Dead Even in Gallup Since the Debate

Monday, October 8, AD 2012

 

Gallup has announced that in their tracker Mitt Romney has pulled dead even with Obama since the debate:

Registered voters’ preferences for president are evenly split in the first three days of Gallup tracking since last Wednesday’s presidential debate. In the three days prior to the debate, Barack Obama had a five-percentage-point edge among registered voters.

An Oct. 4-5 Gallup poll finds roughly two in three Americans reporting that they watched the Oct. 3 debate, similar to what Gallup measured for each of the three 2008 presidential debates. Those who viewed the debate overwhelmingly believe Romney did a better job than Obama, 72% to 20%. Republicans were nearly unanimous in judging Romney the winner. But even Democrats rated Romney as doing a better job than Obama, 49% to 39%.

Continue reading...

2 Responses to The Dinner Table

  • In the beginning, the sin of Eden was the serpent taking away the relationship of the children of God from their Father. Father’s are what they do. They provide and protect. In many homes this is how they show affection and love. Take away a man’s way of doing that and he is left without anything to give. He feels he becomes irrelevant, and loses respect for himself. This is magnified greatly if there is no faith in the One that is Greater.

    The serpent has performed superbly again. Fatherlessness is running rampant in this nation.

  • elm i too see the suffering of today’s father; born in the 60’s and 70’s and early 80’s – they took their first steps on shifting sand.
    The importance of earthly fatherhood was emphasized at Fatima, when Joseph appeared with the child Jesus in his arms, and together they signed a blessing on the faithful, seekers and skeptics gathered there at the cova.

16 Responses to The Look

  • Romney’s little victory dance was a telling clue as well.

    http://www.noisyroom.net/blog/romneydance.gif

  • Man, does she like pissed or what? Heh. She’s certainly not use to seeing her husband look so inept in front of a national audience and on live TV. Of course he’s not used to being in front of a camera without his teleprompter.

    It was a beautiful thing to watch!

  • I do not think I will be quite right for the rest of the day. One can actually gin up some sympathy for the man.

  • I agree Art. I suspect that Obama was thinking, “She is going to let me have it once we are by ourselves!”

  • Far too many have said this before. The whole “thing” (since 2008) recalls Hans Christian Andersen, “The Emperor’s New Clothes.”

    “‘I see.’ said the blind man as he picked up his tools and walked away.”

  • While the media is still in the tank for him, I get the impression that his own party is going through the motions at this point, but are keeping their flotation devices close at hand.

  • “She is going to let me have it once we are by ourselves!”

    Actually, she probably didn’t. :0

  • Somewhat trivial, but did Romney and O purposefully coordinate on attire? I notice Romney wearing a red tie (red state) and the O sporting blue (blue state)? Or is that a traditional thing (just never noticed before).

  • Michelle looks like she just wants to kick R’s a** for beating up on her hubby.

  • Also telling, and if someone here already mentioned this I apologize, after the debate Romney was greeted by his wife, his kids, and a throng of his grandchildren. Obama was only greeted by Michelle.
    Look at this pic. Obama is glad this is over. Romney is writing something down. Romney is still working to see where he can improve.

  • “Dems are looking to Biden to save Obama:”

    The comedic possibilities in this are endless! Nemesis is what comes to mind first however. Obama put Biden on the ticket out of arrogance: I am such a genius and so confident that I can have a complete idiot as Veep. Arrogance kept him on the ticket when many Democrats wanted him dumped this year. Now our Beloved National Clown is expected to rescue Obama !

  • Maybe, with her ‘heart’ on her sleeve, she’s watching the candidate’s family smiling and happy in a natural human manner on their way to him.

    The incumbent allowed the debate on their anniversary and used it for gain in his greeting.

    Also, the microsoft internet explorer window is ( and has been since last night) working with one of C. Matthews ‘bring out the knives’ (How Vicious and Unprofessionally Degrading) by showing in first item the same picture of Mitt Romney at the podium with the caption: I was ‘completely wrong’.

  • It’s getting bad for the emperor’s new suit.

    Seems he’s lost Jack Welch, “Unbelievable jobs numbers..these Chicago guys will do anything..can’t debate so change numbers”

  • She looks a real sour puss.
    Didn’t know she was pigeon-toed as well. 🙂

  • I not happy with the choice I’m faced with in this election cycle. I have a choice between a socialist who favors abortion and infanticide, a polytheist who is probably prolife, or a more Catholic or Catholic-like third-party candidate who does not have a realistic chance of winning. Since the Roe v Wade decision, no Republican president has ever made the prolife cause the number one issue in his administration. If a President can campaign on the campaign trail, he can take the time appear at a March for Life.

    I’ve observed the behavior of an individual exhibiting similar personality traits as Obama’s. Based upon my observations, I’m certain that Obama will spend more time preparing for the next debates. If Obama is able to understand what the most important and prevalent values are, he will attempt to explain how his policies protect and/or promote those values. Mitt better make sure is well prepared for the future debates.

Top Ten Reasons Obama Lost the Debate

Friday, October 5, AD 2012

 

10.  He assumed that it was a gag twentieth anniversary celebration thrown together by Michelle.

9.    His puppy chow snack an hour before the debate didn’t agree with him.

8.    He was distracted by receiving debate advice from Biden in his earpiece.

7.    Newt Gingrich told him he had nothing to worry about.

6.    Jim Lehrer gave Obama advance knowledge of the questions he would ask, but then Lehrer forgot the questions.

5.    Rocky Mountain High.

Continue reading...

13 Responses to Top Ten Reasons Obama Lost the Debate

  • 11. Lehrer didn’t ask Romney the most vitalestly-important-to-the-people question, “When did you stop beating your wife?”

