage. But the storm was so strong that its heavy winds  blew the rain  sideways, pelting the president’s right side and leaving  the sand pockmarked  and completely erasing his right elbow.

Democrats’ choice of Charlotte has drawn criticism from unions who  don’t  like North Carolina’s labor laws, and the state seems to be  tilting away from  Democrats politically.

The large Rushmore-style sculpture drew comparisons to Mr. Obama’s  2008  convention in Denver, when he accepted his party’s nomination on a  stage that  looked like a Greek temple.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to Ozymandias Obama

  • I have come to the conclusion that it is simple impossible to be an authentic Christian and a member of the Democratic party. When given the choice between Our Lord and Barabbas, these people have chosen Barabbas. God help us he is “re-elected”. If this is an honest election, or as close as possible, Romney/Ryan will win, but I put NOTHING pass Obama, the machine behind him and the palace guard media that protects him and lies for him. Our Lady of America, pray for us!

  • Well said Siobhan! Right-On Exactly! I stand with your beliefs to the letter!

Obama 2016 Review

Sunday, September 2, AD 2012

My family and I went to see the documentary Obama 2016 yesterday.  The documentary is based on Dinesh D’Souza’s book The Roots of Obama’s Rage which posits that the key to understanding Obama is that he is motivated by the same anti-colonial ideology that motivated his Kenyan father.  I disagreed with his thesis, so I was uncertain whether I would enjoy the movie.  Read below for my review of the film.  The usual spoiler alert applies.

Continue reading...

10 Responses to Obama 2016 Review

  • Great look at the influences that formed Mr Obama, fairly reviewed. Thank you.

  • I saw the film on Friday. I agree that it was well done, much better than I expected! It was ironic that so much of it was our president’s own voice reading his autobiography. I, too, was struck by the fact that the film did not focus much on his mother, when his mother is the one who raised him. I think her influence deserved more investigation and time.

    There were less than 20 people at our theater in mid TN, so I am glad so many came in your area! I wonder how it will affect this election.

  • I already knew most of the facts given in this movie so it wasn’t anything knew. Obama already scared me if elected so this didn’t help. I think everybody should see this movie before the election.

  • I too was happy and yet astounded by the numbers that attended the opening day of “2016”, here in the Grand Rapids, Mich. area. There was applause @ the end of the viewing! I don’t want to agree/disagree with the reviewers comments about anti-colonialism.

    My gut take on the movie was: Obama’s still an enigma to the American people, but the scary part is: most are not aware of this fact. He’s so well placed, poised and patterned in his speech and movites, that Americans aren’t seeing him with what I call “thinking eyes”! Eyes that perceive and know there’s so much more to his agenda. Eyes that have had the scales removed by the Ancient of Days!

  • Phenomenal! Obama was exposed by his own words and actions by a scholar.

  • First, D’Souza is hardly a scholar. He has a BA from Dartmouth. Second most of the quotes are either partial passages taken out of context or changed by the author – misquotes, or, as many would say, lies. D’Souza strings together half-truths and speculation to make his case.

  • No, D’Souza is clearly a scholar as you would realize if you had bothered to read the many books he has written. I especially recommend The Catholic Classics and The End of Racism. One can be a scholar without being a phony doctor. There were no misquotes or out of context quotes of Obama in the film.

  • I just checked on Box Office Mojo and the film has now earned over 26 million dollars, more than ten times its production costs. Astounding.

  • Interesting that Susan Clark belittles D’Souza and his degree from Darmouth. Our current president is a former community organizer with very little experience on anything other then leading groups to divide the country we love!
    The movie is well done and I felt A-Political..it was a documentary that allows us to see a view of Obama and his family of origin. Family history does color the views of children…scripture says train up a child in the way he should go; when they grow p they will not depart from it.
    Just a thought….what influences us does not have to rule us but this film gives us a clue of what voices he chose to listen too.

  • Maybe Susan has more concern about years of formal schooling than I do- for my part, I think his movie and books show wisdom, good judgment and reason.
    The movie wasn’t personal against Obama. It is a good review of everything that has been floating down the stream in these times, that has an effect on all of us in ways we may not even recognize. The movie and the books are an invitation to think more deeply about our own personal response.

Man Bites Dog: Newsweek Runs an Anti-Obama Story

Monday, August 20, AD 2012



Having followed the political scene in this country since 1964, few things surprise me.  Newsweek running an anti-Obama story did.  British historian Niall Ferguson writes a damning article on Obama as he calls for his defeat:

Unemployment was supposed to be 6 percent by now. It has averaged 8.2 percent this year so far. Meanwhile real median annual household income has dropped more than 5 percent since June 2009. Nearly 110 million individuals received a welfare benefit in 2011, mostly Medicaid or food stamps.


Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50–50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.

Continue reading...

14 Responses to Man Bites Dog: Newsweek Runs an Anti-Obama Story

  • Some belated payback by the MSM for Obama’s shunning of them? I’m sure more than a few media egos were wounded when Stephanie Cutter delightfully said it was as important for Obama to go on Entertainment Tonight and morning talk shows to chat about his favorite superpower as it is to have WH press conferences. They’ve carried water for him all these years and this is what they get in return? Being put on a par with the Morning Zoo guys? (Actually, I think most of them ARE on a par with the Morning Zoo guys, but we know they all see themselves as the second coming of Edward Murrow.)

    Anyway, a great article by Ferguson. I have read several of his books (“Empire” and “The War of the World” are fine works) and he is always worth reading. It’s too bad in this case that News Weak is seldom read outside dentists’ offices these days. But you know that cover is causing grand mal seizures over at Daily Kos 🙂

  • Does this mean Newsweek is no longer part of Obama campaign apparatus?

    Anyhow, RACISTS!!!

  • I think this is a good issue to buy to boost sales. Maybe Newsweek will print more such articles. If so, it might get contagious.

  • OK, Donald I am putting this in the “WAAAAAYYY Too Good To Be True” category, but will you take a look at this:

    “A poll conducted by Illinois-based pollster and political strategist
    Michael McKeon found Obama leading Republican Mitt Romney by 49 percent
    to 37 percent in Cook County, the home of Chicago. That puts him ahead
    by a far thinner margin than expected in a county he should be winning

    Cook is the most Democratic leaning county in the state. It is also the most populous.

    Those numbers do not bode well for the president. ”

    Can I permit myself to dream, just for a moment? I very seriously doubt that Obama will lose Illinois, because, as we all know, the dear departed vote in Cook County and they always vote Dem, but just imagine…..If I saw Illinois turn red on the electoral map, my ticker would give out on me. I would simply lie down on the sofa and wait for the angels to take me. But it would be a happy death. 🙂

  • I saw that today Donna. It is hard to underestimate just how unpopular Governor Quinn is in Illinois. Last week he was booed so intensively at the State Fair that it looked as if a riot was going to break out. Illinois is reeling under increased state taxes, a fiscal meltdown and a very lousy economy, and a lot of that is rubbing off on Obama. Do I think Obama will lose Illinois? Probably not. Do I think it might be close? Yes.

  • Too bad it’s in Newsweek.

    Graffiti in an interstate truck stop bathroom stall has more readers.

  • “Too bad it’s in Newsweek.

    Graffiti in an interstate truck stop bathroom stall has more readers.”

    That’s probably why Newsweek ran the story, Dale.

  • If he can’t win by 40 percent in Crook County, he is toast. Also: at least ten million people live pretty near to Crook County, in several states — and THEY are watching the meltdown of Illinois.

  • Its funny considering what I have been reading lately about Newsweek being on the verge of total collapse due to its rigid, unbending left-wing ideological partisanship.

  • Albert Gore, who was then much less disoriented than he is now, lost Tennessee in 2000. He had stood as a candidate in six elections therein and in only one was held to less than 60% of the vote. Bilge Clinton managed to carry Tennessee twice. Until comparatively recently, Illinois was the most competitive state in the country in presidential elections. It would be sweet if Illinois flipped the President the bird.

  • Donna V. “It’s too bad in this case that News Weak is seldom read outside dentists’ offices these days. But you know that cover is causing grand mal seizures over at Daily Kos” LOL

  • “It is hard to underestimate just how unpopular Governor Quinn is in Illinois. Last week he was booed so intensively at the State Fair that it looked as if a riot was going to break out.”

    The booing was done, NOT by ordinary fair attendees, but by members of AFSCME ticked off at his efforts to reduce pension, health care and other benefits for state employees and retirees. AFSCME is currently almost two months past the expiration date of its last contract with the State and they are still negotiating with no end in sight. No one will comment on the record, but reportedly the State is insisting upon what amounts to a 10 percent pay cut for unionized employees, plus closures of several State facilities. Needless to say this has AFSCME members hopping mad.

    What’s even more interesting about this situation is that this push for rollbacks/givebacks in the union contract — which seems to go way beyond anything Scott Walker, organized labor’s devil incarnate, ever asked for — is being pushed by a DEMOCRATIC administration, run buy a man (Quinn) who until he became governor, had a reputation for being a populist gadfly who stood up for the “little guy.” However, Quinn and other Democrats are betting that this stance will win them more support among the general public than it will lose them among members of government employee unions.

  • I can tell you Elaine that Quinn’s brilliant idea on teacher pensions, shift the bankrupt system from being a state responsibility to local property tax payers, is as popular as poison in a small county like Livingston. As the failed Special Session last week in the legislature indicated, Quinn can’t get this rubbish through a General Assembly dominated by his party. I don’t know about Springfield, but in my neck of the State Quinn is cordially despised. One of the interesting features about the poll showing Obama doing poorly in Cook County in comparison to 2008 is Quinn’s dismal ratings in Cook County.

    “I wouldn’t bet the farm that Romney has a shot in Illinois. He’ll do much better in the suburbs and Downstate than John McCain four years ago. But a shot at winning Illinois? Not yet.

    Also, notice Gov. Quinn’s ratings. Not good at all. The person who probably should be worried is Gov. Pat Quinn, not President Obama.”


  • which seems to go way beyond anything Scott Walker, organized labor’s devil incarnate, ever asked for

    Wisconsin and New York are the two states whose public sector pension plans are closest to being actuarially sound. Illinois is at the bottom of the pile.

2 Responses to Experience

  • As Chief Executive, Obama has the power to implement and enforce the will of the people spoken through Congress. Only Congress has the power to declare war on the Catholic Church, not Sebelius, not the HHS mandate. Only Congress has the power to declare war on God, but Congress has not, the Department of Justice has banned God from the public square, never putting the measure on the ballot. Only Congress has the power to declare war on the newly conceived unborn, but Congress has not declared war on God, the unborn, or on America’s sovereignty, only the Dept. of Justice has. The declaration of war on God, the war on the human being, born and unborn, on America’s virginity, innocence and independence, and on America’s sovereignty is a power assigned by the people and our constitution to Congress.

  • Is the aggregate IQ of the voter 60?

    We will see in November.

Let America Be America Again

Thursday, July 26, AD 2012

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.

This is known as “bad luck.”

Robert Heinlein

Scott Brown is a largely pro-abort RINO, but he has come up with a campaign commercial in the above video which is devastating both to Obama and his opponent in the Massachusetts Senate race, Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren.  Warren came up with the business bashing meme that Obama disastrously latched on to, and Brown is ramming it down their throats.  By far the best campaign commercial I have seen this year.

Continue reading...

11 Responses to Let America Be America Again

  • Watching Obama, it occurred to me that he is playing up to the envy, greed and other lower instincts of the people. Sowing discord, chaos and promoting vice is not human. It is un-American.
    Here is one: “The duty of a PATRIOT is to PROTECT his country FROM its government.” Thomas Paine

  • I agree that this encapsulates what this election is all about.! Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

  • I am reminded of last Sunday’s first reading, in which Jeremiah warns about the shepherd who allows the flock to wander away from each other. That man in the White House wants to break up the flock that is America, pitting one against another. Envy and jealousy are not an ethical basis for public policy.

  • It is precisely that, and ONLY that theme that will send the President packing.

    Hammer the economy theme, hammer it, hammer it, hammer it.

    Bring every discussion back to it.

    If the President wants to talk about child birth, point out the plummetting birthrate due to the economy. If he wants to talk about immigration, point out the 23 percent unemployment among African Americans. If he wants to talk about cooperation in Washington, point out the failed bi-partisan stimulus bills.

    Hammer it, hammer it, hammer it.

  • There’s a trailer – speaking of America being America.


  • The Heinlein quote is both wrong and foolish.

  • The Heinlein quote is historically accurate Art and completely wise.

  • No, it is not. I am reading him literally even though it is a rhetorical flourish, because it miseducates.

    You had during pre-modern eras periods of advance and retreat in levels of prosperity. Robert Heinlein did not have a comprehensive understanding of why this occurred; serious students of economic history are uncertain about that. See Philip Daeleader on late antiquity and the early medieval period.

    As for the modern period, catastrophic retreats in levels of prosperity are generally coincident with wartime. You also see it in economies whose measurable aggregate production is heavily dependent on net exports of minerals and their national income fluctuates a great deal according to the terms of trade.

    You could say you saw it in Soviet Russia after the 1st World War and much of Eastern Europe after the 2d. You still have to try and disentangle the effects of the war from the effects of the abuse of manufacturers, financiers, merchants, artisans, and peasants.

    It should be noted that proprietors are not a ‘tiny minority’. They are certainly atypical, but the number of people in business for themselves full time is at any one time in the seven digits in this country. Being a notable in industrial history, whether your name is Carnegie or Jobs, is rare. The thing is, the benefits attributable to innovation in a discrete economic sector are often surprisingly small. It is the collective effect of many tiny efforts which comes to matter.

    We are not living in Roumania ca. 1946. The current regime’s regulatory practices and ham handed capital allocation will one supposes cause such injuries as the economy gradually comes to a point of stagnation. That modern industrial civilization will disappear is something we can be fairly sure will not occur. That 25 years worth of economic improvements will evaporate (as happened during the period running from the fall of 1929 to the spring of 1933) is also unlikely (and most likely to arise from trouble in the financial sector). The real threat is can be seen in the history of Argentina – decade after decade of minimal net improvement punctuated by political and economic crises which never seem to resolve anything in a salutary direction.

    Heinlein’s is an aynrandesque reverie and not true to our situation.

  • Like most disasters that confront humanity Art, poverty, after a certain technological level is achieved, is usually man made. Recent examples I can think of off the top of my head would include the expulsion of the Indians from Uganda and the expropriation of their property in 1972 which was a disaster for the Ugandan economy. Zimbabwe, one of the more agriculturally fertile regions in Africa, is now subject to recurrent threats of famine due to the fecklessness of the government of Robert Mugabe. The lamentable history of Communism is an example of Heinlein’s statement in action, except where there is a turning away from the doctrines of Marx as has occurred in China. Cuba is a prime example of what happens when a country drives away its business class.

    In our country there are complete fools, most if not all located in the Democrat party, who would love to give further proof to Heinlein’s observation. The Occupy movement has degenerated into bad farce, but the Democrats were initially quite happy with their 99%-1% jeremiads. California is a prime example of what economic quicksand an anti-business and anti-growth mentality can produce.

    A pro-business mentality is a rare thing in global history, and governments have often adopted policies that have destroyed prosperity. In the Church, sadly, it is not rare to see troubling manifestations of this type of anti-free enterprise mentality:


    No, I think Heinlein is correct.

  • Your two examples include one of the most lunatic autocrats of the post-war period and another president-for-life quite possibly mad from tertiary syphilis. These are not common problems.

  • I would say Obama is a common problem Art. Oh wait, you weren’t referring to him? 🙂

Obama Attacks Success

Tuesday, July 17, AD 2012

I have always found Mitt Romney to be a fairly indifferent orator, but he was on fire today, attacking the remarks made by Obama that Paul blogged about here.

President Barack  Obama‘s campaign officials are trying to minimize the damage caused by his  campaign-trail comments that downplayed entrepreneurship.

The push-back came midday when Obama’s press secretary, Ben LaBolt, tweeted out that “Romney apparently set to launch false  attack. … Get the facts.”

