Start Your Week Off With A Smile

Monday, November 3, AD 2014

15 Responses to Start Your Week Off With A Smile

  • Pelosi! I picture her trying to get into the wedding.
    The purple dress with gold tassels is tinged with blood red.
    She is amazed as the King has refused her to enter. “Don’t you know who I am?” “Yes!” is the reply. “Don’t you know who you are?”
    Many are called…yet few are chosen.
    Catholic and pro-choice is a deadly combination. Deadly for All.

  • That is one of my favorite movie quotes! The injustice in that Arnold never received an Oscar . . . [joking!]

    .

    Get out and vote. [Intsruct the ignorant.] I’m convinced that you won’t be getting into Heaven if you vote Democrat. [Admonish the sinner.] There is my Spiritual Work of Mercy for today.

  • Nancy Pelosi does not have the intelligence or common sense to accomplish anything worthwhile. She comes from a crooked Baltimore Democrat family and would not last a week in the world if she had to work to support herself.

    The Republican Party’s adherence to wishy washy moderates has long been a source of frustration for me, but Tuesday night should be fun to watch – with the exception of the Pennsylvania governor race. Pennsylvania will elect an Ed $pendell blowhard to the governor’s mansion where he will spend four frustrating years failing to convince a Republican controlled state assembly to increase income taxes.

  • In response to Mr. Shaw, my understanding of current instruction to us Catholics on this is that its not mortal if you say, vote for a Democrat who you agree with everything else on, but you disagree with them on abortion. I seem to remember reading that it had been stated to be ok…or at least not a mortal sin….if you voted for a Democrat….but NOT because of their stance on life.

    I am a Democrat for many reasons. However, one of them is this….the “liberal” narrative, especially when it comes to issues of social justice and the struggles non white, non male people still go through in the USA….it all makes more sense to me. As a straight white male, the conservative “narrative” on those issues feels too self-congratulatory. Like its saying to me “You are awesome and doing fine. The structure of the world, which just so happens to benefit you a lot, is just and you don’t have to worry so much”. But when I read actual stories from women, the poor, people who are not white, and I see the physical, specific descriptions of their struggles, vs the vague “they are all overreacting” stuff I feel like I see from conservative sources, those conservative sources just feel too silver-tongued, like they are assuring me of my place. Again, its not my only reason for voting that way, but do I feel that way.

  • “I seem to remember reading that it had been stated to be ok…or at least not a mortal sin….if you voted for a Democrat….but NOT because of their stance on life.”

    Which is equivalent to saying that you overlooked Stephen Douglas’ support of slavery in 1860 due to his stance against a National Bank. Abortion is the prime human rights issue of our time and those who lend their political support to those who are perfectly fine with slaying kids in utero are no better than an abortionist working at Planned Parenthood. It is precisely that mentality which leads to a million deaths of the most innocent among us each and every year.

    http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/catholic-archbishop-voters-cannot-ignore-legalized-homicide-abortion

  • I am a Democrat for many reasons. However, one of them is this….the “liberal” narrative, especially when it comes to issues of social justice and the struggles non white, non male people still go through in the USA

    The left-wing (I refuse to call it liberal) approach is what helps keep the poor downtrodden. I wish for a moment that social justice Catholics would put their emotion aside and see the destruction that their social engineering efforts have wrought in the communities they are trying to help.

    In fact the very use of “narrative” in this discussion is illustrative of the problem. Instead of analyzing the differences in the policy approaches you are concerned about language and feelings. It is time to take stock of whether the economic policies you favor do more harm than good.

  • I happen to think that the liberal narrative regarding the poor, women, and people who are not white, is factually correct.

  • I’m always tickled by the “social justice,” dems who can not see the death of 57 million innocents as a social injustice. To me, a nobody, these dems rank up there with Hitler, a true social justice pioneer.

    When you wake up surrounded by the tiny aborted limbs and torsos of 57 million make damn sure that you remember your vote! You might have to live with the vote you cast for eternity.

    After all, Death Judgment Heaven Hell.

    We will all pass on from this life to a next one. You determine the placement. Your choices fit your destination. You are making it everyday. You’ll have no one to blame.

    Choose Wisely!

  • I happen to think that the liberal narrative regarding the poor, women, and people who are not white, is factually correct.

    First of all, this indicates that you have an entrenched opinion that is not likely to change no matter what counterfactuals you are presented. That’s not unusual – sadly most individuals are like that. More importantly, you insist on discussing “narratives.” Narratives don’t feed the poor.

  • I’m always tickled by the “social justice,” dems who can not see the death of 57 million innocents as a social injustice.

    What’s 57 million dead children compared to the ability to pass a health care bill that actually makes health care more expensive for millions of people. Because passing that health care bill “felt” like the right thing to do, even if in fact it made things worse. After all, we’re talking about narratives here.

  • First, the us catholic bishops ok’d the voting strategy I use in “Forming Conscience For faithful citizenship”.
    Also, In terms of how I would argue my position is more than gut intuition, while their are many reasons, one I submit is the video Jessica Williams of The Daily Show made detailing street harassment. While i know some who hear this will dismiss it out of hand because it is the Daily Show, i ask that you only comment on the point made in the video itself, after having watched It. I believe it’s “jessicas feminized atmosphere”

  • Also, In terms of how I would argue my position is more than gut intuition, while their are many reasons, one I submit is the video Jessica Williams of The Daily Show made detailing street harassment.

    http://goo.gl/fQjKai

    While i know some who hear this will dismiss it out of hand because it is the Daily Show –

    No, I dismiss it because that might actually be the shallowest rationale I ever heard for supporting leftist policy, and I have heard a lot of shallow arguments in my life. Seriously, if that’s the level of thought you have put into these matters, then all I can say is have a nice day.

  • To Mr. Zummo,

    No, as stated, the video was not my only reason. I Simply included as 1 example. Its one example of the Callous disregard given to women. Also, I am curious About peoples specific responses To the video, particularly, the disregard shown by Fox, and how hard the women have to work to avoid comments.

  • Poor blacks by 90%+ have voted Dem for 50 years. They are even poorer for it.

  • Dear Watcher, The program of the Left is all about coercion. Eventually, there will be no limits to extent of it. History!

Archbishop Cordileone Responds

Tuesday, June 17, AD 2014

Archbishop of San Francisco Salvatore Cordileone has responded to calls by Nancy Pelosi and other California Democrat politicians that he not join the June 19th March for Marriage, and he is not backing down:

 

 

Dear Fellow Citizens,

 

Your letter sharing with me your thoughts on the upcoming “March for Marriage” in Washington, D.C., was forwarded to me while I was attending meetings out of town, and I have reflected on what you have to say.  I appreciate your affirmation of my Church’s teaching—not unique to our religion, but a truth accessible to anyone of good will—on the intrinsic human dignity of all people, irrespective of their stage and condition in life.  That principle requires us to respect and protect each and every member of the human family, from the precious child in the womb to the frail elderly person nearing death.  It also requires me, as a bishop, to proclaim the truth—the whole truth—about the human person and God’s will for our flourishing.  I must do that in season and out of season, even when truths that it is my duty to uphold and teach are unpopular, including especially the truth about marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.  That is what will be doing on June 19th

 

With regard to your request that I not attend the March, and the reasons you give for this request, allow me to explain the following points. 