  • I just pray that we do not become arrogant and assuming in this first battle victory. There are two more Presidential debates and the moderators in them will do everything they can to assist Obama and embarrass Romney. That liberal blogger who runs Atomic Insights that I wrote about yesterday – Rod Adams – whined that the debate was poorly moderated. I don’t believe that, but to a liberal any debate that allows a non-liberal to win is a poorly moderated one. Liberals can’t stand losing. And yes, I do pray for the safety and protection of Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. Obama is a vindictive man.

  • The first debate is usually the most important Paul, especially in this case where Romney was still a virtual unknown to many voters who do not follow politics closely. He made a stunning first impression, completely at odds with the Mainstream Press portrait of him, and the hundreds of millions of dollars of negative ads Obama has unleashed against him.

    Additionally Romney did not win simply on stylistic points, but because he was more knowledgeable than Obama. This couldn’t happen at a better time for Romney. Donations for the final push are now flooding in, the conservative base is ignited and early voters now go in with that debate foremost in their minds. The next debate will not be until two weeks from last Wednesday. In between we will have the sight of the dumbest Veep in US history going up against one of the brightest Congressmen in US history.
    Romney will gain a lot of ground during the time period until the second Presidential debate.

    Obama will doubtless do better in the last two debates, he could hardly do worse, but I am confident that Romney will more than hold his own.

  • When I saw the headline about Al Gore blaming the altitude, I thought it was well-written satire. Outside of what my teenage sons have cooked up for excuses on occasion, I think that has to be the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.

  • How could liberals think that it was unfairly moderated? I only watched the last 40 minutes. I kept thinking, “Why is the moderator saying ‘mm-hmm’ when Obama speaks & then silent when Romney speaks?” I think he should have been quiet the whole time. It wasn’t supposed to be a chat between 2 people. And another obvious bias against Romney was when Romney TWICE had to say, “No, Jim, I need to have time for rebuttal.” And that was just in the last 40 minutes. I would imagine that there are alot more examples of bias toward Obama if you watched the whole thing.

  • Found this elsewhere, so I can’t take credit, but it’s pretty funny. And remember, this time you read it, it’s satire. Next time . . .

    “Speaking to an adoring crowd at a campaign stop in Shovel Ready, Ohio, President Obama today effectively rebutted claims by Romney partisans of a “big win” in Wednesday night’s debate.

    “You didn’t win that”, the president exclaimed to cheering supporters, “somebody else made that happen!”

  • It would help if we had an honest assessment of what errors, spins or distortions that each of the two said. i do not rely on their own team or the general media left or right biased ones. Please anyone?

  • LT – For assessing errors:

    1. look at the latest diatribes on Mitt Romney as seen in dnc campaign ads and consider the source

    2. listen to a replay of the debate

  • Thank you, PM. i spent a lifetime as a journalist and have a passion for truth and fairness. I listened to the debate, am living in Europe now, What I am most concerned about is Romney on MEDICARE MEDICAID, SS was clear for 554 plus; and the $730 billion which Mr Obama supposedly took from the Fund.

  • I still find it bizarre Obama agreed to schedule a debate on his 20th anniversary. He couldn’t agree to 1 day before or after? I would not have agreed to debate on my anniversary.

    Maybe he did it so he could try to woo the female vote. I guess he expected the females in the audience to go “Awwwww.” when he told Michelle “Happy Anniversary.” It would work on The View. How could it not on a national stage?

  • Some advice from John Kerry for the next debate has leaked out:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/john-kerry-master-debater_653746.html

  • Kyle Miller, I agree. I don’t know any woman on any side of the aisle that would be even remotely happy that their husband put work first. Maybe that’s why she turned her head when he kissed her after it was over.

  • Pingback: John Kerry Thrown Under the Obama Campaign Bus | The American Catholic

Mitt the Bulldozer

Thursday, October 4, AD 2012

This is the latest attack ad by the Democrat National Committee.  How clueless are those guys?  Do they think that Romney being assertive in the debate will be regarded by anyone, other than the yellowest of yellow dog Democrats, as being a bad thing?  Actually Obama talked four minutes longer than Romney did in the debate last night.  It only seemed like Romney talked more since he was actually saying things of substance instead of making pointless meandering statements that appeared to be Obama’s main strategy last night.

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Mitt the Bulldozer

  • DNC and admin know whereof they speak about bulldozers – having used a fleet for four years.
    Of course, the machine will transfer blame to ‘hide’ guilt.

  • Once clip answers this completely. Just play the part where Obama says, “I think I had 5 seconds before you interrupted me” and then goes on to talk for another 2 minutes…

  • Here’s how the debate looks from China:

  • Who talked longer vs. who communicated more? Even the Establishment Media talking head corps agree with Mr. McClarey. Here’s Josh Tyrangiel, editor of Bloomberg BusinessWeek:

    Romney was short and to the point, I mean – as John (Heilemann of New York magazine) was saying – you know, the President won on overall time spoken by about five minutes but I would say Romney ran about 50 more plays.
    Live Analysis of the Presidential Debate, Charlie Rose show (PBS), October 3, 2012 (@11:00 min.)

3 Responses to Smirk

  • The smirk changed though, to an appeal to the moderator (big sad eyes) and a defeated look as Rmney finished.
    Hope Romney keeps up his ataacks like this – he’ll need to be better next time. Obama knows he failed, and will come out all belligerant and nasty next time.

  • just the audio would be great, but the visual wins sympathy for O. perhaps esp among young women voters

  • Anzlyne, as a female voter (although no longer qualifying as young), I would say the visual doesn’t win sympathy for the President. It instead shows him as finally becoming aware of how badly his policies play in the real world. Thanks to Mitt Romney for showing the rest of the world.