LaBolt was trying to head off Romney’s new focus on Obama’s July 14 speech  where he argued that entrepreneurs are dependent on government for success.

“If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that  happen,” Obama told the crowd, while urging tax increases and a larger role for  government.

Romney’s strongest response came shortly after LaBolt’s tweet.

“I’m convinced he wants Americans to be ashamed of success … [but] I don’t  want government to take credit for what individuals accomplish,” Romney told a cheering crowd in swing-state Pennsylvania.

“The idea to say that Steve Jobs didn’t build Apple, that Henry Ford didn’t  build Ford Motor, that Papa John didn’t build Papa John Pizza, that Ray Kroc  didn’t build McDonald’s, that Bill Gates didn’t build Microsoft … is not just  foolishness, it is insulting to every entrepreneur,” Romney told the July 17  crowd in Irwin, Pa.

Continue reading...

38 Responses to Obama Attacks Success

  • As to the speech, if Mr. Romney can do that, deliver that kind of direct, uncomplicated, heartfelt message often enough, he can win this thing. He really seemed to believe what he was saying and i kinda liked him for it.

    Americans vote with our hearts, not our heads.

    As to the ad, it was perfect. It hits the soundbite, lingers on the hopefullness of the message, and uses blue collar workers as a visual representation of the stark differences in fundamental beliefs.

    If the GOP can keep that up, they can sweep the election.

  • This is as good a speech as Romney has ever delivered. But first, we must hear more about Bain and Romney’s taxes. Because those are the really pressing issues of our time.

  • This is perfectly in Romney’s wheelhouse. He ain’t the picture of conservatism that most conservatives want to see but these are the moments that will tend to make us the most proud of him. Thanks for teeing Romney up, Activist in Chief, BO.

  • No one would argue that Napoléon did not win the battle of Austerlitz; but, nor would they contend that he won it single-handed.

    As for the baleful influence of bureaucracy, no doubt, we have all heard the old proverb that “Frederick the Great lost the battle of Jena,” even though he died thirty years earlier. As Bagehot says, “It was the system which he had established—a good system for his wants and his times—which, blindly adhered to, and continued into a different age, put to strive with new competitors, brought his country to ruin.” Now, the special vice of bureaucracy is that “bureaucrats will care more for routine than for results; or, as Burke put it, “that they will think the substance of business not to be much more important than the forms of it”” (Bagehot again)

  • “The young Napoleon was a student of Frederick’s methods and, after defeating Prussian armies at Jena and Auerstadt in 1806, took his marshals to visit Frederick’s tomb in Potsdam. “Hats off, gentlemen,” he said. “If he were still alive, we would not be here.””

  • Donald R McClarey

    As a general, Friedrich der Einzige [Frederick the Only] was without rival. The proverb refers to the military system he perfected, in contrast to the levée en masse, inspired by the Revolution and so brilliantly organized and developed by Carnot (the real head of the Committee of Public Safety from August 1793) By contrast, Frederick had said that the ordinary citizen should not even be aware that his country is at war. The House of Hohenzollern, ever since the Thirty Years War had displayed a rare talent for drilling mere savages into mere soldiers; it could not form and lead a citizen army.

    Actually, the decisive test of the two systems was the battle of Valmy; something Europe had not seen since Salamis and Marathon.

  • Obama, last week, wrote one of Romney’s best stump speeches, “President Obama attacks success and therefore under Obama we have less success, and I will change that. . . . I don’t think that anyone could have said what he said, who had actually started a business. . . . I find it extraordinary that a philosophy of that nature would be spoken by a President of the United States.”

    I am not surprised. That is in the liberals’ belief system. It’s in their screed.

  • MPS, this goes to illustrate the importance of the individual in most human endeavors. Frederick was a military genius who successfully fought off most of Europe in the Seven Years War. His successors, attempting to slavishly follow what they perceived to be his system, came a cropper. It is precisely this lack of appreciation for the importance of the people at the head of any successful enterprise that makes Obama and most advocates of state power and centralization tone deaf to this important factor in human events.

  • So I guess we’ll soon be hearing from Pres. Obama that anyone who failed in this society did not do it alone either? We’ll hear about those who had no incentive to work and depended upon government assistance, who resorted to illegal activity and violence that landed them in prison and because of their behavior I can blame them for not succeeding. It’s funny that he does not mention that three out of four births in the African American community are children born to unwed mothers and that there is a total breakdown in family life in many African American communities. When is he going to mention that individual responsibility is what helps bring people out of poverty? When is he going to talk about that responsible parenting is key to success? My parents came to this country as immigrants and worked hard to achieve the American dream. They did it through hard work and self discipline. America has always been the land of opportunity. It should not be the land of handouts.

  • Donald wrote
    ” His successors, attempting to slavishly follow what they perceived to be his system, came a cropper.”

    That is precisely why chose the example as a criticism of bureaucracy.

    To take another example, from Sixtus V, who died in 1590, to Leo XIII, who was elected in 1878, we had a virtually unbroken succession of popes, who had risen through the ranks of the Vatican bureaucracy and who were, by habit, taste and training, administrators. Even Benedict XIV, better remembered today as Prospero Lambertini, the great canon lawyer, fits this mould.

    It is not unfair to describe the result as one of assiduous mediocrity. Pious, conscientious men though they were, even in Catholic countries, they had the same impact and the same popular appeal, as the average Secretary-General of the United Nations or President of the World Bank. Pio Nono was popular because he was pitied.

    Meanwhile, we had the Church riven by the Thirty Years War, the Quietist controversy, the Jansenist heresy, the Gallican controversy, Josephism, the suppression of the Jesuits, the French Revolution and its aftermath, and the Risorgimento, in none of which can the Holy See be said to have greatly distinguished itself.

  • Actually Pio Nono was popular for many reasons. He had a wry sense of humor: He once told the Anglican bishop of the Mediterranean during an audience that he now found himself a member of his diocese. He knew how to use modern technology, photographs, the telegram, cheap printing, to establish a personal link between the pontiff and the average Catholic. His piety which was remarkably similar to that of the ordinary fervent Catholic. Pio Nono was a disaster as the ruler of the Papal States, but as Pope he was masterful, and he can be regarded as the creator of the modern papacy.

  • Romney needs to say something like this:

    “Anyone can borrow a ton of money from your parents and survive, but that is not real growth! That is not taking a serious look at your life and making the necessary changes! The Fed will always print you money, but that is no way to get out of your slump! You need someone who has the knowhow to fix this country—Obama has no new ideas.. He has no willingness to work with all sides.. He is no Bill Clinton.. America needs someone who can lead a nation, NOT AN AGENDA!”

  • To liberals, the proletariat makes the company and should own the company, not the person whose idea it was to start it and with whose resources those proletariat are being employed. It all goes back to the idea of no private property – everything owned by the State and for the State. It’s communist. And that’s Obama: a communist.

  • Paul Primavera:
    You have no clue what you’re talking about. Obama is the same president who has kept minimum wage at $7.25/hour which is good for business owners but terrible for anyone trying to make a living on that pittance of an income. Obama has done absolutely nothing to push for the Employee Free Choice Act which would make it easier for workers to (gasp!) actually get union representation so it isn’t just them as an individual negotiating with a corporation or business owner. He’s given us a health care “reform” bill that pleases nobody but the health insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry when he had a golden opportunity to push for single payer. You know, universal coverage like every other industrialized country in the world except the U.S. has. Why did we get a health care “reform” bill that made share values of insurance companies and Big Pharma corporations skyrocket as soon as they heard it passed in Congress? This is a communist?? Are you out of your mind or just completely ignorant of what a communist is?

    As for business ownership, if a person takes out a small business loan and starts their own business, hiring, say, 10 people to do the grunt work guess what? He needs those ten people to make his business a functioning business instead of a failure or else he wouldn’t have hired them. Of course he’s going to pay them as little as he can get away with paying them while squeezing as much value added out of their labor as he can. Those 10 people are what makes his business a business and not a boarded-up storefront. In other words he’s going to have to expect many times the dollar value in labor out of his workers than he’s going to be paying them per hour. But because that guy was able to take out a loan or scrape together the money himself to start a business that means he gets to exploit 10 people, or however many he hires, indefinitely or until they get fed up with being used and quit, to take up another job somewhere else getting exploited probably just as badly? Why does having the capital to own a business equal the “right” to take advantage of other people’s lack of capital?

    That’s all capitalism is after all: an economic model in which those who have the capital to exploit others do so, exploiting everyone who doesn’t have the capital to exploit anyone else. That’s a decent economic system? Sounds more like Satan’s own economic model.

    The future doesn’t involve capitalist wage slavery but rather direct worker ownership of the businesses regardless of who started the business. Companies need to be transferred into the hands of the only people who won’t exploit the workers, i.e. the workers themselves. That’s the only system that is going to give the average worker an incentive to work harder, to do a better job, because he or she would be actually seeing their income increase when their workplace’s profits increase instead of how it is now where if e.g. Wal-Mart’s profits increase by 15% this quarter their workers whose labor brought about some or all of that increase in profit margin see absolutely no difference in their paychecks.

    Capitalism is a dead idea. It belongs in a museum.

  • “Brutal Truth”,

    Please continue to stay and read what people far smarter than I am have to say here at The American Catholic blog site about the Faith once delivered unto the Saints, the conservative principles of personal responsibility and accountability, free enterprise, private ownership, and patriotism. I have neither the time nor the energy to debate you. But I will say this: if capitalism is so horrible and dead as an idea, then first, where did you get that computer on which you composed your message except from a capitalist, and second why don’t you live up to your principles and emigrate to a non-capitalist nation like Cuba or North Korea?

  • ” … But because that guy was able to take out a loan or scrape together the money himself to start a business that means he gets to exploit 10 people, or however many he hires, indefinitely or until they get fed up with being used and quit, to take up another job somewhere else getting exploited probably just as badly? Why does having the capital to own a business equal the “right” to take advantage of other people’s lack of capital? … ”
    Private business does not necessarily pay minimum wage to people for wanting to use their particular and individual talents productively, not to mention incentives or an owner intending to take advantage of anyone.
    Exploitation sounds cynical and something for the unlawful or unjust or careless.

    ” … The future doesn’t involve capitalist wage slavery but rather direct worker ownership of the businesses regardless of who started the business. Companies need to be transferred into the hands of the only people who won’t exploit the workers, i.e. the workers themselves. That’s the only system that is going to give the average worker an incentive to work harder, … ”
    Sounds inefficient and costly with too many chiefs, no scouts. Breeding ground for distraction, waste, and mistrust.

  • They have been devouring the private sector since 1933.

    For 80 years, it’s been spend, spend, spend, tax, tax, tax, regulate, regulate, regulate until they bust the private economy and unemployment goes through the roof. Many state and local government go bust due to sweetheart deals with employees unions and stark declines in tax revenues. Soon enough, the US government can’t pay interest on the debt, or for anything else.

    Then, they blame capitalism, dump the Constitution, and declare a dictatorship.

    Only thing lacking, over the last 80 years they were unable to disarm we the people.

  • I’m so sick of hearing about Bain & tax returns. Bain has a very good success rate of turning companies around. He gave what his required when it comes to tax returns & if I was him I would offer another year of tax return for Obama’s college record. I read an AP story the other day & if it is true, it is very disturbing. If that came out about Romney, all the newspapers would have picked it up, true or not. I think we have a choice in November someone who believes in socialism or capitalism period. Obama really scares me as he doesn’t even respect the separation of church & state.

  • Although I am sceptical about his proposals, Brutal Truth does raise real concerns.

    One, of course, is the intractable problem of usury. I say “intractable,” because the last major papal encyclical on the topic, “Vix Pervenit,” promulgated on 1 November 1745 does more to indicated the difficulties of the subject than to offer solutions. Bearing in mind that Benedict XIV was probably the greatest canonist ever to occupy the chair of St Peter (the other contender is, of course, Innocent IV), it is not to be expected that others will do any better.

    What Vix Pervenit does do, is to require Catholics to examine very seriously the real nature of a contract, in the light of the Church’s perennial teaching on the evils of usury, that is, taking money simply and solely for the use of money. It certainly cannot be treated as a dead letter.

  • I want to see Obama’s official (not forgeries) college transcripts, medical records, and passport records. I know that Romney made a lot of money.

    Speaking of evil Bain Capital, Obama mega-cash bundler, Jonathan Lavine, ran Bain while it killed jobs at GST Steel.

    MP-S: You’re correct about usury. The US gov (Clinton, HUD kapo Cuomo, Bush) decided every American, Honduran, Mexican, et al should own his/her own home (the ownership rate jumped from 66% to 69%). Prior to those edicts, US banks would only lend money to people that didn’t need it, i.e., people that could repay the loans.

  • T Shaw
    Curiously enough, the mortgage or wadset, as the Scots called it, was designed, during the Middle Ages, for people who wanted to invest their money, without committing the sin of usury. The borrower disponed his land to the lender on condition that, if the loan were punctually repaid, the land would revert to the borrower. That is why the borrower had to obtain letters of regress from the superior, undertaking to re-enter him as his vassal. In the meantime, of course, the land belonged to the lender, who could do what he liked with it. What he usually liked to do was to let it and the person he let it to was the borrower. Receiving rent for land was not usury, for land naturally yields an annual increase.

  • Context its everything. It might be sinful today NOT to engage in usury given that fiat money is the predominant form of currency. If I don’t charge you interest then you are effectively usuring me under today’s inflationary fractional reserve banking system.

    Thank you Paul Primavera for inviting that drive-by socialist to live under the suppression that he advocates by moving to Cuba. At some point it may not be as genteel of a suggestion as it is today.

  • Instapundit has it.

    Atlas Shrugged isn’t a novel.

    It’s a “how-to” manual.

    “He didn’t invent iron ore and blast furnaces, did he?”


    “Rearden. He didn’t invent smelting and chemistry and air compression. He couldn’t have invented his Metal but for thousands and thousands of other people. His Metal! Why does he think it’s his? Why does he think it’s his invention? Everybody uses the work of everybody else. Nobody ever invents anything.”

    She said, puzzled, “But the iron ore and all those other things were there all the time. Why didn’t anybody else make that Metal, but Mr. Rearden did?”

  • Paul D

    You are right about context.

    The old writers all treated a loan of money as a “mutuum,” the term used in Roman Law for a loan for consumption. Thus, the present French Civil Code. Art 1892, following the Roman Law, says, “a loan for consumption is a contract by which one of the parties delivers to the other a certain quantity of things which are consumed by use, on condition that the latter shall return as much to him in the same kind and quality.” So, if I borrow a pint of milk or a cup of sugar from a neighbour, then that is mutuum.

    Clearly, the old writers were thinking of money as a tangible, fungible thing; thus, the French word for silver and for money is the same – l’argent. Our word “money” derives from the name of the Roman mint, which was in the undercroft of the temple of Juno Moneta [Juno the Warner – It was her geese who famously gave the alarm, when the Gauls made a night attack on the Capitol in 390 BC]; likewise the French word, “la monnaie,” which means specifically a coin.

    Now, the rules around usury were never applied to a mere instrument of debt, such as a bill of exchange or a promissory note. If a bill of exchange had been given for the price of goods, say, no one ever suggested that negotiating it at a premium, or taking it at a discount was usury. There was a brisk market in foreign bills in the City of London from around 1300, the price being governed by the balance of trade.

    It is a good question how “fiat money” should be classified.

  • Point of information: the so-called US money in circulation is debt owed by the Federal Reserve. On the side with the face of the dead president, in the top border, it reads “FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE.” And, below it says, “THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE.”

    Money and US Constitution – ‘Create a more perfect Union.” Article I, Section 8 “The Congress shall have Power . . . ; To coin Money and regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, . . . ” Nowhere does it say create money.

    Your money is backed by the full faith and credit of the government (whatever that is pwrth).

    Many believed paper currency was unconsitutional. In 1871, Knox v. Lee, the Supreme Court declared United States notes (i.e., government debt instruments) legal tender and constitutional.