 

The March for Marriage is not “anti-LGBT” (as some have described it); it is not anti-anyone or  anti-anything.  Rather, it is a pro-marriage March.  The latter does not imply the former.  Rather, it affirms the great good of bringing the two halves of humanity together so that a man and a woman may bond with each other and with any children who come from their union.  This is precisely the vision promoted by Pope Francis, who recently said, “We must reaffirm the right of children to grow up in a family with a father and mother.” Rest assured that if the point of this event were to single out a group of individuals and target them for hatred, I most certainly would not be there. 

While I cannot go into all of the details here of your allegations against the sponsors of this event and scheduled speakers, I do know that at least some of what you say is based on misinterpretation or is simply factually incorrect.  For example, it is not true that the National Organization for Marriage connects homosexuality with pedophilia and incest.  What is true is that three years ago a conference was sponsored in Baltimore by the group B4U-ACT for the purpose of finding ways to encourage tolerance for pedophilia.  A statement on NOM’s blogpost objecting to this conference affirmed that this is something that would outrage people in the gay community as well.  Unfortunately, many conclusions are being drawn about those involved in the March for Marriage based on false impressions. 

It gives me assurance that we share a common disdain for harsh and hateful rhetoric.  It must be pointed out, though, that there is plenty of offensive rhetoric which flows in the opposite direction.  In fact, for those who support the conjugal understanding of marriage, the attacks have not stopped at rhetoric.  Simply for taking a stand for marriage as it has been understood in every human society for millennia, people have lost their jobs, lost their livelihoods, and have suffered other types of retribution, including physical violence.  It is true that historically in our society violence has been perpetrated against persons who experience attraction to members of the same sex, and this is to be deplored and eradicated.  Sadly, though, we are now beginning to see examples, although thankfully not widespread, of even physical violence against those who hold to the conjugal view of marriage (such as, most notably, the attempted gunning down of those who work in the offices of the Family Research Council).  While it is true that free speech can be used to offend others, it is not so much people exercising their right to free speech that drives us further apart than people punished precisely for doing so that does. 

Continue reading...

24 Responses to Archbishop Cordileone Responds

  • But he and his brother bishops still need to publicly excommunicate that heretic Pelosi, treating her in the same way that St Paul treated the sex pervert at the Church in Corinth in 1st Corinthians 5 and the same way St John treated that false prophetess Jezebel at the Church in Thyatira in Revelation 2. It is time to publicly put these heretics and apostates in their proper place. It is one thing for a person to privately fail and sin, and repent and try again to do what is right. It is another to persist in publicly manifest sin as Pelosi, Biden, Kerry and all the rest of the Katholyck Demoncraps do.

  • Pelosi and the gay gestapo deserve a one word response: “Nuts!”

  • Paul: “But he and his brother bishops still need to publicly excommunicate that heretic Pelosi,”
    .
    I agree. Excommunication will have an impact on people considering their position of marriage and the Right to Life. If we do not stop the imposters, good people will suffer. The rape of minor children who do not have informed consent to give or incest with one’s child ought to be punished most severely. The child’s informed sexual consent and all civil rights are held in trust for them by God, their parents and finally by the state. Yes, God’s law is violated every time a child is violated. Atheism is unconstitutional (or prohibit the free exercise thereof) and the repugnant fruit of atheism is lawlessness and savagery.
    .
    Marriage, the marital act, makes a husband of a man and a wife of a woman, as a child makes a mother of a woman and a father of a man. Marriage and family have already been defined.Redefining marriage and family is co-opting the law of God, plagiarizing God’s law, stealing from and cheating the people.
    .
    The bishops in unison need to move on this as there is little time left. The barbarians are at the gate.

  • My sentinments exactly.

  • I wish the Fellow Citizens to exercise their attention spans as regards this letter.

  • Thanks Bishop Cordileone!

    Beautiful letter. Seasons come and go, but the Truth remains the same. God bless courageous religious!

  • Nancy must need more campaign finance $$$ for this fall’s election contests.

  • What a beautiful letter from the archbishop! Wouldn’t it be great if she would continue the exchange, instead of just firing off a volley and then walking away with her ears and heart closed. As he said, love is the answer. And the courtesy to dialogue. I hope she responds with the same respect he has shown.

  • Hi praise for the Archbishop’s courage and clarity as well as his reaching out a hand. I have done so many times myself on all things related to these concerns. Tolerance and love goes both ways and when it is authentically present, I very much concur: miracles CAN and DO happen.

  • “And so I ask you: V. Do you renounce Satan? R. I do. V. And all his works? R. I do. V. And all his empty show? R. I do.” Why, then, does the archbishop feel it is necessary to say that the “March for Marriage is not … anti-anyone or anti-anything”?

  • How refreshing and inspiring to meet a TRUE Shepherd for a change. There might be one counter offer the good Archbishop my make to Ms. Pelosi and the other elected officials that I would consider, and that is – To ask her and the others to renounce their support of abortion publicly and pledge to support all pro-life legislation in the future including nominees to the U.S. Courts who would support a Constitutional Right to Life.

  • Imagine what you could accomplish if you and your kind worked to promote peace, an end to poverty, and an end to malnutrition and starvation instead of using your time and energy to promote hate and discrimination. WWJD?

  • “instead of using your time and energy to promote hate and discrimination.”

    The flaw in your argument Tim is that is not what we are doing. Refusing to bow to the transformation of marriage is neither hatred nor discrimination but standing up for common sense.

    “WWJD?”

    Judging from the Gospels, He would tell us all to go and sin no more and also tell us in graphic detail what will happen to us in the world to come if we do not.

  • He gives me hope in the True Church.

  • “Imagine what you could accomplish if you and your kind..” No prejudicial slant in that introduction to a comment?.. hmm. I wonder who “me and my kind” are to this person…

  • “You and your kind” – typical liberal prejudice. No tolerance. No respect. No kindness. No niceness. No diversity of thought. No freedom of expression. Just godless putrid liberalism.

  • From the Bible, “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil.”

    I do not see the gay gestapo (if one disagrees one is evil, hateful and must be destroyed), Tim and his kind aren’t making any progress in the areas of “promote peace; end poverty; or end malnutrition and starvation.”

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

    Paraphrasing A. Lincoln: Calling two men a “married couple” is equally as invalid as calling a dog’s tail a leg. That dog still has only four legs.

  • What Would Jesus Do? {WWJD]

    We already know:

    “..Have you not read that He Who created them from the beginning made them male and female and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and cling to his wife and the two shall become one flesh” Matthew 19.4-5

  • “worked to promote peace”

    Working to protect traditional marriage is an effort to promote peace. A redefinition of marriage is a war against tradition, gender and the child.

    ” an end to malnutrition and starvation”

    The Church’s mission first and foremost is the salvation of souls. It was not established to be Meals on Wheels.

  • Hey, Tim.

    Here’s a tiny slice of what “our kind” does to promote peace, an end to poverty, and an end to malnutrition and starvation:
    .
    http://catholiccharitiesusa.org/
    .
    http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1400345.htm
    .
    http://www.crs.org/
    .
    http://www.stjude.org
    .
    http://www.gabrielproject.com/
    .
    Not to mention the food pantries located in almost every parish, as well as free clinics, unemployment services, mental health services and an address for almost every human need, all done at little or no cost. Google “Catholic free clinics” or “Catholic food pantries” for listings in your area.
    .
    I don’t know where you got your information, but whoever told you that “our kind” doesn’t do these things, but rather ‘promotes hate and discrimination,’ obviously believes that you are a complete and utter moron. The truth is so incredibly evident with just the slightest bit of research, that they, whoever they are, must take you for an unquestioning, illiterate boob with no capacity for critical thought whatsoever. I would sincerely doubt their honest concern for your well-being if I were you.