Romney Victorious

Wednesday, October 3, AD 2012

 

It was a total rout.  Romney dominated the debate from beginning to end.  Obama was attempting to sit on a lead which is the worst strategy against an able opponent, and Romney demonstrated that he is a very able opponent tonight in spades.  A few thoughts:

1.  Best Performance Since Reagan-I have watched every presidential debate.  Except for the 1980 Carter-Reagan debate I have never seen any debate where one candidate dominated as much as Romney did tonight.

2.  Jobs, Jobs, Jobs-Romney kept the focus fixed throughout the debate on the 23,000,000 unemployed and continually returned to the subject of job creation.

3.  Teleprompter Where Art Thou?-Obama gave a wretched performance.  He rarely looked at Romney, while Romney always looked at him.  Obama either looked at the moderator or had his head bent down, looking at his notes, with a half smirk on his face.  His answers meandered and often had no point.  Obama needs to dump Lurch, (Senator Kerry), and get someone to coach him who can actually prepare him for a debate.  His performance was pathetic, and even his most rabid partisans, as indicated by the video of Chris “Tingle up my leg” Matthews at the beginning of this post indicates, realize it.

4.  Mitt the King Wonk-The amount of detailed knowledge that Romney had at his fingertips was astounding.  I know it astounded Obama, the pretender policy wonk.

5.  Lehrer the Zombie-Before the debate began I thought Jim Lehrer was looking incredibly old.  Romney was able to push him aside effortlessly and talk about what he wanted to talk about.  Lehrer attempted to throw a few lifelines to Obama when Obama was floundering but his efforts were futile.  Lehrer has moderated many presidential debates, but I guarantee the Democrats will make certain this is his last one.

Continue reading...

61 Responses to Romney Victorious

  • If this were a fight, it would have been stopped. The referee would have determined that one fighter (President Obama) didn’t want to be there. Therefore for his own safety, the fight would have to be stopped. One need only look at the meltdown that Chris Matthews just exhibited toward President Obama on MSNBC. In addition, look at the comments of Andrew Sullivan, “disaster,” and Bill Maher saying maybe the President does need a teleprompter. Governor Romney won a lot of votes tonight which means the attack machine is going to be amped up like never before.

  • I am no fan of Romney, but I’ll give the guy credit, he seems very sincere and capable when debating an empty chair.

  • With regards to point #3, even Bill Maher Tweeted that Obama needed a teleprompter. My only worry is that Romney gets overconfident.

  • Romney was very smart not to let Obama and Lehrer work as a team. However debates don’t change votes; at best they keep everyone who is not sold on the other guy from defecting or staying home. Romney would need to do something similar in every debate to get a point or two from the other side.

  • Watched the debate at my mate’s place on Fox, with a check on CNN afterwards, plus Hannity. Romney waa certainly a clear winner. Obama’s body language was not good – looked like a loser. But things will be very different next debate. i don’t think Romney has any illusions about winning the first debate – a good mouthful does not a meal make. Obama’s team will have him attack much more, and Romney will be aware of it – the gloves will be off.
    I think it was telling that, in his closing address, Romney referred to the Constitution, with an emphasis on “Our Creator”. Excellent. I hope he keeps up the attack, and the principles.

  • The closings:

    Seems like the debate reminded the current President that he likes Americans tonight; for giving up perks to stay in business and finding meaning in building cars ‘n stuff, because he promised to keep on supporting them the way he has been, and if they vote for him … he promises. Maybe during October, November, and December, he’ll do some good for a change as a courtesy to Americans, if he can rise above the msnbc plan.

    Gov. Romney wants to do the work of President of the United States because he both loves this country and its foundation and is capable to do so. For how much more can Americans ask? We are so lucky to have this man for a candidate. Things are a such a huge mess.

  • Keep in mind there are 8 days before the next debate which is the Vice Presidential debate. The onus is on the President now who is a known commodity. Though Mitt Romney is well known to us political junkies, he was not to a good many Americans. The Governor can simply say the characticature of me seen on the negative attack ads are false and what you saw in the debate and in my term as Governor of a very liberal state (the Commonwealth of Massachussets) is the real Mitt Romney.

    The President and the media going on the attack against Governor Romney risk being seen in a even more negative light than they are already seen by a good many Americans. A very good night for Mitt Romney, a real game changer as seen by a CNN poll that shows he won 2-1, and focus groups of independent voters that state they are definitely leaning toward Romney. Remember before the debate, polls indicated that voters expected President Obama to win the debate 2-1.

  • David.
    I can’t believe that the result from the first debate is a game changer. Sure, Romney has shown himself to be “human” – not the ogre portrayed by the Dem attack ads. But if he can perform in the next two debates as he has done here, then the game MAY change.

  • Jim Lehrer did what any good moderator should do. He got out of the way and let the candidates have at it. The last thing I want to see in a debate is the moderator demanding “control”. In fact they should not even be there at all. The candidates should question each other directly, with only a timekeeper to keep some semblance of order, but as long as there is a moderator and/or panel, picked from the national press corps, Jim Lehrer is about as good as it is going to get.

  • Happy to hear that Mitt did well.

    I was watching the Bronx Bombers put away the AL East championship against their arch-rival BoSox, 14 – 2.

    I wouldn’t have watched the debate if they paid me. Obama nauseates me.

    Don’t get cocky.

    Seems even Matthews can’t put lipstick on that incumbent. Put Chris on suicide watch.

  • Chris,

    I agree about Lehrer. “In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.”