  • In the post about money. When a loan was made to start a business venture and the venture failed it was considered the money’s fault. Bad money. Before 1962 paper money had SILVER CERTIFICATE written across the top. After 1962, it then became illegal to hold silver except as boullion. When the Fereral government begins seizing private property to pay off its debt, they are dancing on our childrens’ graves. All public and private property is held in trust for all future generations. When 70% of the country is owned by foreign interests we are no longer a sovereign nation. America’s sovereignty as a nation is on the choppng block by one world government under the world bank. Without sovereignty, we, the people, are slaves.

  • Let’s face some unpleasant facts: Capitalism literally could not survive for a week without there being an enormous difference between the amount of value added to a company per hour by a worker’s labor and what that worker is getting paid per hour to perform that labor. That difference is called surplus value. I’m not talking about someone doing $12/hour worth of work and getting paid $10/hour. No, in order for the business owner to be able to meet his overhead costs like building rent and utilities as well as materials costs if it is a manufacturing enterprise or wholesale goods if it is a retail store etc. and especially in order for the business owner to be able to take home a profit, there has to be a huge surplus value extracted from every worker in his employ. In other words someone has to be doing $40, $50, $60 or more dollars in work per hour in terms of value added and getting paid $7.25 or $8 or maybe if the business owner is feeling “generous”, $9/hour to do that $40 or $50 or $60 worth of work/hour. Or more. State chambers of commerce routinely advertise how much value they extract from their workers for example North Carolina’s brags that it squeezes $5 in value out of the state’s workers (on average) for every $1 in wages they get paid. Meaning if I’m getting paid $8/hour I would be actually doing $40/hour worth of work. Put a happy face on it all you want, try to rationalize it all you want, that’s exploitation pure and simple. And without this egregious, blatant and endemic exploitation of the average non-wealthy working person capitalism falls apart under its own weight.

    We live in a society in which the social class someone is born into largely determines their chances for success in life. Capitalist apologists can brag all they want about how America is supposedly some “land of opportunity” but the facts don’t bear this out, not by a long shot. Ask yourselves: does a person who is born in the ghetto, goes to ghetto schools through no fault of their own with windows broken, no A/C or heat, teachers who don’t want to be there and textbooks so out of date they refer to the Civil Rights movement as “troubles ahead”, a kid who studies hard but has parents (or parent) with no money to send him or her to college even if they had grades to warrant it, and graduates high school if they’re lucky with the wonderful career opportunities of working in McDonald’s, Burger King or slinging crack on a street corner have anywhere near the same kind of opportunities as a kid born to rich parents, living in a gated community, going to the best private schools and has a college education paid for by daddy’s big bucks and a sweet cushy job at daddy’s stock brokerage all lined up after college whether or not he has any aptitude for it? Making most of his income from capital gains and paying 15% in taxes instead of a rate nearly double that for a person who actually does hard work for a living? Those two people are not even in the same universe of opportunities. Why should a small percentage of the population be born into wealth with little risk of failure or of being destitute no matter how inept they are while a much larger segment of the population also through nothing they themselves did be born into soul-crushing poverty and have to claw their way out of a well their whole life? Why does the so-called “richest country in the world” have tens of millions of people who can’t afford their own food without assistance from the government? Why does this country have hundreds of thousands if not a million or more homeless people? Why does this country have 20% (one in five) of its children going to bed hungry at night because their parents can’t afford to feed them adequately? Why does this country have the least social mobility of the industrialized world? Why does it have the least worker rights in the industrialized world?

    Read in Genesis, read Cain’s impudent question to God: “What, am I my brother’s keeper?” That is a question people have been struggling with ever since but if you all have truly read the Bible as I have you would see that most of the point of the Bible is that YES, we most certainly ARE our brother’s and sister’s keeper in the sense that we are to not ignore their suffering, not turn a blind eye to their misery. Do you think God wants an economic model in which a tiny percentage of the population has more money than they could ever hope to spend in several lifetimes and are the ownership class that exploits the labor of everyone else who doesn’t have the capital to exploit others? Really? Of course not. Satan, yes, this is his ideal economic model in which it benefits a tiny percentage of the population while basically enslaving everyone else through lack of opportunity, simultaneously destroying the environment for future generations through lack of concern for literally anything beyond short-term profit. Capitalism is an evil, heartless, yes satanic economic model that doesn’t deserve to enslave humanity for one more day let alone indefinitely. It’s a great and wonderful system for the wealthy elite. It is a spectacular failure for everyone else.

    The future is working towards a classless society in which nobody is born into poverty, nobody is born into wealth and everyone starts out from approximately the same economic starting line. This is not a guarantee of succes. This would be a guarantee of having an equal opportunity for success as everyone else, big difference. We cannot achieve this through wealth redistribution. It can only be done by a drastic reappraisal of what we value in life and a clean break with current notions of bourgeois property relations, meaning the transferring of the ownership of businesses into the hands of the workers, not as punishment to the business owners for their exploitation of the workers but to PREVENT future exploitation which is inevitable under a capitalist system. A government truly representing the average non-wealthy citizens (rather than the small sliver of the population that are millionaires and billionaires) would have as much right to effect this transfer of the ownership of the productive assets as it would have in taking custody an abused child away from its abusive parents or confiscating a snake oil salesman’s supply of snake oil. Nothing else will get workers fair compensation for their labor and nothing else will give them an actual stake in the success of their workplace.
    The future is a worker ownership classless society. Anything less is barbaric.

  • “The future is working towards a classless society in which nobody is born into poverty, nobody is born into wealth and everyone starts out from approximately the same economic starting line. This is not a guarantee of succes. This would be a guarantee of having an equal opportunity for success as everyone else, big difference. We cannot achieve this through wealth redistribution. It can only be done by a drastic reappraisal of what we value in life and a clean break with current notions of bourgeois property relations, meaning the transferring of the ownership of businesses into the hands of the workers, not as punishment to the business owners for their exploitation of the workers but to PREVENT future exploitation which is inevitable under a capitalist system. A government truly representing the average non-wealthy citizens (rather than the small sliver of the population that are millionaires and billionaires) would have as much right to effect this transfer of the ownership of the productive assets as it would have in taking custody an abused child away from its abusive parents or confiscating a snake oil salesman’s supply of snake oil. Nothing else will get workers fair compensation for their labor and nothing else will give them an actual stake in the success of their workplace.
    The future is a worker ownership classless society. Anything less is barbaric.”

    Didn’t they try that in the Twentieth Century in a number of countries? Wasn’t the outcome barbaric?

    I’m also interested in others dissecting (?debunking) the numbers presented.

  • loe future is working towards a classless society in which nobody is born into poverty, nobody is born into wealth and everyone starts out from approximately the same economic starting line.”

    In other words a perfectly idealistic world.

    In the immortal words of Gandolph:

    Fool of a Took!

  • And more importantly the inspired words of Holy Scripture:

    Mark 14:7

    “For the poor you have always with you”

  • Opposing collectivism, financial repression, and high taxes is not the same as opposing Charity.

    St. Matthew writes that it was the disciples. St. Mark says it was some of the people. According to S. John 12:1 – 8, the one who was angered by the woman anointing Jesus with expensive perfume (in anticipation of His burial) was Judas, the one that would betray Him. John goes on to say it was not because Judas cared for the poor. It was because he was a thief.

    Social justice is not the same as Charity.

  • “Opposing collectivism, financial repression, and high taxes is not the same as opposing Charity.”

    Nor is it opposing Catholic Social Teaching. Though I have come to believe that many who promote a particular form of social justice in the name of Christ are little concerned with authentic Catholic Social Teaching.

  • The future is a worker ownership classless society. Anything less is barbaric.

    commisar for the enlightenment: Comrade, what is Capitalism?

    stakhanovite: The exploitation of man by man.

    “And what is Communism”

    “The reverse”

  • Brutal Truth is implicitly adopting the labour theory of value.

    According to this theory, labour alone creates value and, under capitalism, the labourer’s wages are invariably less than the value he creates, the “surplus value” being filched by the capitalist.

    To take a hackneyed example: yarn is more valuable than wool, because of the labour involved in spinning it (including the labour that went into the plant and machinery used in the process). For the same reason, cloth is more valuable than yarn and garments are more valuable than cloth.

    But this is false. Garments are valuable, because people want to wear them and cloth, yarn and wool are valuable only insofar as they are garments in the making. Let the garments go out of fashion and all the labour in Christendom will not give them value.

    According to the Labour Theory of Value, goods derive value from their past, to which the purchaser is supremely indifferent, whereas, in truth, they derive their value from their anticipated future use or enjoyment and labour derives its value from its product, not the product from the labour bestowed on it.

  • A good commercial from the Romney Campaign:

  • Here’s a great one. Pass it around:

  • Pingback: I Built This | The American Catholic

Our Lightworker President Still Has His Worshippers

Monday, July 16, AD 2012

As hard as it is to believe, even after four years of the inept comedy stylings of the Obama administration as a substitute for government, we still have in this great land people who continue to worship, as occurred in 2008, the South Side Messiah.  Signs of this include the movie The Obama Effect, which reminds me of an old Stalinist propaganda movie with lesser production values, and this piece of tripe that our old friend Christopher Johnson, a non-Catholic who has taken up the cudgels for the Faith so frequently that I have designated him Defender of the Faith, shines a light on at Midwest Conservative Journal:

Write about the Episcopal Organization long enough and every so often, you’ll run up against something that stops you cold.  Seems that the Rev. Mark Bozzuti-Jones, who works at Trinity-Wall Street, just published a book entitled The Gospel of Barack Hussein Obama According to Mark.  Here’s how Bozzuti-Jones blurbed the book at Amazon.com:

The Gospel of Barack Hussein Obama According to Mark is designed to initiate the reader into a meditation on what it means to be human, what it means to be a manifestation of God, and how Barack Obama is a unique and important manifestation of God’s desire for human flourishing. In a blend of words from his public speeches, imagined conversation, and fictional situations, the book highlights Obama’s real stance on social justice and, in particular, economic and political empowerment. It juxtaposes ancient Biblical form and contemporary reality, challenging the reader to see and seek God in all persons. “Our life-defining texts must be porous and we must be imaginative in our engagement with them. Let this book be a reminder not to so credit sacred texts or cultural icons that they lead us to hatred and violence in the name of God. When we see the Divine in another, we must name it. We must respect it. The practice demands nothing less than Love.

Um…okay.  If you use Amazon’s Look Inside feature and read the first few pages of this thing, you discover a book that is so over-the-top that David Fischler thinks it might be a joke.  I’m not so sure.  Over at Trinity’s site, Bozzuti-Jones comments:

This is a project close to [Bozzuti-Jones’] heart. “It means a lot to me because this is my first self-published book, and there is something special about that: a book like this is truly mine in the sense that I struggled with it, I wrestled with it, and I ensured that it saw the light of day.”

It may surprise some to hear that it is not meant to be a political book. “I have tremendous respect for all people, no matter which side of the political spectrum they are on,” Bozzuti-Jones explained. “That said, I do believe that President Obama holds a significant place in American history and world history. What Barack Hussein Obama has accomplished is the fulfillment of the constitution of the United States: that all people are created equal, and so more than any other person in the last decades he has fulfilled the American dream.”

The book comes from Bozzuti-Jones’ incarnational theology. “I think oftentimes, as Christians and as a world, we don’t give sufficient credit to what it means to be born in the image and likeness of God. I think if more human beings could see the divine in the other, they could recognize that human beings can point to the divine in each other.”

Normally, this is where I’d say, “I got nuthin’.”

Continue reading...

22 Responses to Our Lightworker President Still Has His Worshippers

  • The Gospel of Barack Hussein Obama According to Mark is designed to initiate the reader into a meditation on what it means to be human, what it means to be a manifestation of God, and how Barack Obama is a unique and important manifestation of God’s desire for human flourishing.

    I threw up a little in my mouth reading that…

  • ” Let this book be a reminder not to so credit sacred texts or cultural icons that they lead us to hatred and violence in the name of God. ”

    Another reminder that atheism, nihilism, and the other ism’s of worldly power brokers just end up needing the golden calves to replace desecrated good.

    ” Bozzuti-Jones explained. “That said, I do believe that President Obama holds a significant place in American history and world history. What Barack Hussein Obama has accomplished is the fulfillment of the constitution of the United States: that all people are created equal, and so more than any other person in the last decades he has fulfilled the American dream.” Free rides aren’t the stuff of dreams or the Constitution of the United States.

    The book comes from Bozzuti-Jones’ incarnational theology. “ ”

    The video clip has no dream come true looking happy souls – poor kids. Poor in Spirit … indoctrinated, not created. May they live and learn from their poverty of Spirit.

    ” fulfillment of the constitution of the United States: that all people are created equal, ”

    except the ones that are EXEMPT and are the Contributors List and the politically disagreeable . E. Orders and E. Privilege for the not so equal.

  • Exodus 20:1-3:

    “And God spoke all these words, saying, ‘I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. You shall have no other gods before me.’”

    Idolatry will always and everywhere result in the suspension of religious freedom. Just ask Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, or the Maccabean brothers. We live in perilous times little different from what the Weimar Republic faced after World War I, and we all know how that turned out.

    Kyrie Eleison
    Christe Eleison
    Kyrie Eleison

  • From the video, it is obvious, that the minor child, an un-emancipated child, without informed consent to give or adult enough to vote, has been and is being indoctrinated. The minor child is being used and abused to indoctrinate others, especially the minor children. This is proof positive in a court of law, that Obama does not rule according to the will of the people and will commit treason to get his own will accomplished. VIVA CRISTO REY

  • If you ever wanted any insight into how early Christians could fall and end up burning a pinch of incense to Caesar’s genius, here you go.

  • Oh, did I say IMPEACH? The child may be Obama’s constituent, but she is her own person. Using innocent children without the understanding to know what they are doing is a violation of their innocence and their informed consent, their citizenship. The child who has been indoctrinated for political purposes is being abused. The innocence of a child may only be presented to almighty God, the Supreme Sovereign Being, “their Creator” as inscribed into our Declaration of Independence. Because Obama is president, he has committed treason against this person, a child, a citizen. What is a little slavery, indoctrination is filial ensalvement, when one is Obama? There is no money that can buy the un-informed consent of a minor person, the consent and all minor person’s civil rights are held in trust for her by God, by her parents and finally by the court…not Obama. If the child’s civil rights are violated by enslavement to filial love without her informed consent, making of her a political issue instead of a free person, the courts are not the final arbiters, the child into adulthood is. In most states it is eighteen years and two months.

  • The forces of evil running public education are brainwashing, not educating, innocent little chldren.

    Talk about Obama-worshiping imbeciles . . .

    The Gospel According to Obama: uncharitable, implacable, hateful, dishonest, . . .

    Jim Treacher: “Here’s The Smartest President Ever, speaking in Roanoke on Friday . . . writing Romney’s next ad for him. . . . Barack Obama openly stokes bitter resentment against Americans who work hard, take risks, and create jobs.”

    “You don’t deserve what you have earned.”

    From comments: Americans to Obama: “Funny, we were thinking the exact same thing about you…”

  • Talk about Obama-worshiping imbeciles . . . I think Lenin called them “useful idiots”. The truth does not abide in them.

  • Mary–

    Were you this up-in-arms about the video of the child singing “no homos in heaven” from Indiana?

    As for the original article and the comments–my what vitriol and hatred from a bunch of self-proclaimed “christians”. (Just so you all understand, the quotations and the lower case is my personal way of noting that, while you proclaim to follow Christ, you certainly don’t act like it. Talk is cheap.)

  • “Were you this up-in-arms about the video of the child singing ‘no homos in heaven’ from Indiana?”

    “9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Neither sexually immoral people, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor passive homosexual partners, nor dominant homosexual partners, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, not drunkards, not abusive persons, not swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.” Lexham Translation of 1st Corinthians 6:9-10.

    Malakos (the Greek word for passive homosexual partners) and arsenokoit?s (the Greek word for dominate homosexual partners) are NOT getting into Heaven. Period.