  • Hey Paul Primavera, where is Rudy Giuliani and Senator Susan Collins on your list to be excommunicated? If there is any doubt why we are getting our butts kicked on this issue, look no further then the hypocrisy of a political party that is loud on homosexuality but virtually silent on pornography and “strip clubs”.

  • I agree completely, Tom M. And I would add George Pataki to that list as well.

  • Good for you Paul on your consistency. I do wonder though what you think would happen if the Church started mass excommunicating the Biden, Pelosi, Pataki and Giuliani’s of the world? My guess is that we would become about as relevant as the Orthodox Church. Maybe that’s a good thing but I’m glad I’m not making those decisions.

  • Tom M, the Church isn’t about relevance. It is about worshiping and serving God. Sts Paul, John, James and Peter didn’t give a hoot about this liberal penchant for relevance. St Ignatius of Antioch preferred to be eaten by the wild beasts in the Coliseum before being relevant. I say to hades with relevance, liberalism and RINO-ism. Vive Christe Rex!

Pelosi, the Bishops and Tekel

Monday, June 16, AD 2014

 

 

For years faithful Catholics have been urging the excommunication of the Lying Worthless Political Hack, aka Nancy Pelosi House Minority Leader.  Such pleas have fallen on deaf ears.  Now the Lying Worthless Political Hack believes that she can bully the Archbishop of her city, San Francisco, and she quotes Pope Francis while doing so.  Father Z gives us the details:

 

 

Nancy Pelosi urges S.F. archbishop to exit marriage march

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi took the lead this week in a high-profile lobbying effort to pressure San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone not to attend the controversial March for Marriage event, which she characterized as “venom masquerading as virtue.”

Pelosi, who is one of the country’s most powerful [pro-abortion absolutist] Catholic politicians, made a passionate appeal to the archbishop in a letter obtained by The Chronicle not to participate in the National Organization for Marriage’s June 19 march on the Supreme Court in Washington.

Cordileone, who is one of the featured speakers at the event, was a leader in the campaign for Proposition 8, the 2008 California anti-gay-marriage initiative.

“We share our love of the Catholic faith and our city of San Francisco,” Pelosi wrote to Cordileone, who, as head of the 560,000-member Archdiocese of San Francisco, has become the Catholic bishops’ point man against gay marriage. She urged him to abandon an event in which some of the participants show “disdain and hate towards LGBT persons.”  [If that’s what Pelosi says, you can be sure the event is exactly the opposite.]

Invoking the words of Pope Francis with regard to gays and lesbians, she wrote, “If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him?” [?!?…. and?]

The goal of the second annual March for Marriage is to draw thousands of supporters of what they call “traditional marriage” [you can almost hear the sneer…. “what they call…”] to walk from the U.S Capitol to the Supreme Court. Conservative former presidential candidates Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, as well as Cordileone, are being billed as the star speakers.

[…]

Is there some initiative out there in support of Archbp. Cordileone? I am itching to create an ACTION ITEM.

Can. 915 needs to be applied to this scandalous wreck of a Catholic.

Continue reading...

35 Responses to Pelosi, the Bishops and Tekel

  • Mark Shea (and the site he links to) disagrees with you, Don. But, them again, Mr. Shea is very disagreeable! http://www.patheos.com/blog/markshea/2014/06/mackerel-snapper-asks-the-musical-question.html

  • Virtue is a high dollar boutique where the House Minority Leader shops.

    Virtue is a word in which poor Nancy has neither the concept of, nor experience in practice thereof. Now venom! All snakes are experts in producing venom. House Minority Leader included.

    Nancy. Go fly a kite.

  • “If someone is gay and is searching for the Lord and has good will, then who am I to judge him?” [?!?…. and?]
    .
    Please note that Pope Francis says nothing, absolutely nothing about those who are practicing gay behavior, the sodomists. The sodomist denies his partner’s soul and can’t be bothered searching for the Lord. Is this good will or indulgence is one’s own lust? Or am I judging?
    .
    Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader, says that she had five children in six years. Does that mean that if I have five children in six years, I can become House Minority Leader?
    .
    Immediate animation by the human, rational, immortal soul occurs at fertilization, before the human being begins his journey down the fallopian tubes. (fallopian implantation may rupture the fallopian tube and cause immediate death for the mother in which instance removing the human being is necessary to save the life of the mother. Death must be imminent for this cause to be invoked. Prognosis is a definite maybe)
    .
    Willful human sacrifice is worship of the devil and cannot be permitted in a civilized society because another human being, a potential American citizen, being sacrificed, is unconstitutional. It is called homicide.
    .
    Kermit Gosnell went to prison for murdering American citizens. How many sovereign souls, from immediate animation through citizenship at birth, Gosnell ripped from the womb untimely, will be known in eternity. Atheism says there is no eternity. Mother Angelica says: “You will believe in hell, when you get there.”

  • Back in September of 2008, then-Speaker of the House Pelosi made several
    comments downplaying the seriousness of her rejection of Church teaching
    on the sanctity of life. In the controversy that followed, then-Archbishop of
    San Francisco George Niederauer publicly chastised Pelosi and informed her
    that he wanted to sit down with her and discuss both her scandalous rejection
    of the Church’s teaching and her reception of Holy Communion.
    .
    Pelosi’s office responded by stating that Madame Speaker was very, very busy
    and Pelosi pinky-swore that she’d sit catch up with her Archbishop as soon as
    possible. Six years and a new Archbishop later, and Pelosi still hasn’t found
    a free moment to have that sit-down with her Ordinary… It’s almost as if she
    was making a show of how little she cares what her Archbishop (and the Church)
    thinks.
    .
    If Canon 915 isn’t applicable in the case of the scandal that is Pelosi, pray
    tell when would it be?

  • I would agree that the most grievous of all sins could be the outright denial of the Divine Mercy of our God. Since divine mercy would necessarily include divine justice in its concluding judgment of mankind this has to be a reasonable position for us. Too often we humans, in making judgment of our actions and behavior, have a tendency to overlook the preeminence of this. That is the basis of what Pope Francis meant when he said “Who am I to judge”.
    We have the Law, the Scriptures, and Tradition to guide us in the pursuit of perfection to which we have been called but that perfection, if it could ever be achieved, would in truth simply be a human image of the one and only Divinity. The Pope was excusing himself from the vainglory some humans ascend to when they make declarations about others and assign definitive sentences regarding their activity.
    The only way to find out who is in hell is to go there and the path there includes setting oneself up as an authority on its contents. This, unfortunately, is what is meant by the oft used “judge not lest you be judged” precaution we Christians have been given. Unfortunate, because it has been twisted and used by the forces of Evil to stop the faithful in their tracks anytime we attempt to reveal its presence in the minds and hearts of sinful men and women posing as our benefactors in their efforts to lead us to a secular Utopia.