  • Don the Kiwi, hope all is well down under. Actually, I am not being a big Romney cheerleader, as I didn’t vote for Governor Romney in the primary (I voted for Senator Santorum.) However, when any candidate, sports team actor, actress, business leader etc rises to the top on emotion, hoopla etc. they are bound to have a big crash. It is the law of physics.

    The Middle East expert Dr. Fouad Ajami noted in a revelatory Wall Street Journal article in October of 2008 that he had seen the Obama effect before in the Middle East; where leaders were treated as conquering heroes only to come crashing down to earth. The Greek columns from President Obama’s 2008 Denver convention speech are cracking as we speak. He wouldn’t be the first charsimatic leader to see his fortunes come tumbling down Mt. Olympus.

  • I didn’t get to watch the debate last night, but this is about as unanimous a verdict I’ve ever seen regarding a presidential debate since I started following politics.

    I disagree slightly with Rozin. First of all, John Kerry was helped by good debate performances, closing the gap between he and Bush after the first set of debates (though one could argue that correlation does not equal causation). Second, many Republicans and conservatives before last night had become convinced that Romney was all but finished, and now there has been a marked revitalization of spirits. Don’t discount the impact on voter enthusiasm, especially among the GOP.

  • what I enjoyed was the gentle and forthright way that Romney corrected the mendacity, pointing it out quietly (not shouting– as that one guy did during a State of the Union speech)
    I would have liked a direct discussion of the Three Branches. The arrogance of this pres is to in effect put the Supreme Court on trial in a real battle for Supremacy.
    Pres. Obama disrespects of the Supreme Court- dissing them at his S of the U speech, and on a regular daily basis with DOMA etc —

  • PZ I think we are in violent agreement. Debates don’t convince the other side’s voters to switch, they can only work on people who already are leaning against the other candidate. If a majority has decided or “all but decided” to vote for Obama (or Romney) then the debates wouldn’t matter at all. Fortunately, I don’t think Obama has anywhere close to 50% committed to him (FWIW Rasmussen put the number at 42%).

  • Recommendations for Romney and GOP:

    Be humble.

    “If you would be loved, be lovable.” Ben Franklin

    Work harder.

  • wow- blame atmospheric pressure! Blame Mr. Lehrer. Is there any way Sarah Palin can be blamed?
    Credit Romney, credit all the thorough Republican debates last year. Credit the power of all the prayers going up all over this country!

  • Phillip I guess the answer to Chris M. question “where was O?” is
    He disappeared into thin air!

  • One must be careful with decreased air pressure when one is an airhead.

  • Where was “O?” He was looking for his chair…

  • Anzlyne, yes as to your credits. Last night, I couldn’t turn on the TV thinking about preserving my mental ‘health’ from media, as I already have the season’s ‘flu’. I went to mittromney.com debate page and watched the tweets. Don’t have tweets or facebook things here, but it was as close as possible for me. I had time to allow consider ation of how deeply we, as a people, need some reason and sanity to antidote the daily government and media poison dosed out for these years – not as an excuse to be ‘cocky’, but as an acceptable reality in the world to breathe, if even for an evening.

    Mostly, it was a powerful experience to consider that Our Lord in Heaven has somehow had a hand in bringing hope to so many with this event by lifting hearts. I fell asleep trying to say thanks for so much.

  • Before the debate began I thought Jim Lehrer was looking incredibly old.

    He is 78. His sidekick Robert MacNeill retired 19 years ago.

  • Anzlyne says:

    “I would have liked a direct discussion of the Three Branches. The arrogance of this pres is to in effect put the Supreme Court on trial in a real battle for Supremacy.
    Pres. Obama disrespects of the Supreme Court-”

    I, too, enjoyed the gentleness of the debates. I appreciated the way Romney did not let Lehrer cut him off, William Buckley style.

    from President Obama, one of his 923 executive orders:
    “EXECUTIVE ORDER 11921 provides that when a state of emergency is declared by the President, Congress cannot review the action for six months.”
    Who will reinstate representative government if Congress is defunct? Who will represent the people? Obama has overruled all of our unalienable rights and our sovereignty and wishes to give us over to be taxed by the United Nations. Anything Obama might have said last night would have given away the fact that he does not ascribe to our founding principles. The anger on his face when Romney did speak of our Constitution and Declaration of Independence, but I did not hear Obama growl. Maybe next time.

  • I’ve got to pat myself on the back for a moment. I’m usually terrible at calling this kind of thing, but a couple of weeks ago I said that Romney needs to embrace Romneycare as proof that he can work with the opposition, and then hammer at the President for his partisanship. The President wouldn’t be prepared for it. It seems to have worked. Although, from the look of it, the President wasn’t prepared for much of anything.

  • Romney came out swinging and Obama looked as if he was uncomfortable up there.

  • I was astounded by that Phillip. It has been interesting to see the degree of scorn that Obama’s poor performance has earned from the port side of our politics.