    BUT celebate homosexuals who repent are getting into Heaven. BTW, adulterers and fornicators don’t make it into Heaven either except that repent and stop the sinning. The same rules apply to everyone: no sex outside of marriage between one man and one woman. Anything other than that means hell.

  • Just so you all understand, the quotations and the lower case is my personal way of noting that, while you proclaim to follow Christ, you certainly don’t act like it.

    No Kidding! I am completely shocked that someone could use air quotes to imply sarcasm on the internet. Had you not issued your excessively long disclaimer, I would have spent the next few seconds thinking you genuinely thought us to be Christians. Instead, I will now have to reflect on my life now that some drive by troll labeling himself cminca thinks I am somehow less than Christian.

  • Paul Z. wrote:

    “Instead, I will now have to reflect on my life now that some drive by troll labeling himself cminca thinks I am somehow less than Christian.”

    If one proclaims social justice, the common good and peace at any price from the hill tops, then to liberal philosophy that one is Christian.

    If one insists on holiness before the Lord God Almighty, personal responsibility and accountability for one’s actions, reverence before the Most Holy Sacrament of the Eucharist, and frequent Confession and Penance, then to liberal philosophy one is a medieval right wing neo-con reactionary.

    It all goes back to what the Prophet Ezekiel noted in chapter 18 of his book: “Y’all keep on whinin’ that ‘God ain’t fair, God ain’t fair’ because He told you what’ll happen if you sin. Quit your whining; you’re gettin’ what you always wanted.” (Loosely paraphrased, of course)

  • So what does cminca think about the claim that “Barack Obama is a unique and important manifestation of God’s desire for human flourishing”?

    Oh, never mind. He/She’s just here to declare personal awesomeness against those nasty inferior christers.


  • Something like a cause and effect kind of thing seems to happen in comment sections – maybe it’s coincidence or my limited reading time – which is: use of words implying delusions of someone for lack of any better terms brings on another using of accusations of hatred and judgements, in a vitriolic, condescending tone.

  • another using accusations

  • cminca,

    Did you read St Mark’s Gospel? In Mark, Jesus speaks of Himself as the Son of Man Who came to give His life to free people from sin and to win for them salvation.

    I find it highly offensive for a so-called clergyman to subvert the Gospel, the Good News of eternal life – the rewards of which jesus won for us by His Life , Death and Resurrection – to support a dull and illogical nobody like Obama.

  • He/She’s just here to declare personal awesomeness against those nasty inferior christers.

    Wow, that was really funny. I was going post something but the awesomeness of that post says it all.

  • “(Just so you all understand, the quotations and the lower case is my personal way of noting that, while you proclaim to follow Christ, you certainly don’t act like it. Talk is cheap.)”

    Not as cheap as a troll condemning complete strangers on the net for pointing out the obvious: that the Southside Messiah still has a cult follower that is weird in the extreme.

  • “You Got Nothin”, I got sick! One Our Father, One Hail Mary and One Glory Be To the Father. Oh and yes many “Acts Of Contrition” or in paraphrasing
    Salley Fields, “I’m trying I’m REALLY trying.”

  • In any case, a book comparing Obama with Muhammad would be closer to the truth.

  • cminca: “Mary–

    Were you this up-in-arms about the video of the child singing “no homos in heaven” from Indiana?”
    An homosexual in heaven will be practicing the homosexual act forever. Pretty boring. An homosexual in hell will be practicing the homosexul act forever. Pretty boring. God says : “Do not do sodomy. It gets pretty boring.” Man dies the way he lives. Man chooses heaven or hell for himself. The child singing ” no homos in heaven” is correct. Singing the Truth

Charlie Cook: Hard Election For Obama to Win

Tuesday, June 26, AD 2012

One of the political experts I pay close attention to is Charlie Cook.  His personal politics lean Democrat, but when it comes to predicting elections and reading political tea leaves, he has one of the best records among political mavens.  I therefore assume that alarm bells were going off all over the Obama campaign when they read Cook’s column today in The National Journal:

We are past the point where Obama can win a referendum election, regardless of whether it is on him or the economy. The success of his campaign is contingent upon two things. First, when focusing on the narrow sliver of undecided voters, between 6 and 8 percent of the electorate, the Obama team must make its candidate the lesser of two evils. It has to make the prospect of a Mitt Romney presidency so unpalatable that about half of those undecided voters will begrudgingly vote for reelection. Polling focusing on the undecided voters reveals they are a deeply pessimistic and angry segment of the electorate and don’t particularly like either candidate (fitting, because they don’t tend to like politicians). But they show signs of being more conservative than not. One unpublished analysis gives Republicans a 10-point advantage on the generic congressional ballot test among those undecided about the presidential race. Close analysis of the numbers shows that Obama might have an edge with between a third and a quarter of the currently undecided bloc. That’s cutting things awfully close.

The second key is turnout. African-Americans look solid for Obama and very likely to vote in high numbers, but young and Latino voters’ turnout appears problematic. Obama’s recent announcement of a newly articulated Dream Act-light policy could help, but it is too soon to see any data showing measurable change. It is what many Latino voters wanted to see, though Obama did it less than five months before the election when it could have been done three years ago. After deportations had reached levels higher than those under George W. Bush, it could take a lot to drive up Latino turnout.

This election is hardly over: The totally unexpected could happen that changes everything. Unless the Obama team can discredit Romney, though, convincing voters that he is a ruthless, uncaring corporate buccaneer, this will be a hard election to win.

Continue reading...

28 Responses to Charlie Cook: Hard Election For Obama to Win

  • Lord Jesus Christ, may Obama be utterly defeated on November 6th and may Romney prove that he has the right to govern. Amen!

    I cannot begin to express my hope for an Obama defeat.

  • When Obama is king, we, the people will not have to vote.

  • It will be a blowout, crushing loss for Obama. It won’t be a 1984-style route, but very much akin to 1980.

  • I just hope & pray that Obama gets defeated because it’s scary to think what will happen to this country if he continues to be our president.

  • If I were the Devil, I would vote for Obama. If Obama won my work would be done. I would retire to Pandemonium.

    Hope, pray and work for the the good. Prepare for the worst: Obama gets four more years to finish us off.

  • Seems it is hard for him to win by convincing people he is the best and piling up more votes than Romney.
    What else can he try? October surprise? The month of June, already replete with bowing and scraping before his various constituencies, is nearly over. But I think more gays and Hispanics are becoming increasingly skeptical.

    Of course he has not really tried an appeal to the older voters yet.

  • As long as Obama has the MSM on his side, he’s in the driver’s seat. His anti-rich, anti-white, anti-religious message is gaining traction in secular America and in the weeks leading up to the election all we will hear will be how he killed Osama, “created millions of jobs,” and how dangerous it will be to “turn back the clock” and hand the reins to a rich, greedy politician who exported jobs overseas and is “out of touch.” Somewhere along the way there will be a few Romney “gotcha” moments and the MSM will pounce. Obama will squeeze out a close win.

  • Baloney Joe, utter baloney. You exaggerate the power of the fading Mainstream Media to god-like proportions and you forget the first rule in American presidential politics: It is always about the economy unless an issue of the magnitude of the Civil War or World War II dominates. No amount of media malarkey can put a smiley face on this pig of an economy for the majority of the voters. Romney with 295-310 electoral votes, with an outside chance of going as high as 347.

  • It is good to see that Mr. Green has gone from “Obama blowout” to “Obama close squeeze.”

    Good trend – let’s keep it up.

  • Only chance Romney has is a big white guy turnout. Obama has the queers, Jews, Latinos, women and blacks solidly locked up. Older white conservatives are an ever-shrinking voting bloc. It’s simple math.

  • Don, perhaps you’d like to place a small wager. Like a year’s subscription to our favorite magazine. Your call.

  • P.S. That would be one bet I would be happy to lose.

  • Don, perhaps you’d like to place a small wager.

    Fine Joe. If I win you will write a guest post for TAC praising Lincoln. If you win I will write a post attacking Lincoln.

  • “Obama has the queers, Jews, Latinos, women and blacks solidly locked up.”

    Identity politics, the last refuge of a politician who presides over a lousy economy. Obama got elected in 2008 because the economy was in meltdown and the voters blamed the GOP. He will lose this year because the economy is still wretched and he is the guy in charge.

  • Don, can I praise with faint damns? : )

  • I think Obama got elected for 3 main reasons: 1) white guilt 2) a weak opponent 3) MSM support.

  • I might not worry so much about some of the demographics you mentioned, Joe. Jews are 2.1% of population, and only 64% support Obama, 10% less than last time around. Less than 2% of Americans self identify as homosexual, so they’re not a great demographic to rely on, and the GOP still managed to get a fifth of them in the midterm. While there is a gender gap, MARRIED women tend to be a pretty Republican demographic. Think about it; if women were really a solid liberal block, that means that the half of the country with more registered voters is solidly liberal, and therefore there shouldn’t be a single Republican in any office anywhere – but there is.
    Conservative white people might not sound cool, but conservative is America’s largest ideological group, and white the largest race.

  • It is my unhumble opinion that Obama got elected because the people fear the retribution of God for abortion, for the removal of Jesus Christ and FREEDOM of religion from the public square. Obama’s arrogance posed as a strength, a shield as it were, from the vengeance God will take upon the guilty. Obama, as chief executive, will indeed bear the brunt of God’s vengeance, for Obama has not humbled himself before God or the TRUTH. MSM and Obama’s cohorts will be there right next to him when the hand of God strikes, sooner than later, praise the LORD.

  • Its a sad commentary on the state of US politics and its demographic shadow, that a man with absolutely no ability except mouthing platitudes continues to be a credible incumbent. The truth may be unpalatable but it has to be faced: the US of old is not going come back unless the whites take stock and vote according to their interests both present and historical.

  • Obama has the queers,

    There’s no need for name-calling here. Certainly Obama will garner a majority of the homosexual vote – you can just say that.

  • Paul, point taken. Perjorative now, but widely used when I was growing up. Have to remain PC of course.

  • “…a guest post for TAC praising Lincoln. “

    Low blow.

  • I am not clear on what you said here in your first sentence Mary. I do think the people are beginning to have a little more fear of the Lord. And we have to keep remembering that His is the most powerful constituency! Yes praise the Lord
    (and pass the ammunition?) joke joke… I don’t mean to foment anything…

    You speak of God’s retribution Mary … I am wondering about the quickness of God’s smackdown after the building of the druid pagan house of worship at the Air Force Academy in Colorado

  • Obama has the queers…

    That’s, what, three votes (39 if you include former members)? Not much to get worked up about, methinks. 😉

  • Anzlyne: “I am not clear on what you said here in your first sentence Mary. ” The people who voted for Obama tried to hide behind him from the vengeance of God. Obama is a hot air filled shirt with absolutely no power to rule over the nation without the sovereign authority of God. Yes, Anzlyne, It may become “praise the Lord and pass the ammunitiion” and it is no “joke, joke”. After writing 923 Executive Orders imposing martial law upon the citizenry, Obama let the military tanks roll into the streets of a quiet town to impress every voter of his power.

  • yes I get it “Obama’s arrogance posed as a strength, a shield” You are prob right– and people don’t see past the pose. Yet.

    He does have lots of feisty people trying to help him with this election.
    I wish the woman named Julia Sweeney who is a “cultural Catholic” on TV ads would get a little fear of the Lord, she could do a lot of good if she was on the side of Good.

    Maybe the armored vehicles in the streets in Missouri will make the light dawn for people- if they can admit they need to change their minds. I wish some cultural leaders would publicly do that.

  • The objective factors of 2012 indicate a crushing loss for Obama:

    1. The economy is in lousy shape and getting worse.
    2. Obama has not governed remotely as he ran.
    3. The Democrats got crushed in 2010 – that wasn’t just a little, mid-term loss there boys and girls: it was a defeat of epic proportions. 7 Senate seats, 63 House seats, innumerable State legislative seats. Has anything happened since that drubbing to make people go, “hey, those darn Democrats are just great!”?
    4. Over the past couple years upwards of a million people took the time to switch their voter registration from Democrat to Independent or Republican. The number of registered GOPers in the US has grown (slightly) while the number of registered Democrats has dropped (like a rock in some places).
    5. Polling has been showing an increasing gap between the number of GOPers polled and the number who show up to vote: the Wisconsin recall and Indiana Primary are prime examples of this. Lugar was supposed to lose by a couple points: he lost by 21. A major surge in grassroots, conservative voters is showing up.
    6. A bunch of senior, elected Democrats are skipping the Convention. They don’t want to be seen in the same region of the country with Obama – not even in the same region he’ll be in the next day or two.
    7. While Obama continues to pull in huge bucks, he’s not pulling in nearly as much as expected, he’s burning through it faster than he’s taking it in and, at the minimum, the GOP which we thought would be outspent two to one will match the Democrats in 2012.
    8. Political rumor-mongering has it that Democrats are already engaged in Congressional “triage” where they are deciding which incumbents are already lost and thus where to spend money to save seats. In other words they are playing Congressional defense – just trying to hold on to as many House and Senate seats as they can rather than trying to take any away from the GOP.
    9. The Democrats are already in a “thread the needle” campaign mode…looking at the electoral map to see where they can dig up 270 electoral votes. Romney is expanding the field to traditionally Democrat States such as Pennsylvania and Michigan.
    10. It is the end of June and Obama is still in massive pander mode to his core supporters – he’s desperately trying to lock down single women, Latinos, homosexuals and urban professionals.

    The bottom line is that the Obama campaign strategy now is to try to so divide Americans in to mutually hating camps that he can eke out a narrow win as Independents stay home in disgust and the traditionally larger number of core Democrats slightly outweigh the core GOPers on November 6th. This is the campaign of a man who is facing crushing defeat, knows it, and is just working desperately to salvage his political career. It won’t work – even if Obama does manage to disgust everyone with politics, my view is that there are more GOPers these days than Democrats…so a fight between the bases, as it were, still has Romney winning.

    Yes, it is still a long way before November 6th. Yes, all of us committed to defeating Obama must work like heck to get it done. Yes, anything can happen. But the reality of 2012 is that it is a hideous year for Democrats – if they win, it will be by the narrowest of margins, because we dropped the ball and because they lucked out amazingly.

  • I suspect Obama might not step down when defeated. He’s already hired a ton of attorneys to contest the election results.

Barack “Milhous” Obama

Wednesday, June 20, AD 2012

Judging from this morning’s events, I can only assume that there is a Romney campaign mole high up in the councils of the Obama administration.  Absent this, it is hard to understand why the Obama administration, less than five months from election day, thinks it is a brilliant idea to invoke Executive Privilege in order to block the turnover of documents related to the Fast and Furious scandal to the House:

President Obama has granted an 11th-hour request by Attorney General Eric  Holder to exert executive privilege over Fast and Furious documents, a  last-minute maneuver that appears unlikely to head off a contempt vote against  Holder by Republicans in the House.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee is expected to forge  ahead Wednesday morning with its meeting on the contempt resolution  anyway.

If the vote proceeds, Republicans have more than enough votes on committee to  pass the resolution. However, Holder would not be considered held in contempt of  Congress unless and until the full House approves the measure.

The move by Holder and Obama to lock down some requested documents only  complicates the fight over the botched anti-gunrunning operation between the  legislative and executive branches.

Continue reading...

20 Responses to Barack “Milhous” Obama

  • Pingback: Two Quick Links « Truth Before Dishonor
  • *looks at the pot of decaf* It’s too freaking early to deal with this kind of BS without serious caffeine, or much stronger stimulants.

  • I am not surprised.

    Yesterday’s Investors Business Daily published the following: “The chief executive who swore to faithfully execute the nation’s laws picks those he’ll ignore and makes up others through regulation and executive order. He sees no need for a Congress or Constitution.”

    His teleprompter is either too arrogant or to deserate to stop digging that hole.

    The Teleprompter-in-Cheif has misspent 40 months figuratively strangling America’s engines of prosperity. The TOTUS and its administration are America’s
    “Black Swans.”