  • Revelation chapter 2:

    20 But I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jez′ebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice immorality and to eat food sacrificed to idols. 21 I gave her time to repent, but she refuses to repent of her immorality. 22 Behold, I will throw her on a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her I will throw into great tribulation, unless they repent of her doings; 23 and I will strike her children dead. And all the churches shall know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve.

  • Pelosi had a private meeting with Pope Benedict XVI. There is no way Pope Benedict XVI did not inform Pelosi of the Truth. If Pelosi does not hear the Pope, Pelosi will not hear her Bishop.

  • Pingback: What if Pope Francis Surprises Us Once More? - BigPulpit.com
  • While I find Nancy Pelosi’s views on abortion and gay marriage repugnant, particularly as she identifies as a practising Catholic and cannot understand why she has not been prohibited from receiving communion, I am not at all happy with descriptions of her as “a wreck of a Catholic” or a “lying worthless political hack.”
    These descriptions are degrading and I believe, un-Christian. Let’s stick to constructive criticism of what she stands for, what she has said and how she has acted but leave out the personal attacks, the insulting language.

  • “I am not at all happy with descriptions of her as “a wreck of a Catholic” or a “lying worthless political hack.””

    Purely accurate descriptions Robert, and I can attest to that as I have made a close study of her career. It is never degrading or un-Christian to call a spade, a spade.

  • What needs to happen is C915 needs to be revised so it can be applied. In the Latin, direct means direct, not support or vote.

  • Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion: General Principles
    Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger
    Prefect, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

    [Note: The following memorandum was sent by Cardinal Ratzinger to Cardinal McCarrick and was made public in the first week of July 2004.]

    1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: “Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?” The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction “Redemptionis Sacramentum,” nos. 81, 83).

    2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a “grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. […] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it'” (no. 73). Christians have a “grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. […] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it” (no. 74).

    3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

    4. Apart from an individual’s judgment about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).

    5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

    6. When “these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,” and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, “the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it” (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration “Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics” [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

    [N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

  • Nancy Pelosi has excommunicated herself (latae sententia) long ago.

  • Yes, it is uncharitable to call her those names. You undercut your credibility by doing so. I agree with you that she is deplorable. But as soon as anyone hears simple name calling, they can immediately ignore the column as being the work of strong emotion rather than reason. So while it may have made you feel better, it has effectively destroyed the persuasive value of your writing.
    Christians are called to be generous towards those who are wrong. “Turn the other cheek” – “If one asks you to go a mile with them, go two” “Even the gentiles hate their enemies and love their friends.

    “It is not degrading to call a spade a spade”. The point is not about Pelosi. It is about you and how you model Christian behavior.

    Pelosi can be rhetorically dismantled without calling her names. And it would be far more effective to do it in a calm, reasoned way rather than a “I am out of control” way

  • Cernhigss: “Pelosi can be rhetorically dismantled without calling her names. And it would be far more effective to do it in a calm, reasoned way rather than a “I am out of control” way”
    .
    Then do it

  • Is there anything we can do to force the Bishop’s hands in order to bring about the devil’s, Pelosi’s, excommunication ? When the Bishops are rotting in a jail cell at her hand, do u think they will finally act?

  • “Yes, it is uncharitable to call her those names. You undercut your credibility by doing so. I agree with you that she is deplorable. But as soon as anyone hears simple name calling, they can immediately ignore the column as being the work of strong emotion rather than reason. So while it may have made you feel better, it has effectively destroyed the persuasive value of your writing.”

    Cernhigss: Your argument has “some” truth in it but not “the” truth or by any means “all” truth. Jesus Christ while here in Earth called religious hypocrites the children of the Devil (yes, Satan himself,) told them they were whited walls–a very ugly yet picturesque insult, told them they were carrying out the deeds if their father the Devil, called them vipers/snakes, was violent with money changers in a house of worship, etc.

    Emotion does not invalidate argument–that is a political lie.

  • Daniel L Gray may be right, when he says, “Nancy Pelosi has excommunicated herself (latae sententia) long ago” but against this, we must remember the Council of Constance’s decree, Ad evitenda Scandala, “To avoid scandal and numerous dangers and to relieve timorous consciences, we hereby mercifully grant to all the faithful that henceforth no one need refrain from communicating with another in the reception or administration of the sacraments, or in other matters Divine or profane, under pretext of any ecclesiastical sentence or censure, whether promulgated in general form by law or by a judge, nor avoid anyone whomsoever, nor observe an ecclesiastical interdict, except when this sentence or censure shall have been published or made known by the judge in special and express form, against some certain, specified person, college, university, church, community, or place.”

  • I love the wording from the Ad evitenda Scandala decree. Kindness of clarity is expressed in “To avoid scandal and numerous dangers and to Relieve Timorous Consciences, … when this sentence or censure shall have been published or made known by the judge in special and express form, …”
    The word, timorous, is food for thought. (Thank you for your endless source of references! They remind of your convenient discovery of a hyacinth in a cabinet for a holiday.)

  • Good column Donald. Spot on. Call a spade a spade. “Ye brood of vipers” comes to mind, “whited sepulcres full of dead men’s bones,” and, what you don’t see in commentaries is that Jesus called Herod something worse than “a fox.” My Arabic scripture teacher said that the Aramaic word meant something more like “skunk.” I assume he knew what he was talking about. He actually memorized the four Gospels, and could recite one of them in Greek. God rest his soul.

  • Also I am dismayed by Archbishop Cordileoni’s equivocal letter, especially that the March is “not against anything.” It certainly is against something, sodomite marriage.

  • Where the bishop is, there is the Church. So, where is the bishop?

    Public acts of scandal require public acts of correction. So, where is the bishop?

  • To all those who wrote to the following effect, “Yes, it is uncharitable to call her those names…”

    What do you think both John the Baptist and Jesus called the Pharisees?

    What do you think John the Baptist said to King Herod for his perverted sexual relations?

    What do you think Jesus Himself said to the disciples about King Herod?

    What do you think St. Peter said to Sapphira’s face for lying?

    What do you think St. Paul told the Church of Corinth to do with the sex pervert, and what do you think he said about Hymenaeus and Alexander?

    What do you think St. John said about that adulteress Jezebel at the Church in Thyatira?

    It is high time to confront these murderers and sex perverts to their faces. Words mean everything. Furthermore, it isn’t judgment to state an observation.

  • Paul P.
    Agreed.

    One more. Matthew 5:37; “Let your yes be yes, and your no, no. For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.”

    Her explanation of late term abortion is most definitely from the evil one. “Sacred?” Really? Praying for her soul is our responsibility.

  • Man is sacred. KIlling man is unholy.

  • Thank you Pat for the Crisis link. Very informative. This phrase from that article jumped out at me: ” designed to marginalize the Bishops “.
    It seems to me the archbishops letter was a good fairly measured response that protects the people who are the victims of such marginalization. If the bishops are marginalized the flocks can be more easily devoured… so his response is good I think, because it doesn’t give the enemy the red meat of bellicose verbiage, but responds couched in terms of love and respect. so many of the flock do not read Crisis, or TAC or keep up with what is going on with the Bishop’s and only get what the media and the leftish enemies of the Church want to throw to them. The bishop did not give any words that can be used against the Church but he spoke clearly enough in defense of her (the Church).
    Just can’t go out there with roundhouse punches and flailing arms but must be always aware of protecting the people who are so easily mislead.