  • DID OBAMA REALLY LOSE—OR WAS HIS PERFORMANCE PART OF AN OVERALL DEBATE STRATEGY THAT HE WILL DEPLOY IN THE FUTURE?
    It is so easy to conclude that Obama lost in the last debate or for Obama’s antagonists to claim that he can’t debate. Sen. McCain cautions against such assumptions, saying Obama should not be under-estimated by his opponent. Let us recall that Obama did quite well in many debates as he sought the Presidency in 2007-2008. Now, here is my take on Obama’s debate encounter with Romney on September 3, 2012:
    As it unfolded, I, like almost everyone else, was puzzled, frustrated, even angry about Obama’s performance. Upon further reflection long after the event, I have come to the following conclusions:
    1. At that debate, Obama was feeling his opponent out, trying to draw him out knowing there are future debates. That partly explains Obama’s smiles and smirks as the debate went on. So, he let Romney exhaust himself on his main arguments, talking points and spins, some would say on his many prevarications, about-faces and falsehoods. He made these statements before a huge national. He can’t retract or correct them in future without losing credibility—and, by pundits’ count, Romney made about 28 mendacious statements that night. He has already tried to correct one—that his own health care law in Mass. has a provision for pre-existing condition.
    2. Therefore, since the debate, Obama has gone on the offensives debunking or making fun of Romney’s false and misleading assertions. Expect him to do so even more aggressively in the second debate! He would be hammering Romney on his false logic, bad math and deliberate lies, though he may not outrightly call them “lies.”
    3. At the debate, Obama revealed little of himself. So Romney has little to work on. At the debate, Romney was out to prove himself and reverse a bad trend. Obama simply watched—at the end he said ominously that he “enjoyed it.” Obama did not even get into Romney’s disastrous 47% comments. Thus, he denied Romney the opportunity to pedal back before a national audience.
    4. Having set Romney up, Obama would be ready for the kill in the next encounter! He knows and can anticipate Romney’s well-rehearsed answers. Obama will do his home work on all of those. Romney can’t on Obama’s; he doesn’t know.
    5. The final debate on foreign policy is uniquely Obama’s territory. Romney know little that is meaningful here except what former Bush aids would feed him. But Bush is toxic for this election season. Here, Romney would receive his final body blow!
    6. Finally, the new job report bodes well for Obama. It takes the wind out of Romney’s sail. It undercuts severely his main selling point. Obama wins!

  • “It is so easy to conclude that Obama lost in the last debate”

    Because it is a self-evident fact.

    “At that debate, Obama was feeling his opponent out,”

    If so, what Obama discovered is that he is up against an opponent who can out-think and out-talk him.

    “Therefore, since the debate, Obama has gone on the offensives”
    Completely ineffectually, judging from the polls and early voting which show Romney surging, especially in the key states of Florida, Ohio and Virginia.

    “At the debate, Obama revealed little of himself.”

    Little that we didn’t already know. He is inarticulate without a teleprompter. His policy knowledge is lacking. He tends to allow his unfiltered statements to meander badly and often pointlessly.

    “Obama would be ready for the kill in the next encounter!”

    The next debate will be the Veep debate and I expect Biden to be badly humiliated in that, adding to the Romney momentum. I doubt if Obama will manage better than a draw in the last two debates, and there is always the possibility that Obama will come across as over the top and desperate if he attempts to overcompensate for his passive and unagressive stance in the first debate.

    “Finally, the new job report bodes well for Obama”

    It really doesn’t. The vast majority of voters understand that the economy is wretched and these last minute “save Obama’s” job numbers are being met with cynicism and derision.

  • “The vast majority of voters understand that the economy is wretched and these last minute “save Obama’s” job numbers are being met with cynicism and derision.”

    Yes. Just one example:

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/jack-welch-refuses-to-back-down-on-unemployment-numbers-in-fiery-exchange-with-chris-matthews/

  • Brilliant satire, Dr. Sam, though I don’t think you’re quite ready for the New Yorker:
    http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2012/10/obamas-old-friends-react-to-the-debate.html?mobify=0

    To sum up: Obama lost the debate because he’s too awesome.

  • I wouldn’t write off Dr. Sam completely. I saw the entire debate and Obama could have embarassed Romney to no end on two points that I was aware of…but Obama didn’t. Romney said he would create 12 million jobs but Wall Streeters like Romney know that Moody’s Analytics and other financial advisory companies are saying the economy will produce 12 million jobs no matter who wins.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-money/economy/247081-experts-say-economy-should-grow-despite-who-wins-white-house-in-november

    Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/31/us-usa-healthcare-costs-idUSBRE84U05620120531

    So Romney will really be giving Medicaid half what it needs ( if it had no misuse which it does like most programs ). When I saw both moments ( the 12 million jobs and ” I’ll increase medicaid” ), I said to myself…this guy could sell lemon ice in the Antartic. But Obama knew Romney was conning the average listener ( not the above average listener who already know who they’ll vote for…if they are in a state where it will make any difference electorially.)
    Obama could have murdered Romney on either the 12 million or the medicaid increase and he did not. My impression was that Obama had something intimate bothering him….or Dr. Sam can’t be ruled out.

  • “or Dr. Sam can’t be ruled out.”

    Oh yes he can be. Obama is no Machiavellian genius, but rather a fairly typical liberal politician who had immense good luck when he ran for the White House in 2008. Now he has four years of failure behind him, and is confronted with the first competent opponent he has confronted in his political career.

  • Perhaps both Bill and Sam agree with the college students reported elsewhere who think Obama should be allowed a teleprompter for the next two debates.

    Of course it is entirely possible that Romney, having demolished Obama in the first debate, will feel it would be running up the score if he made him look bad in the last 2 debates.

  • Rozin,
    I’m against Obama way more than I’m against Romney but the debate showed that economics oral debates are a contradiction in terms. They should be done on paper as exchanges of researched responses…but the fast moving pragmatic US voter population would not read the debate on paper or on internet because the position texts would be hyper detailed and endless and boring to most voters.

  • Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.

    1. You have a news report of an analysis done by one agency. I would not take the number at face value.

    2. Much of Medicaid is devoted not to medical care but to the financing of nursing homes. Nursing homes house people, feed people, and give personal care, not services given to technology-driven cost inflation. There are rehabilitation services on site and attending physicians, but these are not financed by Medicaid.