    Little wonder, then, that three days after his immigration demagoguery, polls show Obama (Romney 46 – Obama 43) got zilch for his extra-constitutional arrogance.

  • Oh don’t worry Foxfier, with a little luck we’ll be watching the fallout between now and election day. Get your popcorn ready.

  • I think it’s an insult to Nixon to lump him in with King Kardashian. No one died during Watergate, a third-rate burglary that led to a coup d’etat launched by The Washington Post.

  • “I think it’s an insult to Nixon to lump him in with King Kardashian.”

    Ha! I support what Joe Green wrote!

  • Not thinking that a lousy economy was enough of an advantage for the GOP, they have handed the Republicans a scandal issue.

    You have two choices. Either what’s in the documents is worse than the aroma which arises from refusing to disclose them, or Obama is refusing to disclose them because it is his default to attempt to control the narrative at all times (that last being one suggestion as to why his long-form birth certificate remained under lock-and-key for so long).

  • In the 70s it seemed that all the sanctimony in the world could not wash away the sins of Pres Nixon. A trivial incident that JFK would have told his brother to fix with a visit by some union goons to the NYT, or FDR dismiss airily with some remarks about moneychangers became a full-blown constitutional crisis for the hapless Nixon. It would be interesting to see if the press exerts even a fraction of the effort they made during Watergate to get to the bottom of FF. Then the pundits endlessly intoned about Nixon’s contempt for the spirit of the Constitution, while here we have what appears to be no less than an attempt to subvert the Constitution itself and the MSM cannot bestir itself since it may go right up to its man in the WH.

  • Perhaps the most amusing aspect of all this is the spin that this started under Bush.

    Not exactly.

  • What you talking ’bout Ivan?

    FF would be a trivial incident in JFK administration?
    FF could be airily dismissed if FDR had done it? I don’t think so. There are still lots of guns out there, maybe more American to be killed or have been killed by them, perhaps all only for the effect of changing the Constitutional right to bear arms.
    You might not like the aforementioned Democrats, but I think Nixon, Kennedy and FDR were all true patriots.

  • Analyze,
    To be clear I was talking about the Watergate incident.

  • This is Obama’s first. George W perpetrated about a dozen, all rather questionable.

  • Six times actually, none of which were overturned by a court. We will see how Obama fares.

  • Did any of Dubya’s six, court-sustained EP claims involve illegal activities as in providing the murder weapon to the killer of a federal employee or perpetrating violent schemes aimed at taking away the American people’s Second Amendment rights?

  • “This is Obama’s first.”

    Of course the first time could be an abuse of the privilege. In which case it doesn’t matter how often others have done it.

  • First of all I was not around during the 70’s or 80’s so can someone explain watergate to me? It’s mentioned in a few songs and Lynerd Skynerd says that watergate doesn’t bother him.

    Paul Dwhich state will you take over? I call Delaware and Maryland which may not seem significant but that includes D.C.

  • I’m part way through Michelle Malkim’s book, “Culture of Corruption”, and am simply staggered that all the shenanigans by Obama and his cronies was kept under the radar for so long prior to the 2008 presidential elections
    Its pleasing to see that she, Sean Hannity et al. are working hard to expose all this – there appears to be so much, that there is probably not enough time to get through it all before the elections.

    Politics, Chicago style – nothing seems to change, does it.

  • Alas, no Don. If only there were lawmen with this type of attitude to clean up politics the Chicago Way:

  • First of all I was not around during the 70?s or 80?s so can someone explain watergate to me? It’s mentioned in a few songs and Lynerd Skynerd says that watergate doesn’t bother him.

    Mr. Nixon inherited a most wretched military quagmire from the previous administration and embarked on a policy of ‘withdrawal as a matter of policy rather than as a matter of defeat’ in the words of Dr. Kissinger (his principal counselor on foreign affairs, later the foreign minister). The precedent they had in mind was Gen. deGaulle’s liquidation of the French commitment in Algeria (1958-62). With a variety of purposes in mind, the political opposition undermined government policy (commonly in the service of promoting a rout of American forces in Indochina). One element of this was misappropriation of state secrets by government employees working both sides of the street, Morton Halperin and Daniel Ellsberg among them. They were in cahoots with our perpetually unscrupulous press corps. Mr. Nixon and his confederates thought they were justified in using every means at their disposal to attack and disable these characters. Mr. Nixon also had…issues, and had a neuralgic response to his opponents that some more internally tranquil man (e.g. his successor) might not have.

    The FBI was not the most conscientious of organizations and had been engaged in seedy extra-legal domestic surveillance for some time. They elected to not be helpful, so Mr. Nixon’s subordinates put together a pick-up team of composed of members of the White House staff, people on the staff of the President’s election campaign committee, and assorted subcontractors to do these bag jobs. One odd target of theirs was Lawrence O’Brien, the Chairman of the Democratic National Committee. They burgled his offices and tapped his phone. They needed to repair the malfunctioning tap so they burgled his offices a second time on 17 June 1972. They were collared by a security guard at the building and placed under arrest. There then followed a 10 month long campaign to conceal the filaments that connected the five men arrested to the President and a number of crimes were committed in that interval (such as bribing them). It all began to unravel in April of 1973 and a series of inquiries were undertaken by federal prosecutors and committees of Congress which had fairly demonstrated by August of 1974 that Richard Nixon was in the know about the obstruction of justice and had a general knowledge of what his subordinates were up to in 1971 and 1972. A committee of the House of Representatives had approved three resolutions of impeachment and his impeachment was imminent. A resolution of impeachment requires a trial in the U.S. Senate and he was counseled that only 12 Senators would likely vote for acquittal, so he resigned.

10 Responses to Why Obama Is Going to Lose in Four Videos

  • The President is a dumb idiot nit wit.

    Oh yeah, I am not being loving and kind and nice and tolerant when I call a spade a spade.

  • I don’t care how many Ivy League degrees you possess, massive drug use during your adolescent years will always come back to bite you. If Barry Hussein really wants to help people, he would hold himself up as exhibit A regarding the dangers of choom.

  • What he meant was, “My cronies and cash bundlers in the private sector economy are doing FINE!”


    That was uncharitable.

    Cut the man some slack.

    After all, this is his first real job.

    That being said, I will not rehire him. I didn’t hire him in 2008.

  • To wit – I doubt Zerohedge reads St. Ambrose or the Pope.

    This blog post:

    “All that debt Obama acquired, and all the stimulus did work to redistribute wealth and income — it worked to redistribute wealth and income toward the well-connected crony capitalist groups that funded Obama into office. Obama can talk all he likes about cutting taxes for the middle class; the data shows who Obama’s redistribution policies have overwhelmingly favoured. Of course, leftists and statists often end up favouring the super-rich. That’s been the underlying reality of communism — politburos, bureaucrats, technocrats, party members all benefit at the expense of everyone else (in spite of all that proletarian rhetoric). Inviting the state to carve up national income and redistribute it is an invitation to corruption, and graft. Obama talks an updated version of the old communist rhetoric about redistributing wealth to the working class — he even adopted Stalin’s slogan “forward” — yet just like Stalin the reality of his policies is more wealth for the richest and most well-connected. What a surprise.”

  • “PP: That was uncharitable. Cut the man some slack. After all, this is his first real job. That being said, I will not rehire him. I didn’t hire him in 2008.”

    Love it, T. Shaw, love it!

  • Paul,

    The President is not a nitwit. His general intelligence is more than adequate. It is likely much more developed in the verbal sphere than elsewhere and one suspects he would perform wretchedly in an occupation with the most rigorous operational measures of competence. Neither politics nor law are such an occupation, so what he has will do.

    His real problem is that he is a serial dilettente. One can reasonably infer that he has no goal or prescription that is not self-aggrandizing or derived from whatever Kool-Aid is being consumed in his milieux.

  • Thanks, Art Deco. Perhaps you are correct. Nevertheless, I despise and loathe what he stands for and supports.

  • The problem T Shaw is that a some people either don’t seem to care that Stalin killed more peasants than Hitler killed Jews or even agree with what he did.

  • So I realized something guys, if the European countries go to war with each other I could be in real deep horse dung, because am a German citizen but live in the USA and have a green card and more recently ended up in the system because I got a drivers permit in December, so if Europe has one of its secular squabbles over banking and due to that has a war the USA no doubt will get involved and the USA doesn’t really like Germany (for many reasons).

  • I watched the Romney video and found one statement very disturbing (in that it will easily be used against Romney): “he wants more government; he wants more firemen, more policemen, more teachers. That’s not what we need. We need less government.” This, of course, can easily (and will) be taken as, “we need fewer firemen, policemen, and teachers in America.” Yikes! That sounds awful! I don’t think anybody likes the sound of a person saying we need fewer policemen, firemen and teachers (even if they are being paid on the public dime).

Lech Walesa “Too Political” For Obama Administration

Saturday, June 2, AD 2012

The Obama administration, in its never-ending quest to embarrass itself and America, has insulted one of the pivotal figures in ending Communism in Europe, Lech Walesa:

According to the Wall Street Journal, Polish officials requested that Walesa accept the Medal of Freedom on behalf of Jan Karski, a member of the Polish Underground during World War II who was being honored posthumously this week. The request makes sense. Walesa and Karski shared a burning desire to rid Poland of tyrannical subjugation. But President Obama said no.

Administration officials told the Journal that Walesa is too “political.” A man who was arrested by Soviet officials for dissenting against the government for being “political” is being shunned by the United States of America for the same reason 30 years later.

Meanwhile, one of the recipients of the Medal was Dolores Huerta, the honorary chair of the Democratic Socialists of America. So socialist politics are acceptable, but not the politics of a man who stood up and fought socialism.

This revelation follows an eruption of outrage in Poland after President Obama referred in his remarks at the Medal of Freedom ceremony to “Polish death camps,” a phrase that Poles have battled since the end of the Cold War. The phrase suggests that Poles were complicit in Nazi concentration camps, which of course is not the case. In fact, Poles were exterminated in the camps.


The White House’s flippant response to the uproar caused the Polish president and prime minister to demand more thoughtful and personal reactions. But White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Wednesday that the president has no plans to reach out to his Polish counterparts and has shrugged off the outrage in Poland.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to Lech Walesa “Too Political” For Obama Administration

  • Its not that he is too political. Its that he’s the wrong politics.

  • It’s just one thing after another with President Obama….

  • Obama still hasn’t apologized for his ‘Polish death camps’ remark. He sent “regrets”, but not an out and out apology.

    11/6 can’t come soon enough.

  • Obama has a ready supply of unwarranted apologies for the actions of his predecessors, but he can never find cause to apologize for his own.

  • This is not too surprising considering how communist Obama is. Obama is just such dummass and luckily is a lot less sneaky than Stalin.

  • Thank you Donald McClarey for this post. I am greatly saddened by the actions of Obama. I will not say “our president” because Obama is not our “president”. A man who does not believe in FREEDOM does not deserve to be a citizen in America.

  • … the pot calling the kettle …

  • This proves what I have said all along about Obama: he is an ideologue not a politician.

  • Of all peoples, I have the highest respect for the Polish for what they went through and sill were not beaten. Years ago, I thought the creator of the “Polish jokes,” that were so prevalent in America, was the work of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union because the greatest weapon against your greatest threat is ridicule. It disgust me that Catholics were so instrumental in electing this despicable human being as our President who bows to Arab dictators and insults our allies and friends.

  • My father’s family is 100% Polish. Poles fought for American freedom in the War for Independence. Polish troops were allied with the Western Powers against Germany in World War I. Polish servicemen who could escape after the Nazi and Soviet invasions in 1939 did escape and fought hard and well on the Allied side throughout World War II. For this, FDR turned away any pleas for help in the Warsaw Uprising of 1944 and refused to consider any evidence that Stalin’s NKVD were guilty of the Katyn Massacre. FDR was fine with Stalin keeping the chunk of Poland he took in 1939 (FDR was fine with Stalin keeping the Baltic states as well). Polish airmen fought the Nazis in the Battle of Britain. Polish troops landed with the Allies in Normandy and fought hard and well. The Poles helped to close the Falaise Gap. German soldiers surrendered to Poles in the battle of Monte Cassino.

    I think FDR stunk as a President, too.

    King Jan Sobieski and his Hussars crushed the Ottomans at the Battle of Vienna in September 12, 1683 (the Most Holy Name of Mary). Poland defeated the invading Red Army (the Miracle of the Vistula) in 1920. Poland struggled against Communism and defeated it within its own borders in 1989.

    For these as well as being Catholic, Obumbler hates Poland. Obumbler is the most disgusting, most despicable, most unqualified dufus to inhabit the White House. I pray for his defeat. The man’s name is $**t to me. I loathe Communism – which Obumbler clearly is – and he and his minions need to be driven from power.

  • Naturally, Obama can’t laud a man who helped sweep into the trash bin of history his ideology: communism.

  • Penguins fan, I myself being a German know that many things from the Nazis were adopted for example promiscuity in schools, socialism, atheism, either an extreme pride or hate of Germany, hatred of Jews in Arabia, and heaps of filth which Poland had to deal with. One should not forget that Germans suffered as well under the rule of the Nazis and later at the hands of unchaste communist pieces of god hating filth. Obama however seems to agree with communism quite blatantly.

  • He looks partial to communism and communists in this incident. It seems he just can’t countenance the idea of associating himself with anything to do with Walesa, communist defeater. I think of his whispered words to Medvedev. I can’t believe so many Americans still don’t think he is doing anything wrong. What does it take to open people’s eyes?

  • I really and truly cannot believe this. I mean literally that. Look, forget about everything else. Just think of this: Lech Walesa is a former President of Poland. A former head of State of an allied country with strong ties with America going back to Kosciuzko. In the ordinary intercourse of civilized countries, if a man of that rank asked to be present at a ceremony involving his country, it would be unimaginable to refuse. If the Obama administration actually has committed such an international solecism, then they are not fit to run a bicycle.

  • “then they are not fit to run a bicycle.”

    Precisely Fabio, or as we say in the US they couldn’t pour water out of a boot if the instructions were written on the heel!

  • Boiska na Sycylii e pszenicy ale je?? z Aten Scythia. Scythia sta? si? bardzo greckich i demokratycznej a nast?pnie sta? si? Polska. Grecy i Rosjanie sta? si? zbyt du?o pod dyjab?a.

  • ” … The request makes sense. Walesa and Karski shared a burning desire to rid Poland of tyrannical subjugation. But President Obama said no.

    Administration officials told the Journal that Walesa is too “political.” A man who was arrested by Soviet officials for dissenting against the government for being “political” is being shunned by the United States of America for the same reason 30 years later. …”

    These admin officials serving the admin said a Hero in reality who is 180 degrees from admin political agenda is too political. There might have been some sober, joyous accolades for a man of our time to have to acknowlege in their admin consciousness.

  • Valentin, it might surprise you to know I have German ancestry. My mother is half German, as her maternal grandmother were born in Frankfurt. Her family, the Deckers, left during the days of Kulturkampf at the hands of Bismarck, who despised Catholic Germans almost as much as he despised Poles.

    For what it’s worth I think the origin of the “Polish joke” was Bismarck’s government. Despite the fact that Germany was Europe’s largest and most powerful state in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and a center of scientific research and manufacturing, some nasty ideas have come from Germany. There is a miniseries about WWI (made in England) that begins with the accusation that German had an invasion plan to attack the eastern United States in the early 20th century. Karl Marx was German. In WWI the German government assisted Lenin in his power grab in Moscow in order to get Russia out of the war.

    Back to Obumbler – it is obvious that the man is a lousy politician. He has made it a habit of annoying and driving away people who may support him in the upcoming election. Obumbler should not have a chance of winning.

  • For fellowships sake I will mention that my great grandmother came from Silesia. I thought the polish joke came from Polish soldiers having fought the world wars with horses but I could be wrong.

  • I think It would be a major act of stupidity if people voted Obama in again.