  • “The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts.”
    St. John Chrysostom

    “I do not think there are many among Bishops that will be saved, but many more that perish.”
    St. John Chrysostom, Extract from St. John Chrysostom, Homily III on Acts 1:12

  • “It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly.”
    St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4

    “Augustine says in his Rule: ‘Show mercy not only to yourselves, but also to him who, being in the higher position among you, is therefore in greater danger.’ But fraternal correction is a work of mercy. Therefore even prelates ought to be corrected.”
    St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4, Sed Contra

  • How encouraging to see postings by self-appointed “holier than thou” Catholics on the topic of elected officials who also happen to be Catholic. As a cradle Catholic, I would never presume to know who is or isn’t Catholic.
    We have a secular government, not a Christian government although some seem to think it is. So many of these so-called pro-life politicians have no problem voting for killing machines such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter or simple cluster bombs used by Israel against Palestinians. Now we have Catholic state legislators who want to make miscarriages a crime and charge these women with murder. How Christian of them. Of course, these same hypocrites are the first to take their teenage daughters to Planned Parenthood when they discover the little darling has a muffin in the oven.

  • Congratulations, Mike, on one of the most ill-informed, cliche ridden comments in blog history. Let’s go through it piece by piece.

    As a cradle Catholic, I would never presume to know who is or isn’t Catholic.

    I have no doubt that you may very well be a cradle Catholic. Of course considering the state of catechesis and Catholic education in the United States, that has very little bearing on the merits of your comment. Nevertheless, there are numerous documents – that you’ve no doubt not read or are even aware exist – that explain the responsibilities not just of Catholics but particularly of Catholic politicians. The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a good place to start as it explains the moral duties of elected Catholic politicians. Also, I would note that the tenor of your last few sentences belies the idea that you are not interested in labeling who is or is not truly Catholic in your eyes.

    We have a secular government, not a Christian government although some seem to think it is.

    A rather trivial non sequitur that avoids the duties and responsibilities of elected Catholic politicians.

    So many of these so-called pro-life politicians have no problem voting for killing machines such as the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter –

    Unless you can demonstrate otherwise, I am not aware of any admonitions against methods of legitimate military self-defense. Seeing as there are no admonitions against particular fighter planes, your point is once again a non sequitur.

    Now we have Catholic state legislators who want to make miscarriages a crime and charge these women with murder.

    Yeah, this is pretty much completely made up. You might want to do research that goes beyond Facebook memes.
    Of course, these same hypocrites are the first to take their teenage daughters to Planned Parenthood when they discover the little darling has a muffin in the oven.

    I’m not sure if you’re just projecting here, but again, this really makes no sense and suggests that you are completely flailing in an attempt to make an argument.

    I get it – you really can’t express why you disagree with the blog post and as such lack the ability to make fact-based arguments as to why Nancy Pelosi’s position is the correct one, or why arguments for her excommunication are invalid. Nancy Pelosi votes to keep Democrats in power and to waste trillions of dollars of taxpayer dollars, and let’s face it – that’s a lot more important to people such as yourself than defending marriage or the unborn. And that’s cool – but let’s stop pretending that you’re the one really upholding the meaning of what it is to be Catholic. Because it’s just pathetic.

  • “It’s never degrading or un-Christian to call a spade, a spade.” It is if you’re referring to the actual person. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Dr. Bernard Nathanson- unapologetic abortionist, founder of NARAL and an atheistic Jew-died excruciatingly repentant and completely Catholic. If there is hope for him there is hope for Ms. Pelosi.

  • “It is if you’re referring to the actual person.”

    Not at all. The best confession I ever had was when a crusty old priest strongly and bluntly took me to task for my sins. I tremble at how many souls are lost due to the addiction of many Christians to a mealy mouthed religion of nice uber alles.

  • I agree with Donald. The mentor of my 12 step mentor was an old Franciscan priest and my Confessor. He was quite specific: “So you’re a garden variety drunk: a liar, a thief, a cheat, and a sex pervert. What exactly are you then willing to do to have God remove your character defects? Or do you prefer to die a drunk and go to hell?” He didn’t stop there. Mealy-mouthed religion kills. “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand” saves.

  • Donald R. McClarey wrote, “The best confession I ever had was when a crusty old priest took me to task for my sins.”

    I once passed out, after tying my shoelace outside the Palais de Justice. I have always had low blood-pressure (not a bad thing), so it happens occasionally. Now, the French are a nation of hypochondriacs, so I was promptly rushed into the Hôtel-Dieu (great name for a hospital; it was built by St Landry in 661) about 100m away.

    M. L’Aumônier [The Almoner, as they call the chaplain}, summoned by my panicky Law Agent (who, by the by is Jewish) came into my cubicle in Casualty and, without any preliminaries, kicked off with « Pécheur, humilies-toi devant la pesante main de Dieu ! » [Sinner, humble yourself under the heavy hand of God] and we took it from there.

    The thought occurred to me that, perhaps, my hour had really come and, when he handed me a crucifix, I found myself murmuring the lines of Tibullus,
    “Te spectem, suprema mihi cum venerit hora,
    Et teneam moriens deficiente manu.”
    [May I gaze on you when my last hour comes; may I hold you, as I sink, in my dying clasp.]
    Odd, in retrospect, that a pagan love poem should best express my feelings at such a moment, but the old Abbé beamed approval, and patted my hand.

Demography, Contraception and Fiscal Melt Down

Sunday, February 19, AD 2012

 

 It should be the highest ambition of every American to extend his views beyond himself, and to bear in mind that his conduct will not only affect himself, his country, and his immediate posterity; but that its influence may be co-extensive with the world, and stamp political happiness or misery on ages yet unborn.

George Washington

 

Mark Steyn at National Review Online, notes that the fiscal lunacy of the Obama administration and the HHS Mandate are linked:

 

As for us doom-mongers, at the House Budget Committee on Thursday, Chairman Paul Ryan produced another chart, this time from the Congressional Budget Office, with an even steeper straight line showing debt rising to 900 percent of GDP and rocketing off the graph circa 2075. America’s treasury secretary, Timmy Geithner the TurboTax Kid, thought the chart would have been even more hilarious if they’d run the numbers into the next millennium: “You could have taken it out to 3000 or to 4000” he chortled, to supportive titters from his aides. Has total societal collapse ever been such a non-stop laugh riot?

Yeah, right.” replied Ryan. “We cut it off at the end of the century because the economy, according to the CBO, shuts down in 2027 on this path.”

The U.S. economy shuts down in 2027? Had you heard about that? It’s like the ultimate Presidents’ Day sale: Everything must go — literally! At such a moment, it may seem odd to find the political class embroiled in a bitter argument about the Obama administration’s determination to force Catholic institutions (and, indeed, my company and your company, if you’re foolish enough still to be in business in the United States) to provide free prophylactics to their employees. The received wisdom among media cynics is that Obama has engaged in an ingenious bit of misdirection by seizing on a pop-culture caricature of Republicans and inviting them to live up to it: Those uptight squares with the hang-ups about fornication have decided to force you to lead the same cheerless sex lives as them. I notice that in their coverage NPR and the evening news shows generally refer to the controversy as being about “contraception,” discreetly avoiding mention of sterilization and pharmacological abortion, as if the GOP have finally jumped the shark in order to prevent you jumping anything at all.