  • Bill,

    If you are saying that debates tell us very little about a candidate’s qualifications for executive office (as opposed to legislative office) I agree wholeheartedly. Also any plan is subject to the vagaries of Congress unless like Obama you plan to rule by fiat. However an incumbent has a quite different situation than a challenger. You would expect an incumbent to know exactly what he/she has done and why they did it and be able to explain in great detail how things happened. The debate proved what was apparent to anyone paying attention the last four years: President Obama is a goof-off who doesn’t work at the job but spends his time in recreational activities, and reading from a teleprompter at various places. Given his lack of experience and general arrogance it is not clear that him paying attention would have greatly improved the product I admit. The parties and the people have to wake up and stop nominating and electing people without sufficient executive experience and proven ability.

  • overheard in department lounge: “rope – a – dope” “busy with high level secret stuff in middle east”

  • Art Deco,
    Medicaid covers 40% of the child deliveries ( prenatal and postpartum too) in the U.S inter alia. 40% of all births in the country. Go here:

    http://www.medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-Program-Information/By-Population/By-Population.html

  • Art Deco,
    ps….google ” nursing home inflation”. You’ll see articles to the effect that it too fast outpaces normal inflation.

  • Bill,

    I’m not sure what your point is unless you mean to say that taxpayers have to subsidize any cost no matter what. This was known in the old days as a cost-plus contract and for good reasons no one engages in it anymore (I hope). This is the usual Leftist argument used by Obama and every other Dem.” How dare you cut anything from teachers contracts!! How dare you cut the size and budget of anything we are already doing. How dare you not increase every budget by 7% every year no matter what.” This is how Dems end up saying Repubs want to kill seniors women and children. Why don’t you call up some people in Greece, Spain, Italy and similar places and let us know how they are doing on all their cost-plus benefits and services.

  • Ahem

    “So Romney will really be giving Medicaid half what it needs . . . ”

    When I read that, here’s what jumped upon my alleged intellect “Who gives my family and me any of what we need?”

    But, that’s just me. I’m one of the execrable 53%.

    And, 48 (or so) years after they declared War on Poverty, 49,000,000 Americans live in poverty. That’s a poor return for the $16,000,000,000,000.17 invested.

    The progressives created a leviathan: ignorant, uneducated, illiterate, dependent, people filled with envy, hate, gluttony, lust, sloth, wrath all of whom voting Democrat. The demagogues promise more entitlements and are re-elected ad infinitum. Career GOP pols don’t cut entitlements for fear of being demagogued. Both gangs of scoundrels are united in perpetually expanding the entitlement/nanny state. The middle class is caught in the vise between the free everything entitlement hordes and Wall Street plutocrats. The elites are effective in using media, universities/public schools and think tanks to divert middle class angst to those living off the state. While the endangered middle class is fixated on poor people, elites are bribing politicians and the Fed to give them laws, Op Twists, QE’s, and stimuli that add billions to their net worths. Precious little gets to the middle class and the economy is a wreck.

  • Rozin,
    I many years ago refused to strike with the Newark teachers’ union…fortunately I’m 6’3″ and 235lbs. with little fat. They’d drive by and yell….but no takers. But previous to that I worked one year in welfare and saw the problems of the both the real poor and the phonies on welfare. I was also in the military and I like the military but not big budgets…but I like the small smart war concept…kill lists and drones, snipers and assassins make for lower costs and fewer civilians hurt. Rearranging muslim groups at $4 trillion (Iraq/ Afghan/Pakistan/…Brown University) is more wasteful than welfare. I’ll leave you with one thought…we give the mentally ill on welfare enough money in New York to live in the most
    dangerous neighborhoods. I live tin such places now sporadically for real estate
    reasons. God is not pleased with our niggardliness toward the mentally ill. ” The
    day of the Lord cometh like a burning oven”….Malachi 4:1.

  • “God is not pleased with our niggardliness toward the mentally ill. ‘The
    day of the Lord cometh like a burning oven.’ Malachi 4:1.”

    I agree.

  • Paul,
    People wonder when does God punish nations? When their sins like abortion and the neglect of the mentally ill are filled up. In Genesis 15 God notes this principle to Abraham and predicts 400 years for the sins of the Amorites to be filled up:

    13
    * Then the LORD said to Abram: Know for certain that your descendants will reside as aliens in a land not their own, where they shall be enslaved and oppressed for four hundred years.f
    14
    But I will bring judgment on the nation they must serve, and after this they will go out with great wealth.g
    15
    You, however, will go to your ancestors in peace; you will be buried at a ripe old age.
    16
    In the fourth generation* your descendants will return here, for the wickedness of the Amorites is not yet complete.
    ……………………………………………………………………..

    Christ tells His generation of Jewish leaders that they are at the tale end of a filling up period which is why Jerusalem will be destroyed and was:

    Matt.23:31-32.
    31
    “Thus you bear witness against yourselves that you are the children of those who murdered the prophets;
    32
    now fill up what your ancestors measured out!”
    ………………………………………

    The fire comes when the sins are filled up. Only God knows if that is two years or two hundred years. But once the filling up is complete, God acts fast. If you have a sinful relative, pray daily for them because they are moving toward the “filled up” point but your prayers can affect all that.

  • T Shaw,
    If anyone in your family dies very slowly in old age from certain illnesses that require medical machines. Here’s what happens. They are in ICU first in a hospital.
    Then they are transferred to a skilled nursing home which is covted for 100 days by medicare. Then if they are the final spouse, they go through their savings at the nursing home’s rate which is anywhere from $50K a year to 80K a year. After they or you are broke, medicaid covers you or they in that home till death. Unless you have Ryan’s several million or Romney’s many millions, you could be there one day on medicaid. Young people should really note this. If you have parents who hope to leave you several hundred thousand or more or less, it may happen but a lingering, slow death by a final spouse could destroy that inheritance so retirement planning should not include that money. Slow acting lung cancer, late stage Parkinsons etc. could despoil the family saving even with medicaid’s help.