  • Obama and his advisers are probably too stupid and vindictive to realise that Lech Walesa, a living legend, would be doing him a favour by accepting the award. Walesa was organising the Gdansk strikes that triggered the fall of the Soviet Empire with “fire in the belly and iron in the soul” when Obama was mooching composite girlfriends with a reefer stuck in his mouth. What an absurd clown this man is.

  • NOW I believe it, damn it. Read this blog entry, especially the transcript. http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100164771/obama-administration-refuses-to-say-it-will-recognise-results-of-falklands-referendum/ – Read it all. If I were the British Prime Minister, I would pull my ambassador from Washington DC and order my troops in Afghanistan and elsewhere into their barracks pending withdrawal.

  • Typical Obama policy Fabio. Kick our friends in the teeth and coddle our enemies. What a true epic disaster this man has been for the US and the world.

Obama Working Willfully To Undermine Hierarchical Catholic Church

Thursday, May 31, AD 2012

A few years ago I would have thought the title of my piece was too extreme- I bought into the charisma of Barack Obama- never publicly supported him- but I thought he was someone who could bridge some of the serious difficulties that pro-life Democrats faced within my political party. I read his books, I thought he respected the Catholic Church as much as a secular political liberal could be expected to. Around that time I was trying to work from the inside of the Democratic party- running for Florida State House as a pro-life Democrat, and later serving as Vice President for the Florida Democats for Life organization. This was also the time period where I was invited to become part of a national Catholic Democrats listserve which included such notaries as : Vicki Kennedy, Lisa Sowle Cahill of Boston College, Rev. William D’Antonio and Rev. Anthony Pogorel of the Catholic University of America, Peggy Steinfels of Fordham University, Rev. Thomas Reese of Georgetown, Vincent Miller of Georgetown/U. of Dayton, Dan Maguire of Marquette, Doug Kmeic of Pepperdine, Suzanne Morse of NCR, Chris Korzen of Catholics United, Alexia Kelly of Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good, Steve Callahan of the AFL-CIO, and others (Eric LeCompte, Nicholas Carfardi, James Salt, Morna Murray, Fred Rotondaro, Kari Lundgren). I never agreed to keep all that passed before my eyes confidential, but I never publicly revealed the basic content until now.

My reason for going public now is due to the recent event where the Worcester Bishop Robert McManus weighed in to prevent Vicki Kennedy from speaking at the Anna Maria College commencement. The press I read portrayed the Bishop as being overly vindictive and Kennedy milked the rejection, playing innocent, as though she is doing nothing to try to upend the Catholic Church as we know it- as a Hierarchical Institution. It was my experience on the Catholic Dem listserve that Vicki Kennedy was essentially my nemesis. I defended the Church as a Hierarchy, and the official teachings on abortion et al, and she took me to task almost every time I wrote pro-orthodox Catholic commentary- with plenty of Amens from her fellow travelers on the listserve. I did receive a few positive private emails from some on the listserve, but on the whole it was a very discouraging experience trying to defend the Church as a convert, who would be at a total loss if the Catholic Church put no stock in the teaching authority of the Pope and the Bishops, and taught that contraceptives, legal abortion, and gay marriage were just fine and dandy things. So Soon after posting this on the listserve-

“It is deeply troubling to me that this Catholic Democrats listserve membership seems more intent on finding reasons to pull some kind of palace coup against the Catholic Church Magisterium and Hierarchy in general, than to address specific issues related to the Catholic interests in American politics. I am a convert to Catholicism, I knew what I was signing up for in becoming a Catholic, I accepted the teachings and authority lines as prescribed by the latest Catechism. I simply cannot understand why those who seem to relish openly trashing the Apostolic successors retain membership in the Church- that is something that I can only address as an appeal to someone else’s good conscience. Most of my family is of the Protestant variety, I understand that thinking and worldview but reject it, but they are acting in good conscience- they don’t believe what the Catholic Church teaches about her role, so they don’t invest in the Catholic narrative and authority line. Maybe what I’m finding here at Catholic Democrats are many good protestants but not orthodox Catholics as I understand things?

You can remove me from your rolls if it displeases many here that I don’t conform to the groupthink on display here, otherwise I will continue to offer my two bits to challenge the establishment views of liberal, anti-Catholic Hierarchical voices which parallel the hard Catholic Right- in their wrongheadedness- in my humble opinion anyway. One is certainly free to criticize the clerical/Hierarchical handling of sexual abuse cases over the years- but how this all fits in with being a Democratic Party member is something I can’t fathom. Tim Shipe”

My offer to leave was accepted after Vicki Kennedy wrote a smack-down on me; and shortly thereafter I severed my own Democratic party membership and ended my leadership role with Florida Dems for Life- I took Archbishop Chaput route of becoming a political Independent and remain such today.

To come up to speed- back a couple of years ago- I knew that the most powerful and connected Catholic Democrats in our country were interested in more than just getting more traction on Catholic social justice issues in our American political system- I would describe the agenda/mind-set of Vicki Kennedy et al for the most part as the following:

 1. Obama embodies the Catholic social tradition- he’s a better guide than the out-of-touch Pope/Bishops 2. Democrats for Life leaders were not welcome – despite my own inclusion for a time- Kennedy seemingly successfully squashed the idea of Kristen Day being invited to be part of the listserve 3. The Bishops who were outspoken for advocating the primacy of the right to life for the unborn were demonized, mocked, ridiculed, and at times the idea of trying to bring on an IRS investigation on these type of Bishops was being encouraged by some ( especially if they dared to consider withholding Communion from Pro-choice Dem leaders) 4. Bishops were described as “self-designated custodians of ‘the tradition’”. 5. Catholic Dems could aptly be self-described for the most part as “intra-Catholic warriors” 6. The Clergy Scandals were to be used to help bring the end of the Bishops line of authority- teaching and otherwise 7. This authority should pass to those who know best- the secular-minded Catholic professors and their liberal political activist friends- since there really can’t be such a thing as a Holy Spirit-guided Catholic Church with Popes and Bishops playing a key role- I suppose they could still hold onto ceremonial roles like the Kings in Europe.

I can see clearly now that President Obama has been very conscious of this war for control within the Church- and his choice of Vice President and HHS Secretary- Biden and Sebelius, respectively, was a conspicuous power move to set in place the acceptability of dissenting Catholic leaders and thought into the mainstream of American societal structures and popular imaginations. The fact that Obama “evolved” on Gay Marriage with help from his Catholic buddy Joe Biden, and his determination to mandate contraception as a must-have “medicine” through the offices of Catholic Kathleen Sebelius- all of this plays right into the larger goals of the Catholic Democratic party elite. There has been no such evolution in his comprehension and compassion for the thousands of unborn humans killed every day in abortions, and the threat to religious liberties is finely focused on the authority of Catholic Bishops and the official teachings of the Catholic Magisterium. I believe the Catholic Dems elite would like to re-make American Catholic Bishops in the image of the Anglican church in England- with Obama playing a kind of King Henry VIII role in forcing power transfers ( counting on public/Catholic lay apathy).

My conclusion is this- I am not in disagreement with the Catholic Dems elite on an across-the-board basis- I am not a conservative ideologue any more than I am a liberal one. There are political issues where I go left and others where I go right or down the middle- I make the honest effort to stay as close to the official social doctrine teachings of principles, and even the prudential judgment application of those principles as the Bishops and Vatican officials advise. I find that the same powers-that-be that are given Holy Spirit assistance to teach firm principles, are also pretty darn good at putting forth ideas for applying those principles into the real world of political legislation and the like- but I acknowledge it’s not an exact science with one formula fits all simplicities, however. That’s how I would describe my own efforts in being a wanna-be orthodox, faithful Catholic on matters of social doctrine. Others may disagree- I have no doubt that the Catholic Dem elites I list above are well-intentioned- but I believe they are threatening great harm to many souls and to the future of our Catholic Church as the Hierarchical Institution – founded by Jesus Christ. Reforms should be taken up in a spirit that respects the obedience of Faith. I don’t abide by clergy abuses and incompetent administrative decisions made by Catholic bishops- but you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater- just as you don’t kill babies in the womb to solve the problems of women and their mates.

Continue reading...

34 Responses to Obama Working Willfully To Undermine Hierarchical Catholic Church

  • Bravo Tim! The Obama administration is clearly the most anti-Catholic administration in our nation’s history. Now Obama is attempting to play up his supposed ties to the Church:


    The linked to story above requires a strong gag reflex.

  • N.B. The majority (votes democrat) of American Catholic clerics and laity are undermining the Church’s Mission: the salvation of souls.

  • Excellent statement – “…you don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater- just as you don’t kill babies in the womb to solve the problems of women and their mates.”

  • Tim, this is a really good post. Thank you for writing it. I never understood the “agenda” of the elite Catholic Democrate. I never saw the big picture that you describe so well.

    I guess my main question regarding your post is in the last paragraph you said that liberal Dem Catholics are well-intentioned. It is really hard for me to believe that.
    In my mind good intentions would mean they are trying to positively change the Church for the salvation of souls, and I just don’t see that.

    Could you go into a little more detail that?

  • The unfortunate truth is that the attitudes you encountered and described are not just those of the Catholic Dem elite, but far too many of the Catholic rank and file.

  • C. Matt is right. I daily interface with many fine, upstanding and wonderful people who are everything a Catholic should be, except when it comes to contraception, abortion and homosexual marriage. The dissent is profound, widespread and almost un-eradical. I have written pages and pages of explanation on what the Bible says, what Humanae Vitae says and what the Catechism says. I have had many discussions with these persons. I even in certain cases went back to the real meaning of certain Greek words that St. Paul used in his Epistles in my verbal discussions and writings. Each one to a person fully acknowledged that I know more about Church teaching and what the Bible says than they do. But they insist on contraception as women’s health, abortion as a woman’s right to choose and homosexual marriage as a civil right. Nothing I have said or done makes even the slightest dent in their obstinacy. With such a sweet smile on their faces, they imply that I am the close-minded and intolerant one, though that’s not how they word their objections. Now they are entirely polite and diplomatic and respectful. And they do acknowledge WHAT the Church teaches with regard to these issues. But they won’t ACCEPT that teaching as applicable to themselves or anyone else who “by right of conscience” disagrees. They REFUSE the authority of both the Church and the Bible, and they do so in such a loving and kind and nice and tolerant and non-divisive way that I just want to scream.

  • chris- I do believe what these folks are doing is willful- but I don’t think anyone is motivated by a consciously-evil paradigm- these are intelligent people but I find that even the very intelligent get tripped up over the supposedly easy stuff. One connective tissue seems to be that general difference between converts to Catholicism and “birthright” Catholics- Mark Shea has written about how converts tend to see the doctrines as being absolutely essential to being a good Catholic- while cradle Catholics such as most of the people I encountered in Cath Dems – seemed proud of their rights of ownership as Catholics and fail to see through perhaps pride or habit- that they could be just re-making the Church in their own image- instead of being transformed they try do all the transforming- when they should be obedient reformer saints- they instead go the route of tearing down the authority lines within the Church and thus causing ruptures rather than repairing the damage of poor administration.

    So- I have to give people the benefit of the doubt in their intentions- even when they are flat out wrong in what they determine as beliefs and course of action- and of course you don’t allow people to do whatever they want based on good intentions- you have to put up resistance and try to convince them to reconsider- that is what I tried to do from the inside of the Democratic Party and within the CathDem listserve- but at a certain point you don’t just allow yourself to become a floor mat- you come to a point where you separate and kick the dirt off your sandals and move on..I reached that stage..and now I am hoping to do some damage control by alerting the Faithful of the real dangers to our Church by these Catholic intellectuals and activists who see themselves as great alternatives to the Pope and Bishops in leading the flock in terms of moral theology/social doctrine. What is the saying- the road to hell is paved with good intentions..

  • Very interesting post. Thanks for writing.

    As I look back in history and at current events, I see the Democrat party as anti-Catholic in principle (pro-slavery, anti-women suffrage, anti-civil rights, pro-abortion, anti-First Amendment, etc.) and in demonstration (KKK, HHS mandate, etc.). They are a party of hate and death.

  • In my reading about Cardinal Mindzenty I am learning how in Hungary, committed Communists divided Hungarian society into groups that could be pitted against each other, how a few so-called “progressive” Catholic priests and intelligentsia were duped into misleading their flock, how criminal anti-establishment types were used, how diminishing the unity of the Church weakened it’s resistance against the plans of the atheistic left, how government subsidies and so-called help kept various constituencies in line.
    Mindzenty: “Our psalm is the ‘De Profundis’, our prayer is the ‘Miserere’; our prophet is Jeremiah; our world is the Apocalypse”
    He knew the tactical cunning and deceit of the Communists and the reality that there must be no compromise.
    “The collaboration of leftist Catholics caused trouble immediately.” p 54

  • One more point to Chris- one thing that stood out for me was that vicki kennedy defended her brand of Catholicism when I made the above charge that this was really another form of protestantism- she claimed that she was upholding the manner in which she was brought up at home and in Catholic schools she attended. This would be a typical cause and effect which I have witnessed to in my previous posting on Education- the schools are often bastions for lukewarm and dissenting adult Catholics as administrators and teachers- and orthodox Catholic parents are few and far between- so with so much company in the ranks of the heterodox it is no wonder to me that various ideologies have become the replacement religion for many cradle Catholics. The biggest threat from the Cath Dems elite is that they have real access to real earthly power and they don’t just have some differences of opinion over some key political issues with the Catholic Hierarchy and Social Doctrine- they want to usurp proper authority within the Church and re-direct the moral authority unto themselves- this is what I am warning about and why I am trying to get a more organized response that goes beyond the partisan Republican-conservative v. Democratic-liberal battlelines. The Bishops themselves need to address this through the USCCB and through the parishes and schools- I would love to help since I am not a partisan- and thus tainted by ideological allegiances of my own.

  • Thanks again for the article, it is very informative. I often find myself in agreement with Democrates on most economic issues (current administration excluded) but am solidly Republican because of social issues.

    I will say you are much more charitable than me giving many of these Catholic Dems the benefit of the doubt. Something I need to work on I guess.

    RE Paul- I have written pages and pages of explanation on what the Bible says, what Humanae Vitae says and what the Catechism says

    Would appreciate any information you could pass along. Especially regarding homosexual marriage as this is a topic that comes up often within my sphere of influence

  • Completely messed up that last post, but didn’t mean to have that last sentence italicized. Guess that’s what happens when attempting to write a post as my two year old daughter is pulling on my shirt!

  • @ Chris,

    In answer to your request, here is the six page letter I wrote back in February to one of these “right to choose” Catholics. The person said that she read the first three pages and then stopped. All further conversation of a religious nature between us has likewise stopped at that point. There is nothing to be had in common with a liberal. We live on different worlds. What planet they come from I know not.

    Dear XXXXX,

    The following discusses the subject of the HHS mandate with which the Administration is compelling Catholic institutions to comply, and the background behind the teaching on homosexuality….The opinions expressed herein when Sacred Scripture or the Catechism of the Catholic Church are not referenced are my own. There is no obligation for you to agree or disagree with me outside of what Holy Mother Church teaches.

    The Church instructs us that abortion and contraception are intrinsic evils. The reason for this teaching is simple: life begins at conception and man does not have the authority to say when life may begin and when it may end. Three verses of Scripture bear upon this.

    1. First, Genesis 1:28 says, “And God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.’” It does NOT say, “Abort and contracept until you are ready to be fruitful and multiply.”
    2. Second, Jeremiah 1:5 states, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.” This means that even from conception the embryo is a human being.
    3. Third, Deuteronomy 5:17 states, “You shall not kill.” Abortion kills a living being and is contrary to God’s law.

    Genesis chapter 3 records that in the Garden of Eden the serpent tempted Eve with the forbidden fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, and both Adam and Eve succumbed. They were then driven out of the Garden of Eden lest they also partake of the Tree of Life and live forever in a state of sin. Today, humankind has decided to partake of that Tree of Life and determine when life begins and when life ends. The Church teaches that this is evil.