It may well be that the Democrats succeed in establishing this narrative. But anyone who falls for it is a sap. In fact, these two issues — the Obama condoms-for-clunkers giveaway and a debt-to-GDP ratio of 900 percent by 2075 — are not unconnected. In Greece, 100 grandparents have 42 grandchildren — i.e., an upside-down family tree. As I wrote in this space a few weeks ago, “If 100 geezers run up a bazillion dollars’ worth of debt, is it likely that 42 youngsters will ever be able to pay it off?” Most analysts know the answer to that question: Greece is demographically insolvent. So it’s looking to Germany to continue bankrolling its First World lifestyle.

But the Germans are also demographically exhausted: They have the highest proportion of childless women in Europe. One in three fräulein have checked out of the motherhood business entirely. A nation that did without having kids of its own is in no mood to maintain Greece as the ingrate slacker who never moves out of the house. As the European debt crisis staggers on, these two countries loathe each other ever more nakedly: The Greek president brings up his war record against the German bullies, and Athenian commentators warn of the new Fourth Reich. The Germans, for their part, would rather cut the Greeks loose. In a post-prosperity West, social solidarity — i.e., socioeconomic fictions such as “Europe” — are the first to disappear.

The United States faces a mildly less daunting arithmetic. Nevertheless, the Baby Boomers did not have enough children to maintain mid-20th-century social programs. As a result, the children they did have will end their lives in a poorer, uglier, sicker, more divided, and more violent society. How to avert this fate? In 2009 Nancy Pelosi called for free contraceptives as a form of economic stimulus. Ten thousand Americans retire every day, and leave insufficient progeny to pick up the slack. In effect, Nancy has rolled a giant condom over the entire American economy.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to Demography, Contraception and Fiscal Melt Down

  • Obama — our Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning

  • You do know that our total debt as a percent of GDP fell from the end of WW2 until 1980 when our tax policy (not our spending) took a dramatic change. The percentage has since risen except for the 90’s when our tax policy briefly took a minor reversal from their current direction. The direction of the deficit and then the debt changed abruptly again as the tax policy changed in 2001. I know there are going to be many comments claiming it was all about spending, but that is not what the data shows. The relationships between tax policy and the point when the graphs of the current balance and the total debt change direction are clearly related to tax policy. The recent massive debt does have a spending component in that the severe recession we entered in 2008 did cause an increase in spending, but the larger effect was a decrease in tax collections due to the recession.

    I do disagree with the HSS ruling, but if we are going to show charts of rising debt, then we should lay the blame where if belongs. It belongs on our unwillingness to pay for the things we want. We were promised (both nationally and at the state level) that if we cut taxes we would see prosperity and increased . The lowest federal tax rate since WW2 at the federal level has brought massive deficits and the worst 10 years of employment since WW2. A 15 year recorded of increasing tax cuts in Michigan (coupled with the fall of the American auto industry) have devastated our state. At the very least we should stop seeing the claims that tax cuts will improve our economy and increase government revenues as a result since the evidence is to the contrary.

  • Justice and peace!

    Obama’s policies are destroying the evil, unjust private sector.

    It’s working.

    Pharaoh’s economic reports hide the huge decline in number of Americans with jobs.

    Mark Steyn: Obama, Romney and Santorum are talking about sex while the nation goes broke. Each day, 10,000 Americans retire but “leave insufficient progeny to pick up the slack. In effect, Obama has rolled a giant condom over the entire American economy.”

    America can’t employ more people.

    In 30 years, there will not be enough taxpayers to pay for the entitlement masses, $100,000,000,000,000.00 present value of cash flow due. Taxes won’t cover interest on the national debt.

    Then, grandpa will be left out in the cold.

    Justice and peace!

  • “The lowest federal tax rate since WW2 at the federal level has brought massive deficits and the worst 10 years of employment since WW2.”

    Complete hogwash Paul. No possible jacking up of the tax rates can possibly pay for our completely out of control entitlement spending, which is apparently insatiable. Your argument would have a tinge of merit if the European welfare states, paying higher taxe rates than we do, were not also on the same quick path to national bankruptcy.

  • And for those who might still labor under the illusion that congress and this admin-
    istration are in any way serious about this situation, please reflect on the fact that it
    has been almost three years since the federal government has had a budget.

  • No possible jacking up of the tax rates can possibly pay for our completely out of control entitlement spending, which is apparently insatiable.

    Federal spending is currently about 24% of domestic product. There is a mess of junk in the federal budget that ought to be excised, but that is a policy choice. We could certainly levy the taxes necessary to pay for it.

  • ‘The Obama administration is the perfect avatar for the all consumed in self mentality produced by a contraceptive culture that can see no further than the brief span of time this globe is occupied by those who currently inhabit it.’ Yup.

    George Washington’s quote ends with their choice – to stamp misery on ages yet unborn.

    Laughing at religion and conscience like silly jokers, talking about sex enough to train the needy national psyche away from their sleight of hand, and accommodating no one but their handlers with money.

    ‘ and leave insufficient progeny to pick up the slack. In effect, Nancy has rolled a giant condom over the entire American economy.’ As she said on the video, something like uh – more bang for the buck – er – that’s what the economists say.

  • The United States faces a mildly less daunting arithmetic. Nevertheless, the Baby Boomers did not have enough children to maintain mid-20th-century social programs.

    For the record, postwar birth cohorts have varied between 2.9 million and 4.3 million, with no secular trend in size. Our total fertility rate has been at replacement level or above for that entire time bar a brief run of years in the late 1970s. Escalating burdens of caring for the elderly have been a function of improved life expectancy, a problem which can be finessed by having the retirement age on an appropriate escalator.

  • To pay for entitlements Art would require doubling tax rates. Not only is that politically inconceivable, the impact on our economy can be imagined.

    http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/entitlements-double-tax-rates

  • Since the late Fifties Art, the rate of fertility has declined from 3.8 children per woman to 2.06 today. 2.10 is considered to be the replacement rate, and since 2000 we have been at that for only one year: 2008.

  • Given the Pelosi pic, I think a better title for the post should have been– “Demography, Comtaception, and Facial Meltdown.”. After all, the Pelosi facelifts are taxpayer supported.

  • Don, please tell me what I said that is hogwash. The federal tax revenues are the lowest as a percentage of GDP since WW2. The 10 years of employment since 2001 (when the income tax rates were cut followed by tax cuts on capital gains and dividends) are the worst since WW2. I could give you numerous links including the federal government’s budget page. Also, do you deny that our budget was in surplus before the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003?

    As for entitlements, the problem continues to be Medicare, yet every proposal to fix the problem by doing what has been successful in every other country is rejected in this one.
    As compared to the European welfare states please the chart below. The data is sorted by the larges Debt as a percentage of GDP by country. Of the welfare states in Europe that have economies comparable to the US, you could only rank Italy as having a higher debt burden than the US. And only the UK has come anywhere close to the US in the increase of debt from 2000 to 2010 (I included the 2009 numbers to demonstrate that this did not all occur under President Obama). The problem in Europe is that they decide to include countries like Greece in the Euro zone and Germany absorbed East Germany. These actions are close to the US agreeing to a common currency with Mexico, this might help Mexico but would be a significant burden.