  • Bill,

    Yes, Money can be saved everywhere. However, you were saying that Romney was bad in not constantly raising Medicaid according to what the inflation rate is and he should be attacked for that. I asked how was that different from a cost-plus contract? The answer I guess is that you are 1 inch taller and 40 pounds heavier. If you are not going to seriously answer that question you are not serious.

    I did not say that the Left was wrong to advocate for welfare; they are wrong to advocate for more govt spending Regardless of whether it helps or hurts the beneficiaries or bankrupts the country. Are churches and other charitable groups to offload their charitable work to the Dept of Human Services? Why don’t they simply become divisions of DHHS? Obama is right there to make it happen.

    The Right is wrong to advocate for more military spending whether or not it improves our national security. However your so-called smart wars are doing very badly now. Despite all those drones and cyberwhacks, the Taliban is ready to march back into Afghanistan and the Middle East is going jihad. The old fashioned war in Iraq has produced the most stable Arab govt in the region (not that we weren’t lucky about that).

    Why are mentally ill patients in dangerous city neighborhoods? Well, medications have allowed many such patients to leave institutions and live somewhat normal lives. But their earning prospects are not good. They of course could move out of NYC or other such places to smaller cities. But if the economy was improving and you had less corrupt city govt those neighborhoods would be helped too. The Argentinian or Venezuelan model we are seemingly embarking on will make even normal neighborhoods as bad.

  • Old way: Work and earn, save and retire. God-willing, you are whole and can.
    The saving part in this way of life is the betrayal for whatever the % of people.
    ( losing track of %’s ) El banco grande will maybe allow 1% if they can have a sum for a year or more type thing – or else … . They no longer vie with little CD earnings rates ads.
    Vague Anxiety is the order of the new way.

    All I know is that it took only three days from the debate night lift to figure out that we each had better remember to maintain reverence for and communication with our Lord in a constant way for the rest of our lives.
    I think He reminded us with some hope Wednesday night and is watching.
    He called His people the remnant of His inheiritance. Oh, to be a thread and not unravelled.
    Truth, Beauty and Good are gifts for which we have to be thankful and protective.

    Today, for a minor example of signs of His hand in things, I went to a little service for Blessing of Animals commemorating St. Francis. It was at a St. Anthony of Padua Church in the parking lot and a cold autumn weather front was coming in on the wind. We had a circle of cats and dogs, so peaceful, the animals were quiet and seemed almost attentive during prayers. Easter lilies planted for next year were blooming at the Chapel door! (Both Saints are often pictured with lilies.) A magnolia tree had a few spring blossoms. Sadly, some of the dogs were rescued from puppy mills even from other states, but it seemed like a statement about caring for Creation any way we can.
    And, before we began, I was quick enough to pick up the cat carrier when a dog thought it was a hydrant.

  • I noticed the sarcastic comment about Ryan’s several millions and Romney’s many millions, but no reference to Nancy Pelosi’s many millions, or John Kerry’s many millions, or the many millions possessed by many other rich liberal leftist politicians and activists who want to tax your money and mine to provide for what they refuse to provide out of their own riches.

    If Ryan and Romney earned their riches honestly, then they are entitled to their riches. From what I have gathered, Romney has made significant charitable contributions, but none of that will ever dissuade criticism against him.

    BTW, there was a time when families cared for those family members who couldn’t care for themselves. But in this neo-pagan, post modern age, we don’t have families with grandparents and married parents and cousins and uncles and aunts. We have abortion, divorce, homosexual filth, contraception, fornication, adultery and every other family destroying disease. Then we advocate that government should do what our sins have prevented us from doing, and we wail when the Republicans say no. It isn’t government’s responsibility to take care of the mentally retarded, or the sick, or the lame, or the hungry, or the poor. That’s our responsibility as members of the Body of Christ. But we have destroyed our means of discharging our responsibilities. So don’t expect that Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney have to pick up our slack.

  • ND Victorious did not need to score that last TD: 41-3. Mitt didn’t do it to the zero.

    BB: Naked we entered the World. Naked we will depart the World. If God gives us good things; He allows us bad, as well. I know my Redeemer lives.

    All of us will be poor when Obama gets four more years.

    Anyhow, money is about the last thing I think about when involved in end of life issues.

    I have been through “it” three (father, mother, uncle) times in the last eight years. And now, a close (a saintly man who does not merit his horrid suffering) friend is in it. One of the three was a nursing home situation wherein I was PoA: I paid the bills; and I was the executor of the estate.

    Here is how it works when the government controls your health: Death Panels. They seem to be medical SOP for the aged and infirm in the UK.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html#ixzz1yLo1yfRc