    Now Kathleen Sebelius (who describes herself as a Catholic) has issued a regulation that requires Catholic hospitals, schools, universities, colleges, halfway houses, etc., to provide insurance coverage for drugs that act as contraceptives or abortifacients (i.e., drugs which dislodge the embryo from the uterine wall and cause its ejection from the body, which in turn results in the death of the embryo). President Obama offered a so-called compromise to Catholic institutions by saying that they themselves would not under the regulation be paying for contraceptive or abortifacient drugs. But this ignores the fact that Catholic institutions would still have to pay insurance premiums that cover the cost of these drugs, so the compromise is mere sophistry and changes nothing. The regulation forces Catholic institutions to either stop their social service work or to pay for insurance premiums that cover the provision of intrinsic evil.

    What the US Council of Catholic Bishops has to say about the HSS mandate is available at the following web link:

    Bishops Renew Call to Legislative Action on Religious Liberty

    The First Amendment to the Constitution states:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

    Note that the phrase “freedom of worship” is NOT used. The First Amendment guarantees freedom of religion and is explicit in stating that Congress shall not make a law prohibiting the free exercise thereof. That means that the Catholic Church (or any religious community for that matter) cannot be boxed into the walls of its house of worship; rather, religious people are allowed to practice their religion in the public square. In the case of Christians – especially Catholics – this means that its institutions which heal the sick (hospitals), feed the poor (soup kitchens) and teach the young (schools) may refuse to provide insurance coverage for abortifacients and contraceptives without legal penalty. Indeed, the regulation from HHS against the same is blatantly unconstitutional.

    There is another point that bears on this. The normal functioning of a female body is to reproduce. To stop that functioning is unnatural and against the health of the woman. Therefore, to claim that the provision of abortifacients and contraceptives are in behalf of woman’s health is disingenuous at best and mendacious at worst.

    Now some will at this point declare that a woman has the right to determine what happens to her body without interference from any external agency. That is true. Yet we have to remember that it takes two people to cause conception (the Blessed Virgin Mary being the only exception). I must be perfectly plain here. If a man does not want a baby, then he should keep his pants zipped up. And if a woman does not want a baby, then she should keep her legs closed. Abstinence is 100% preventative 100% of the time. There are going to be no second Virgin Mary’s. Once a person has made a decision to engage in sexual intercourse, then that person has acted on the right to choose and a baby results. God created us in His likeness and image, and having given us sentience, He expects us to act like human beings and not like wild animals. That means that we need to exercise self-control and refrain from sexual activity outside of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony between one man and one woman. No one has any right to commit fornication, adultery or homosexual intercourse (a topic which I will deal with later). Too many people nowadays claim to revere science, logic and reason, but when it comes to the titillation of their genitals, they are wholly given over to the lust of the flesh and for them sexual pleasure becomes an addiction no different in essential substance from addiction to heroin or cocaine. St. Paul explains this in Romans 7:15-25:

    15* I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. 17 So then it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me. 21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22* For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self, 23* but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members. 24* Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

    There is a secondary argument that some people raise to justify abortion. They claim that abortion must always be available in cases such as rape or incest. This is illogical. Since when did committing a second crime right the wrong in the first crime? Why should the resultant baby be the victim of capital punishment for a crime that the father committed? The right solution is to make that father support mother and child for the next 18 years and nine months. Furthermore, the percentage of all cases of unwanted pregnancy being due to rape or incest is less than one per cent. The overwhelming majority of reasons given are similar to the following: “I wasn’t ready to have a baby.” The person making that declaration was, however, entirely ready to have sexual intercourse. Thus has abortion murdered 54 million unborn babies since the Roe v Wade decision by SCOTUS on January 23rd, 1973.

    Now a tertiary argument comes. Some claim that while they are personally opposed to abortion, they will vote for an abortionist politician because he claims that he will serve social justice and the common good. This argument is illogical. A man who will sacrifice an unborn baby’s life on the altar of political expediency for social justice and the common good serves neither social justice nor the common good. If he refuses to save the life of an unborn baby, then he will refuse the lives of the poor, the hungry, the thirsty, the sick, and the destitute.

    A fourth argument comes, namely that those who oppose abortion support capital punishment or war. Romans 13:1-4 bears on this:

    1* Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3* For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of him who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, 4* for he is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.

    God gave the State the power to execute the wrongdoer and to defend the people. Yes, the Catechism of the Catholic Church does urge the State to forgo the use of capital punishment (and I agree with that). It also encourages the avoidance of recourse to war (and I agree with that also). But there is no comparison between these and the murder of 54 million innocent babies since 1973. Abortion, contraception, homosexual behavior, euthanasia and human cloning are intrinsic evils. Recourse to capital punishment and war, always to be avoided, are not intrinsic evils.

    One other thing needs to be explained here and that is the warning which Pope Paul VI gave regarding the contraceptive mentality in Humanae Vitae in 1968. The pertinent paragraphs are contained in section 17 of this encyclical and they essentially explain that (1) the contraceptive mentality causes the man to disrespect the women into being a mere sex object, and (2) that same mentality renders unto the State the power to mandate the use of contraceptives contrary to religious conscience. Both of those things are happening today. We see women paraded around as mere sex objects on the television and across the internet, and now our own government is trying to force Catholic institutions to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives and abortifacients on the specious pretext of women’s health care. The actual statements made by Pope Paul VI are given below:

    Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

    Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

    Let us now discuss homosexuality. Paragraphs 2357 through 2359 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church best explain this.

    2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.”142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

    2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

    2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

    Now 1st Corinthians 6:9-10 is quite clear. Because many modern translations incorrectly translate these verses of Sacred Scripture, I will start with the original Greek:

    9 ? ??? ?????? ??? ?????? ???? ????????? ?? ???????????????; ?? ????????: ???? ?????? ???? ???????????? ???? ?????? ???? ??????? ???? ???????????? 10 ???? ??????? ???? ??????????, ?? ???????, ?? ????????, ??? ??????? ????????? ???? ???????????????.

    In typical translations into the English, these verses are rendered as following:

    9 Have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? Be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.

    The word ??????? in the Greek was used to designate the male who acted as receptor in the act of homosexual intercourse, hence its translation as “effeminate.” The word ???????????? in the Greek was used to designate the penetrator in the act of homosexual intercourse, hence its translation as “sodomite.”

    However, knowing what we now know, we see that these verses actually state:

    9 Have ye not known that the unrighteous the reign of God shall not inherit? Be not led astray; neither whoremongers, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexual receptors, nor homosexual penetrators, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, the reign of God shall inherit.

    We modern people get a sanitized version of what St. Paul was writing to the Church at Corinth, yet what he actually wrote was anything but sanitized. Sacred Scripture is clear with regard to homosexual intercourse. Now yes, one may be a homosexual (that is to say, afflicted with same sex attraction). Such persons are never to be discriminated against merely because of a predisposition. Indeed, I have a predisposition to drinking alcohol alcoholically. Being an alcoholic will not send me to hell. Giving in to my alcoholism will, however, send me to hell. The applicable word that St. Paul uses for people like me in the aforementioned verses is ??????? which means “drunken or intoxicated.” Thus, just as I am to remain abstinent of alcohol because of my disease of alcoholism, so also is the homosexual person to remain abstinent of homosexual intercourse. Sacred Scripture cannot be annulled. Romans 1:18-32 states:

    18* For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. 19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20* Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; 21* for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23* and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles. 24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, 25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error. 28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. 29 They were filled with all manner of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.

    People at this point may cry that it is unfair that a homosexual person be denied the pleasure of sexual satisfaction. This is a false cry. Homosexuals are subject to the same rules that any heterosexual person is subject to: no sexual intercourse outside of the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony between one man and one woman. God does not play favorites. But God does allow us to bear our crosses. In my case, the cross may be alcoholism. In the homosexual’s case, it may be same sex attraction. Romans 8:18 states:

    For I reckon that the sufferings of the present time [are] not worthy [to be compared] with the glory about to be revealed in us.

    And Colossians 1:24 states:

    I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and do fill up the things lacking of the tribulations of the Christ in my flesh for his body…

    We are called, whether single mother or father, alcoholic, homosexual or whatever, to unite our suffering with those of Christ on the Cross. As the old adage goes, no Cross, no Crown. The Gospel is not about social justice and the common good (though those are important). As Jesus in John 6:26-27 told the crowd who followed Him about after the feeding of the 5000 with loaves of bread and fishes:

    …Verily, verily, I say to you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw signs, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were satisfied; work not for the food that is perishing, but for the food that is remaining to life age-during, which the Son of Man will give to you, for him did the Father seal — [even] God.

    When politicians promise social justice and the common good, we should remember the example of Judas Iscariot in John 12:1-7

    1* Six days before the Passover, Jesus came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, whom Jesus had raised from the dead. 2 There they made him a supper; Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those at table with him. 3 Mary took a pound of costly ointment of pure nard and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair; and the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment. 4* But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (he who was to betray him), said, 5 “Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii * and given to the poor?” 6* This he said, not that he cared for the poor but because he was a thief, and as he had the money box he used to take what was put into it. 7* Jesus said, “Let her alone, let her keep it for the day of my burial. 8 The poor you always have with you, but you do not always have me.”

    Too many politicians are lying thieves in the tradition of Judas Iscariot. When we look to the State to provide what we need, even what we want, then we render unto the State to take away from us everything we have: house, wife, husband, child, mother, and father. It happened under Maximillien Robespierre in France during the 1790s. In the name of “Liberty, Equality and Fraternity” he murdered tens of thousands of Catholic clerics and laity using Dr. Guillotine’s “merciful instrument” of euthanasia. Like many in our government today, he was rabidly atheist, and his spiritual descendants today do to unborn babies what he did to the born a little more than two centuries ago. Thus does Jesus declare to Pontius Pilate in John 18:36:

    My kingship is not of this world; if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be handed over to the Jews; but my kingship is not from the world.

    Anyone who thinks (like Robespierre) that he can create a kingdom of Heaven on Earth is guilty of the worst sort of hubris, and that is the exact reason why adultery, fornication and homosexuality run rampant today. 2nd Chronicles 7:14 states:

    If my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

    Matthew 6:33 is consistent with this:

    But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well.

    Conversion and repentance come before, not after social justice and the common good. Sadly, Robespierre had to die by his own guillotine because he refused to learn that lesson.

    Again, you are under no obligation to agree with me. And if you have questions on these matters, then you should give this letter to [ your priests ] to ask them to explain the truth. I am only a lay person and I do not speak for the Church. I can only tell you what Sacred Scripture and the Catechism state [and perhaps give a lesson in Koine Greek every once in a while! 😉 ]

  • Thank you for that link Robert Klein Engler. Please, every American Catholic read it.

  • @Robert, The author seems to say the Church has been willing to cooperate with those in power looking to cheat on the field as long as it advances the ball. And now, it has reached a point where it can continue to look the other way and play both parties or take a stand and become martrys. I can agree to a point, but I think some are taking advantage of this situation by going too far in its accussations against the hiearchy.

    An example is Paul’s Richochet article where it accuses the bishops of giving an endorsement of Obamacare. They never did. The lack of pro-life protections was always a road block to endorsement. While they did not endorse it, they also didn’t reject it. I had problems with the latter, but a lack of rejection does not equal an endorsement. I don’t recall a pro-Obamacare campaign by the bishops, which Paul claims.

    American Thinker article does ask an interesting question. How far will the bishops and the flock go to stand by their principles? Got the guts to take it all the way?

  • “An example is Paul’s Richochet article where it accuses the bishops of giving an endorsement of Obamacare. They never did. The lack of pro-life protections was always a road block to endorsement.”

    Though it was almost endorsed. The Bishops wanted conscience protections and coverage for illegal immigrants. If they got that then Obamacare would be fine. Cardinal George was actively lobbying Republicans not to vote against the Stupak Ammendment (in order to spike the Bill). This in the hope that the bill would ultimately pass.


  • Richochet, “A Pact With the Devil” was good grist… I think the Bishops led by Card. Dolan are taking this kind of goad seriously and instead of looking back, are doing their best to make good decisions now. The need is for unity, clarity and shared effort.

  • Thank you Paul, once I get through all of this material know that it will someday go to good use. I do not have to “re-invent” the wheel so to speak and thank you for the readily availible info to use

    RE: Tim

    Regarding Catholic schools, unfortunatly what you say is very true. I am sure some excellent ones exists, but I have several real horror stories myself regarding Catholic schools. It’s one of the reason why I currently struggle with the idea of sending my son to one. I want to give him every opportunity to learn about our faith. Ultimately he learns the faith at home. It’s sad to say but I am worried about more harm than good being done to him.

  • I’ve seen it on the bumpers of cars in the parish parking lot before Mass: the Obama bumper sticker. It astounds me that any faithful Catholic can even consider voting for a Democrat…even a pro-life Democrat, let alone someone as effectively pro-abortion as Obama. And yet, there they are – my fellow parishoners; some of whom I know from personal experience to have a deep love of Our Lord and his Holy Church. Though I guess its wrong, I do envy them their faith being, at least as I can perceive it, deeper than mine.

    Part of it has to be ancestral – my late father didn’t switch his voter registration from Democrat to Republican until 2008, and that was only about a year before he died. But he also warned me – they are coming after the Church. They want to make an “American Catholic Church” to stand in opposition to the Roman Catholic Church and bid for the support of American Catholics. Ultimately, there really is only the Church, and Her enemies. And the enemies of the Church know one thing for certain: the only thing on earth which stands in the way of their victory is the Church.

    And there’s the other part of it – people who are willing to remain Democrats while still trying to remain faithful Catholics. The trick can’t be done – no matter how solidly Catholic you are if you are also a Democrat then you are magnifying the power of those who wish to destroy the Church, even if (and especially) if the destroyers have found a Bishop who won’t refuse them communion and who continue to pretend to the Catholic faith.

    I understand, Mr. Shipe – you wanted to be a good liberal and a good Catholic. You look at the GOP and, correctly, see many glaring errors, not least of which is the rote defense of “capitalism” in spite of the clear need for an alternative (Distributive) economic system. You’ve now learned a hard lesson – the only thing liberal leaders will allow you to be is a good liberal and that means mindlessly following whatever the leadership dictates, and if you don’t you’ll find yourself attacked until you either knuckle under or depart.

    I’m not asking anyone to give up their political views – but political allegiances must conform to reality. Any Catholic simply must, for the time being, vote Republican – not because Republicans are all wonderful…but because only Republicans offer the chance for faithful people to affect government policy. We can look for a day – hopefully not too far distant – when wise liberals will break completely with their leaders and form a Christian Democrat party to scoop up all those who are not enamored of the GOP but who cannot be faithful Catholics – or, indeed, Christians or Jews – within the Democrat party. I’m a Republican – have been my whole life; but if ever I see the GOP become a party hostile to my faith, I’ll drop it like a bad habit. If our faith does not drive our political actions then what use is our faith?

  • “Regarding Catholic schools, unfortunatly what you say is very true. I am sure some excellent ones exists, but I have several real horror stories myself regarding Catholic schools. It’s one of the reason why I currently struggle with the idea of sending my son to one.”

    I have some real ones too. This because my wife taught in Catholic schools for years. The level of knowledge and/or practice of the Faith is limited among most teachers. Some co-habitating. Some with Gay “marriage” stickers on their cars. Most actively communicating this very “modern” life to students.

  • There are too many blank spaces in the Obamacare contract where Sebelius can write in a prison term as Hillary Clinton did in Hillarycare, criminalizing and penalizing the very act of healing and the practice of medicine. Hilliarycare criminalized the practice of medicine with a TWO year federal prison sentence for every doctor who treated a patient not in his group.
    Obamacare promises everything a person might need, if one does not mind waiting a year or more for an emergency. The only surgery that will be done is abortion because the baby grows and is born according to the nature of the human being. In Canada, socialized medicine brought many people to the United States for heart surgery because the wait in Canada was over two years. My friend’s brother moved to Texas where he had the heart surgery.
    It would be interesting If Obama was a doctor poised to go to Federal prison for as long as Sebelius sends him, otherwise, the blank contract without informed consent is entrapment of the taxpaying citizens and a violation of civil liberties. Not those civil liberties endowed by the American Civil Liberties Union or Obama, but of those First Amendment Freedoms guaranteed by our founding principles and endowed by God, our God Who has been removed from the public square. How convenient.
    How very convenient. In this instance, Obama is taking advantage of the devil’s evil genius.