    National debt as a percentage of GDP
    2009 2009-2000 2010 2010-2000
    Japan 197 66 220 89
    Italy 109 2 119 12
    United States 67 22 94.36 49.36
    Germany 73 14 83.96 24.96
    Canada 65 -6 83.95 12.95
    France 80 21 82.33 23.33
    United Kingdom 59 17 75.5 33.5
    India* 66 -4 71.84 1.84
    Brazil* 66 -2 66.84 -1.16
    Spain 56 -7 60.12 -2.88
    China* 32 9 3 3.83 10.83
    South Korea 31 18 33.44 20.44
    Russia* 5 -14 11.75 -7.25

    Sorry to be so long winded in a com box, but I felt the need to respond.

  • Sorry, I spent 20 minutes trying to format the chart and then the columns still did not line up.

  • The pig’s not getting any cleaner Paul. A more pertinent list is that of the total national debt as a percentage of the country’s annual gross domestic product. Go to the link below to view the list.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_external_debt

    The numbers for most of the European nations are especially shocking when consideration is given that they spend next to nothing on defense as compared to the US.

    The idea that the solution to this problem is to raise taxes is simply wrong. The only solution is to radically slash government spending and such a solution will come, probably after the financial crash the West is inevitably headed for.

  • Integrity I wish Obama had some.

  • Don, Still you said my original post was hogwash and make the claim that the answer is not raising taxes. Although I agree the answer is not just raising taxes. Anyone who would claim that the federal government (or any other institution) could not improve it’s efficiency would be silly. However, you have yet to answer what part of The current take of the federal government being the lowest since WW2 or the decade of job performance since the taxes were dropped were “hogwash.” Plus you avoid commenting of the fact that we had a surplus before taxes were cut in the early 2000’s.

  • We did not have a surplus under Clinton Paul. We had the dot.com bubble, a Republican Congress and blue smoke and mirrors with social security funds.

    http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

    If the Bush tax cuts were completely repealed, we could expect to have around 200 billion a year in additional taxes. The deficit for this year is estimated to be 1.327 trillion dollars. Increasing taxes isn’t even a bandage on the underlying problem of run away entitlement spending.

  • Yes Don, unfortunately when the social security taxes were doubled in the 1980’s President Reagan insisted that SS funds were counted in the deficit calculations. And that did allow the issue that the article points out. It is also true that President Clinton had the advantage of the computer industry expansion and dot com bubble to the income side. But Pres. Clinton does deserve credit for stopping his party from spending the money and he stopped the Republican party from issuing tax cuts instead of responsibly reducing our deficit during good times. If you don’t believe this draw a graph of the current balance of the federal government from 1980 through 2010. It has a point of inflection at two points. In 1993 it changes from constantly going more negative to going less negative. In 2001 it changes from constantly going less negative to going more negative. The curvature did not change when congress changed from Democratic to Republican in 1995, nor did it change when the congress went back again in 2008. It changed when President Clinton gained control of the budget process and it changed again President Bush gained control of the process. There is a lot President Clinton did I do not agree with, and some things I find abhorrent, but if the data does not show you that he was responsible for the improving current balance of the federal budget during the 1990’s than you are choosing not to look.

    By the way, you still have not pointed which of my original comments are “hogwash.” Since this is a nice way of saying I am lying, I wish you would at least attempt to support the claim in some way.

  • To pay for entitlements Art would require doubling tax rates. Not only is that politically inconceivable, the impact on our economy can be imagined.

    Heritage is an advocacy group. They are not necessarily going to be terribly explicit about it that when they speak of the federal income tax they are not discussing the whole menu of federal or state taxes. The federal income tax comprehends about half of all federal tax collections and about a quarter of all tax collections.

    As we speak, the ratio of federal tax collections to domestic product is 0.149. I believe that is lower than it has been at any time in the last 50-odd years. However, there was a revolution in state and local expenditures during the years running from about 1965 to 1975, so total tax collections are not so low, but not abnormal in context.

    Currently, federal expenditures amount to about 24% of domestic product, just a wee bit higher than they were in 1984. (Federal tax collections as a share of domestic product are lower than they were, so public sector borrowing is at this time 9% of domestic product rather than 6% of domestic product). All things being equal, the relative size of the public sector (beyond a certain baseline) is inversely related to measures of economic dynamism. There is a cost to be paid in static utility and in economic vibrancy each time you expand the public sector’s take and that cost has to be taken into account in assessing any proposed program.

    Now, how are we financing this expenditure? We are financing it through a mix of taxation and public sector borrowing. One might expect that it does diminish utility to finance an activity from coerced contributions (taxation) rather than voluntary contributions (borrowing). Keep in mind that the diminution of utility would be some fraction of 9% of domestic product, perhaps expressed in anemic growth rates experienced as the tax increase is imposed (recall that the money is not being invested, but parked in Treasury issues). That is not what you want, but it is not economically devastating either).

    If you wish to make an argument against a particular manifestation of public expenditure, make that argument; there’s plenty to choose from. If you wish to argue that there are perverse incentives encoded into entitlement programs, make that argument. If you wish to make an argument that optimal public expenditure is of a particular dimension, make that argument. What you really ought not to do is contend that it would be economically devastating to maintain a public sector of a given relative size when we have in fact done so for 35 years or more (and other countries have maintained larger such sectors for longer periods).

  • The idea that the solution to this problem is to raise taxes is simply wrong. The only solution is to radically slash government spending and such a solution will come, probably after the financial crash the West is inevitably headed for.

    I think it might benefit you if you have the time to review the Appendix to the Budget of the U.S. Government and the analytical tables (not the executive summaries, which can be misleading). There are clunky pdfs available online. Review it with two notions in mind.

    1. You cannot welsh on debt service;

    2. The elderly and disabled have very limited capacity to adjust to reduced economic circumstances; diminution of benefits to these sectors (that would be Social Security, Medicare, and that portion of Medicaid which finances nursing homes) has to be undertaken quite gradually and is not going to net you much over the course of the next several years.

  • And I would suggest Art that you contemplate the deficits for the last five years and consider this truism: “Something that can’t go on forever will not go on forever.” National public debt is currently at 99% of GDP. Our capacity to finance the government by conjuring money out of thin air is coming to an end and probably sooner rather than later due to an increasing realization that we can never pay off this amount of debt, at least not with a currency that has anything close to its present value. Slow motion debt repudiation, hyper inflation, currency devaluation, whatever it is called, it is eventually going to occur with severe damage to our economy.

  • I am perfectly aware of the problem. However, cessation of public sector borrowing requires:

    1. More revenue; and

    2. Less spending.

    My complaint about your posts on this matter is a deficit of specificity as regards the latter and your insistence that the former cannot occur. There’s quite a mass of bilge in the federal budget. There are roughly 55 independent agencies you could shut down with little damage to the public interest; two cabinet departments that could be shut down with like consequences; a third department which could have its budget cut by >90% with like consequences; and another that could use a 22% cut. The thing is, you pump out the bilge and you still have problems.

    A. Reducing the bloat derived from the structural defects in entitlement programs takes time;

    B. Removing excess spending in legitimate programs requires intensive attention to granular details or requires you make an arbitrary cut and tell the agency chiefs to figure out the details.

    C. Some sorts of cuts will induce or exacerbate fiscal crises in state and local government. Liquidated programs are properly partially replaced with formulaic revenue sharing.