  • Evil is as evil does. Intentions pave the road to Hell. It is good that some are crossing over into the light, but forces of Darkness are many. Giving them any credit at all only weakens our defenses and strengthens thier resolve.

    There can be no compromise.

  • Pingback: Need Reader Input: Who Are The Top 10 Dynamically Orthodox Catholic Bishops? | The American Catholic
  • Pingback: Sr. Margaret Farley Vatileaks NeoCatechumenal Way Dawn Eden | Big Pulpit
  • Prior to the 2008 election, many of us had serious problems with Obama’s voting record and his promises for the future. We were ridiculed and called racists and hard-hearted, among among other names not printable here.
    It does now seem like the incubation of time has proven the concerns of 2008 to be real as the plans of this administration move forward.
    Subtle evil is still as evil as openly displayed evil.
    We must not allow this administration to control the bishops – and thus the Catholic Churh – in this country.

  • In my opinion, these heretics have been tolerated for way too long. Everything about them is “un-Catholic.” They have interpreted Vatican II as a license to make up their own Magisterium if they don’t like the Church’s official one. They openly mock the Pope, the Bishops, the Church. To them, it is the “faithful” that determine the Catholic Magisterium, not the Holy Father in conjunction with the heirs of the apostles. They openly declare that the “patriarchal” heirarchy has lost its legitimacy and they see the doctrinal “retrenchment” of Blessed JP II and BXVI as perhaps the greatest tragedy to befall the Church since the Reformation. They believe the Pope and Bishops are dead wrong on abortion, contraception, gay marriage, women’s ordination, etc., etc. and that they are “destroying” the Church by holding fast to their positions on these issues. These heretics should be excommunicated, en masse, immediately. The situation has gotten so dire that, in my humble opinion, every Catholic should be required to pledge an oath of loyalty to the Pope, their local Bishop, and the Magisterium of the Church or face excommunication. The “Catholic” population of the United States would be cut in half almost immediately, but at least those who remained would be true Catholics. This would certainly mean closing many parishes, schools and hospitals. It would mean supposedly Catholic universities formally breaking from the Church. It would mean dramatic loss of political influence. But, it would rid the Barque of Peter of these servants of Satan who are intent on destroying it from within and re-molding it in their own image. We know what happens when the route of accomodation to popular culture that they propose is taken – just look at the rapidly approaching extinction of Mainline Protestantism.

  • Donald, I have to disagree with your statement the “Obama administration is clearly the most anti-Catholic administration in our nation’s history.” If you look back in our nation’s history, the Masonic influence and the nativist movement of the first half of the 19th Century was clearly more anti-Catholic than the Obama admistration.

  • Disagree Chuck. One of the friendliest of the Founding Fathers to Catholics was George Washington, a mason. The Know Nothing Party prior to the Civil War had some influence, but never succeeded in electing a President. No, when it comes to the White House, the Obama administration is clearly the most anti-Catholic administration by far.

  • Wow! Excellent article.
    Thank you for explaining to me what is really happening.
    It’s all clear now.

  • In the beginning of this article you talk about your piece being important are talking about your gun or was that a typo?

  • From my own experience I can tell you that you shouldn’t hang out with poisonous people especially if you are a convert.

  • valentine- the reference was to the title of the “piece”- not my gun or a typo!

    Maureen- thank you so much- I wrote this for those who have leaned Left or Independent- those who have long been on the Right were already on the attack of anything Obama. I wanted to believe that Catholic Democrats were more faithful, not less. I really tried to make a dent in what I found was an extreme belief that the Magisterium- the Pope and Bishops- really weren’t not the proper teaching authorities for the Church. That role apparently is to go to the majority of Catholics- or perhaps society- with the critical role of authority going to the academic and the politician- the professors and political activists are the ones who know and care the most- more than distant popes and bishops- so the thinking goes. The consequence of this twisting of Christ’s will is that we have Catholics supporting legal abortion, widespread contraception, anything goes marriage definitions, and who dare say that women and active homosexuals can’t be priests, bishops or even the pope?? So- I am one who is sounding the alarm- I think I have credibility because I entered into this debate with an open heart and mind- I really tried to find a way to influence the Dem Catholics- but now I see that they are dead-set on something much more than moving the country a bit to the Left on the economy and environment- they are palace revolutionaries in their willingness to use the powers of state to push through an agenda that goes decidedly against basic and obvious official Catholic teachings. We need to talk about this in circles larger than the die-hard Republican grouping. I want politically-independent orthodox Catholics to get more facts to use for their own understanding and to help move the national discussion/debate on religious liberty

  • “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” The public square, all public places belong to the people in joint and common tenancy. You own it all and I own it all. Government is called upon to keep the peace. Government may not usurp the public square that belongs to the people to be used by the people for any legitimate purpose, public prayer, public politicking, recreation, education, leisure, work, any good thing. To ban the Person of God and to ban the acknowledgement of the Person of God from the public square is unconstitutional. If persons desire to be acknowledged as persons, all persons must be acknowledged, beginning with the Person of our Creator. Now that the Person of God is banned, the people of God are being banned and soon all human life will be indicted as unfit to live.

See You In Court Mr. Obama

Monday, May 21, AD 2012





By this time I rather suspect that at least some of his campaign strategists, if not President Obama, are beginning to wonder if it was such a bright idea to pick a fight with the Catholic Church in an election year.  Ed Morrissey at Hot Air gives us the details on 43 lawsuits filed simultaneously around the country today attacking the HHS mandate as blatantly unconstitutional:

Today’s Roman Catholic calendar lists May 21st as the feast day of St. Christopher Magallanes, a martyr killed for celebrating Mass during the Cristero War in Mexico. Perhaps Catholics today may want to recall St. Thomas More — the patron saint of lawyers, who was executed for refusing to agree to a mandate that gave Henry VIII the prerogative of defining religious expression in England.  Dozens of Catholic institutions filed lawsuits today against the Department of Health and Human Services over its mandate and its narrow definition of religious practice:

Catholic archdioceses and institutions filed suit in federal district courts across the country Monday against the so-called contraception mandate, claiming their “fundamental rights hang in the balance.”

The plaintiffs include a host of schools and organizations, including the University of Notre Dame and the Archdiocese of New York. The lawsuits, though related, were filed individually.

The schools are objecting to the requirement from the federal health care overhaul that employers provide access to contraceptive care. The Obama administration several months back softened its position on the mandate, but some religious organizations complained the administration did not go far enough to ensure the rule would not compel them to violate their religious beliefs.

Kathryn Jean Lopez posts a brief statement from Timothy Cardinal Dolan, president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and one of the chief critics of the HHS mandate:

We have tried negotiation with the Administration and legislation with the Congress – and we’ll keep at it – but there’s still no fix. Time is running out, and our valuable ministries and fundamental rights hang in the balance, so we have to resort to the courts now. Though the Conference is not a party to the lawsuits, we applaud this courageous action by so many individual dioceses, charities, hospitals and schools across the nation, in coordination with the law firm of Jones Day. It is also a compelling display of the unity of the Church in defense of religious liberty. It’s also a great show of the diversity of the Church’s ministries that serve the common good and that are jeopardized by the mandate – ministries to the poor, the sick, and the uneducated, to people of any faith or no faith at all.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to See You In Court Mr. Obama

  • This affects everyone – Catholics, Orthodox Anglicans, Eastern Orthodox, Pentecostal, Southern Baptist, etc.

    My older brother – a member of the Pentecostal Assemblies of God (AG) – said that the Superintendent thereof issued a statement condemning the Obama initiatives – HHS mandate, gay marriage, etc. – and ordered all AG pastors to speak on this topic. AG is the largest Pentecostal denomination which historically viewed the Roman Catholic Church with apathy if not outright antipathy. For Obama to unite them in any cause with the Roman Catholic Church means that Obama has done what all the ecumenicalism in the World Council of Churches could never have done.

    I couldn’t be happier!

  • The Assemblies of God couldn’t be farther away from us theologically Paul, or closer to us on the moral issues. God bless them!

  • People have been underestimating the Catholic Church for the last 2000 years. Someone is always saying “It’s finished, let’s kick it!” Never a good idea because a) it’s NOT finished, and b) kicking the Church in a low period does indeed mean that a lot of people desert Her, but it also means that some surprising folks stand up and become dauntless champions for Her — sometimes not until after a lot of destruction, and sometimes right away, but nearly always in each particular place, and always if you look at the universal Church.

  • Just because it needs to be said, when the dust from this battle is settled (not war, for that will never end, but the battle) we (generically) should be prepared to be more dedicated, more active and more committed to doing the things that The Church has always stood for but that we may have been less intently focused on in the past.

    For my part, I am going deeper into the Christ Renews His Parish and Cursillo processes, having done the first one twice and second once. I’ll be on a seed team for CRHP, going from my central Indiana parish to Sarasota to help a parish there rev up its commitment to Christ and The Holy Spirit. My Cursillo groups are active but not terribly “pro”-active, and I’m taking it on myself to challenge that. Instead of just talking around the coffee table each week, it’s time for a demonstration of commitment.

    We each need to be able to say “Yeah, already there,” when the inevitable challenges come from those individuals and media outlets that will say “OK, Catholics, you won that round, but how about all these injustices and poverties?”

    You know the commitment across the country will be scrutinized by the Imperial Propaganda Ministry once the mandate’s been struck down, so we have to be ready. Or, perhaps more accurately, we have to begin yesterday to encourage and motivate our more wishy-washy parishioners to commit and start getting their hands dirty.

  • “contrary to its sincerely held religious beliefs. …”

    The University of Notre Dame has sincerely held religious beliefs? News to me. Glad they are joining the fight nonetheless.

    Between an overbearing government and the recent patent wars, business in law is good these days. I should have been a lawyer. 🙂

    If you haven’t clicked the Hot Air link, you should. More updates. I’m trying to find the list of dioceses in the suit.

  • Kyle–here’s a list of plaintiffs I found from CatholicVote.org:


    1. D.D.C. Lawsuit
    o Archdiocese of Washington
    o Consortium of Catholic Academies
    o Archbishop Carroll High School
    o Catholic Charities of D.C.
    o The Catholic University of America

    2. E.D.N.Y. Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Rockville Centre
    o Catholic Health Services of Long Island
    o Catholic Charities of Rockville Centre
    o Archdiocese of N.Y.
    o ArchCare

    3. W.D.Pa. (Erie Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Erie
    o St. Martin Center
    o Prince of Peace Center

    4. W.D.Pa. (Pitt. Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Pittsburgh
    o Catholic Charities of Diocese of Pittsburgh
    o Catholic Cemeteries Association of Diocese of Pittsburgh

    5. N.D.Tex. (Dallas Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Dallas

    6. N.D.Tex. (Fort Worth Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Fort Worth

    7. S.D. Ohio (Columbus Div.) Lawsuit
    o Franciscan University of Steubenville
    o Michigan Catholic Conference

    8. S.D.Miss. (Gulfport Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Jackson
    o Catholic Charities of Jackson
    o Vicksburg Catholic School
    o St. Joseph’s Catholic School
    o Diocese of Biloxi
    o De l’Epee Deaf Center Inc.
    o Catholic Social & Community Services Inc.
    o Resurrection Catholic School
    o Sacred Heart Catholic School
    o St. Dominic Health Services

    9. N.D.Ind. (South Bend Div.) Lawsuit
    o The University of Notre Dame

    10. N.D. Ind. (Fort Wayne Div.) Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend
    o Catholic Charities of Fort Wayne-South Bend
    o St. Anne Home
    o Franciscan Alliance
    o Our Sunday Visitor
    o University of St. Francis

    11. N.D.Ill. Lawsuit
    o Diocese of Joliet
    o Catholic Charities of Joliet
    o Diocese of Springfield
    o Catholic Charities of Springfield

    12. E.D.Mo. (St. Louis Div.)
    o Archdiocese of St. Louis
    o Catholic Charities of St. Louis

  • Wacky Baracky Obumbler is certainly no skilled politician. At best, for him, he was able to do a decent job reading Axelrod’s trash on a TelePrompTer.

    Now, really, what kind of an idiot does one have to be to hang out with the Marxists in college? I have written it here before ‘ there is no ideology, no “ism”, no system of government that has caused more misery, more failure and more death of innocent people than Marxism, yet it still pulls in the gullible, the idiotic and the stupid.

    Obumbler is a combination of fallen-away Muslim and semi-Marxist. His wife is a golddigger par excellence. Obumbler has treated his presidency as a four year vacation and even if he loses to the Windsock, Obumbler would get a lifetime pension, a paid-for funeral, ten years of Secret Service protection and money for a presidential library. Obumbler will never pay for his errors – not in this lifetime.

    As for our Catholic hierarchy in the USA, it took this “mandate” to get them to wake up. Decades of abortion, Planned Parenthood taxpayer subsidies, restrictions on Nativity scenes, gay marriage and the like and the USCCB has been mostly asleep. The USCCB sill will not confront so called Catholic politicians who support abortion by excommunicating them. I have heard more about immigration reform (amnesty) and the USCCB’s continued support of “universal health care” was no small contributor to Obumblercare.

    Obumbler is a terrible President and quite a lousy politician. Sadly, it took Obumbler and the Democrat control of Congress to light a fire under the Catholic Church in the US.

  • I wonder if this is the tip of the iceberg. Will we see another few dozen suits next month, and again the month after, and so on? 43 plaintiffs is a good start, with good attention, but the true scope of the government’s violation is far more than this.

  • It’s not clear to me if the list of plaintiffs is a list of all suits filed thus far, or if it is
    just a list of plaintiffs with a Catholic connection. Where are the lawsuits being filed by
    Protestant, Jewish, and Muslim organizations? Are Catholics going to do all of the
    heavy lifting on this?

  • Clinton: Several months ago about 11 suits were filed by a variety of organizations, some Catholic and some not. These 12 are all Catholic, and were filed simultaneously and seem to be very similar so I would imagine there was some heavy-duty planning. Are Catholics going to do all the work? They haven’t so far. Are they going to do all the “heavy lifting”? Remains to be seen! So far yes. But we will see.

  • Penguins Fan, you say : “and the USCCB has been mostly asleep. Christ’s Apostles”. Remember, Christ’s Apostles were asleep as He agonized in Ghestemany, they fled when He was arrested. He died on the Cross with only young John and His Mother at the foot of the Cross. The Apostles had to lock themselves in the Upper Room after his death with fear and trembling believing all was lost. But Jesus rose from the dead, appeared to them, reassured them and this Sunday, we celebrate the Feast of the Pentecost which woke up the Apostles with Divine Power and they courageously proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Penguins Fan, the Catholic Church rises up from the ashes like the Phoenix when under attack – whether from within or from without – and emerges victorious no matter how powerful the Adversary may be. She has done so these 2,000 years+ and She will do it again. Jesus will crush Satan whom you, Americans enthroned with your “Gospel of Death”. Obama may have gambled that he will divine the Church in America, but let us all remember, this One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, with Christ as Her Spiritual Head, guided by the Holy Spirit is just about to defeat Satan yet again. And She will continue doing so Until the End of Time.

    The American Bishops may have been asleep when Satan was edging on the Throne, when Obama, his High Priest entered your While House, and he has now risen against Jesus Christ Himself.

  • Yes Mary 42 but now that we know Christ is the lord the only Son of God the bishops have to make sure that fake Catholics don’t burn their souls for not repenting. Not to mention they give a false image of what the Church is.

  • The Democratic Party today , under Obama, is NOT the Democratic Party of JFK, the only US Catholic President to date. It has become radicalized, severely. JFK would have NEVER considered such a strangulation on American’s freedoms. If we lie down without a fight, it will be very fast coming that more and more freedoms go by the wayside. Our constitution is just a piece of paper if not fought for, and used as the proper tool, in the courts.