  • Medusa, the Gorgon, is Nancy Pelosi. Medusa had snakes for hair. Nancy Pelosi has snakes (lies) for hair. The sight of Medusa turned men to stone. Nancy Pelosi turns men to stone. Nancy Pelosi gives her son a stone when he asks for a loaf of bread and a snake when he asks for an egg. As a public servant, all citizens are constituents of Nancy Pelosi. We, the people, are her public, her national community. Yet, Nancy Pelosi consistently gives us, her constituents, a stone, when we ask for a loaf of bread, and a snake when we ask for an egg. If untruth, or perjury in the public court of law is permissible, then, Nancy Pelosi has handed us, her constituents, a stone when we ask for a loaf of bread and a snake when we ask for an egg.
    In Greek mythology, Perseus slew the vile Medusa by viewing her in the mirror of his shield for if he had looked at Medusa straight away, he would have been turned to stone. Medusa had snakes for hair, the sight of which turned men to stone. Perseus, son of the Greek king of gods, Zeus, separated Medusa’s ugly snake-generating head from her body with his sword. Separating Nancy Pelosi from her snake-generating lies with our vote in November will free us, her constituents, from turning into stone.
    St. Patrick drove the snakes out of Ireland. It is time to drive the snakes out of the United States Congress.

Government Health Care Mandate Awakens The Faithful From Their Slumber

Sunday, February 5, AD 2012

Occasionally the haughty and arrogant become so full of themselves, they are deluded into thinking that by their sheer will and intellect they will convince a sizeable part of the populace to give up their beliefs. The current administration illustrated this very point when they announced last month that every group will be forced to abide by the dictates of the governmental health care plan. All employers must provide birth control coverage in their health care plans as well as the morning after abortion pill. (Churches were given an exemption but churches are a small part of church related institutions, such as hospitals, schools, universities etc.)

The prairie fire started by President Barack Obama’s Administration wasn’t immediately reported by the mainstream media. Surely some in the mainstream media must have thought few Catholics would care if a bunch of old bishops read a letter from the pulpit that would go in one ear and out the other. Well of course,  at least the “enlightened Catholic populace” who voted for President Obama would surely come to this conclusion. Those who would care wouldn’t vote for the President anyway, the liberal talking heads surmised. This shows how ill informed many in the mainstream media have become; for since the last 20 years or so increasing numbers of newly appointed bishops and cardinals have been far more orthodox in their beliefs and far less willing to appeal to the whims of the political world.

When I first heard the news, I thought there must be some sort of mistake; surely any freshman majoring in Political Science would realize that rankling the feathers of any major swing state voting bloc especially that of Catholics would make little sense. Yet even after some in the mainstream media awoke from their militant secular slumber, the White House insisted that this dictate would remain because of the “deeply held beliefs of the President.”

This created an opening for the Republican Primary candidates who pounced on the issue, none more than former Speaker Newt Gingrich who called it, “President Obama’s War on The Catholic Church.” Traditional and conservative minded people of all faiths immediately expressed shock at the decision of the White House. Even liberal columnist EJ Dionne wrote a scathing column saying, “The President had thrown him and his fellow Progressive Catholic allies under the bus.” Naturally the liberal media and the likes of Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi rushed to the President’s defense. MSNBC’s Ed Schultz, seemingly unaware of the White House decision, wondered what on earth Newt Gingrich was talking about with “Obama’s War on the  Catholic Church,” which Gingrich stated in his concession speech following the Florida primary. Former Speaker Pelosi did her best Richard Rich imitation saying she “stood firmly with the Obama Administration.”

Continue reading...

7 Responses to Government Health Care Mandate Awakens The Faithful From Their Slumber

  • Pingback: MONDAY RELIGIOUS LIBERTY EXTRA I | ThePulp.it
  • I am reminded of Jacob Marley’s Ghost – “Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!”

    The trouble with activism is that it is the occupation a narrow spectrum of people – most of which enjoy more leisure than the common man. The rest are engrossed in their lives.

    I am one of them.

    It is difficult to rise from a political slumber when catching an early train, working all day, coming home to dinner, homework review, reading with the children, and spending time with a spouse. “Life” fills each nook and cranny of the day and carving out time to do even routine chores, that don’t require immediate attention, is difficult.

    I am therefore skeptical that even so direct an assault will change much.

    It isn’t that our fellow Catholics are uninterested or unconcerned it is that they are engrossed in the day-to-day.

  • G-Veg, true we all lead busy lives but for too long, too many people have filled their lives with junk and thus you can’t digest the good stuff when it comes. If you have ever eaten too many doritos and cheese puffs before a friend suddenly invites you to a nice dinner, you can’t help but think that what have I done? Believe me I am a big sports and music fan, so I know how to enjoy many things. However, at the end of the day, I hope I know where my priorities lie. Sadly too many people live reality show lives, which lends them to being told what to do and how to think. For them pleasing the “In Crowd” and the “Political whims of the moment” are of the utmost importance.

    Once in a while, we are all awoken from our slumber. In a strange sort of way, the Obama administration unwittingly did the Church a favor by waking the faithful up to see the reality of their second term agenda, which lies far beyond this mandate. It is only a taste of things to come. I will leave you with the words of Patrick Henry who said, “When people forget God, tyrants forge their chains.”

  • The Supreme Court will hear the Obamacare case on March 26-28. Can we Catholics make a pilgrimage to the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception at the Catholic University in Washington, DC?

    I agree with G-Veg–most people are too harried–can we block these three days and come together as a Church to worship, fast and pray for our nation? Perhaps a million Catholics praying for the Supreme Court Justices (6 of whom are Catholic) will make a positive difference in this nation!

  • People are not that busy that they can’t change their voter registration if they wanted to.

    You want to be heard? Catholic Democrats who are offended by Obama’s intentional act against the Catholic Church in violation of our Constitutional First Amendment Rights need only register out of the Democrat Party and become Independents or Declined to State registered voters. When the Democrat Party starts seeing their voter registration numbers declining, they will start paying attention to what is happening and start giving the Church the respect we deserve.

    Just as important to Catholics is our professed belief that God is the giver of life (“I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life….) and our praying for God’s “will be done on earth;” so to the Democrat Party is their belief that they are in the right which is verified by the numbers of people registered in the Democrat Party. The fact is that after 39 years of Roe v Wade and 52,000,000 murdered babies, Catholics still represent the single, largest voting block for the Democrat Party. In addition, 55% of Catholic voters voted in 2008 to elect Obama – the first pro-abortion, pro-infanticide President ever. Finally, Obamacare provides, supposedly, health insurance for illegal aliens, something very important to the Catholic Bishops and Hispanics. The combination of those facts convinces Obama that the majority of Catholics will support his mandating the Church include birth control, etc., in their employees’ health insurance or face millions of dollars in fines every year.

    We’ll see who is right… the Church who thinks Catholics really do believe what they say they believe in their “Profession of Faith” on Sundays and in what they pray for in the Lord’s Prayer; or, Obama, who, based on historical, electoral statistics, believes the majority of Catholics will continue to remain Democrats glad to have free birth control paid for by the Church even if Obama’s order is in violation of the Constitution.

  • Somewhere someone commented, “It’s not so much about birth control. It’s all about control.”

    The remnant of the Holy Catholic Church that is not in the tank for Obama is spiritually safe.

    Wait until they individual mandate you to buy Government Motors Volts.

  • I have to agree with Dave that the Obama regime badly miscalculated this one, which very well should make its re-election chances go up in the smoke of Satan.