  • Rozin,
    Cost plus the apposite inflation is a perfect requirement for the truly needy. The waste comes from fraud and from other aspects.
    The mentally ill often do not take their meds and end up in the news for pushing others off the subway platform in front of a train…or stabbing random pedestrians. Deinstitutionalization was society trying to cut down on costs while calling it community based. Lol. I visited the insane in the bad parts of NYC for a year. I went upstairs in a tenement on east 4th street that was heroin row at the time and
    taxis would not stop on that block. I knocked on their apartment door after passing a line of 8 young men outside another door waiting to buy drugs. As the mentally ill couple opened the door to me, the smell of feces from their apartment almost knocked me over. Your portrait of their deinstitutionalization and my portrait of them are miles apart. Many of them live in transient hotels with a hot plate and a bed and no relatives loving them or taking them in. I arranged for one woman to visit her two children who were in foster care with other parents. When she was put in a room with them, she scared her own little children because she would not look at them or talk to them. I pray for her every week decades later as inclusive in my prayers for my family…her and Gladys M., a black schizophrenic who lived in a flop house hotel with a hot plate and bed in a 12 by 7 room…with thugs nearby. One hotel in that area on Jane St. was just for ex cons and was so dangerous social workers were
    not allowed upstairs. “Somewhat normal lives”… I never saw the ones you’re describing. You’re imagining paranoid schizophrenics taking their medications without being in an institution. That was the NY con job that closed sanitariums and sent delusionals back into the community to take medication on their own…and save
    money for the tax payer. The welfare check though was only big enough for them to live in bad neighborhoods. In Norway perhaps or Malta, you can be poor and insane and live proximate to decent people. In New York City, if you are poor and insane, you are living with ex cons.

  • Paul,
    It is Ryan and Romney only that want to cut the medicaid that you or your family member might need one day in the last years of your life. I have no truck with Pelosi or any dem of that ilk. I mention R and R because they want to reduce that area which they will never need.

  • Bill,

    It is not government’s job to care for the sick, feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, etc. That is our job as members of the Body of Christ. Government’s job is to defend against aggression, both internal and xternal, and to foster an environment of free enterprise, personal responsibility and accountability, stable families and religious freedom that empowers the various Christian denominations in their charitable good works. The Great Society program of Lyndon B. Johnson is an exercise in the extent to which man’s hubris will extend itself. Ideally there should be no Federal social welfare programs of any sort, and any such programs should under the principle of subsidiarity be developed and implemented at the local or state level. The Federal government needs to get out of the business of wealth redistribution under the false claim of charity for the helpless. All the federal taxes going to Medicare and Medicaid ought to be turned over to the states and each state should determine how to meet its needs. If a state can’t do that, then the people therein need to vote the politicians out or accept suffering the consequences of their decisions. No more bread and circuses.

  • Paul,
    The Medicaid budget was recently over $400 billion a year. The Vatican has 1 billion in savings investments. The Vatican could not provide one complete day of medicaid bills if it gave all its money to medicaid.
    Catholic parishes gave $60 million to Haiti relief. That amount would only support
    1000 elderly countrywide in a skilled nursing home for one year only without paying the medical. Modern needs and modern medical costs make charity a small player in this area.
    Catholic nursing homes get most of their income from medicaid…60%. Catholic hospital neonatal units get 40% of their income from medicaid. Cardinal Dolan must have told all Bishops to go silent on Medicaid cuts by Romney because Obama’s threat to freedom of religion trumps all other issues and that is correct. But parishes cannot take care of the medical needs of even a handful of their parishioners through donations. Parishes on average gave $3600 each for Haiti relief. That’s one trip to the ER by one needy person on one day.
    Charity can no longer handle the bills of modern medicine for the poor.

    As to government fighting aggression, we were recently paying Boeing $643 each for a $12 part…25 years after the $640 toilet seat incident from an interesting c span interview on DOD waste whose general audit is now pushed back to 2017 from 1997:

    http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/300675-6

  • Bill wrote, “Secondly Romney stated he would increase Medicaid and do so by inflation plus 1%. That’s actually a big cut because unlike low ordinary inflation (2.4% for 2013), medical related inflation is projected to be 7.5% for 2013.”

    I suggest you factor in the equation the horrid (June 2009 to present) GDP growth rate: 2%, the weakest post-war recovery.

    Two points of information: One, the higher education (bubble) inflation rate is similarly far greater than the Ministry of Truth overall inflation rate; and Two, in the run-up to the great recession, the home price (bubble) inflation rate was about six-times the overall inflation rates and the rates of increase in median household incomes, disposable incomes and GDP until the bubble burst in 2007-2008.

    Here’s your Columbus Day assignment. Take out a piece of paper and a pen and write 50 times the word, “unsustainable.”

  • Deinstitutionalization was society trying to cut down on costs while calling it community based. Lol. I visited the insane in the bad parts of NYC for a year. I went upstairs in a tenement on east 4th street that was heroin row at the time and

    IIRC, the Urban Institute estimated in 1990 that there were about 600,000 homeless. Given the increase in general population in the intervening years, one might extrapolate and arrive at a figure of ~720,000 today. Not all of these are schizophrenics. It used to be said that about half of the homeless were ‘mentally ill’, though that was in an era when all sorts of fictional and manufactured data were bandied about in the press.

    The thing is, ca. 1955, the population in state asylums was around about 850,000. Given the intervening increase in the general population, that would translate into about 1,500,000 people today. The last time I checked, the population of state asylums was about 87,000. We do not have 1.4 million lunatics wandering around as vagrants in this country. We might have 360,000 wandering about who would benefit from institutional confinement. It will largely be against their will and it will not be cheap.

  • Quite a few people who would have been institutionalized in previous generations now live in group homes. About 9500 people live in group homes in Illinois. In my opinion the quality of the supervision at group homes leaves much to be desired, but I could say the same regarding the traditional asylums.

Obama Video: Typical Hack Politician

Wednesday, October 3, AD 2012

 

 

The Daily Caller has a video of Obama speaking before an audience of black ministers at Hampton College in June of 2007.  In that speech Obama acts as if the Reverend Jeremiah Wright is his best bud, tries to speak in the stereotypical cadences of a black preacher at a revival meeting, and attempts to inflame the racial paranoia of his audience:

In a video obtained exclusively by The Daily Caller, then-presidential  candidate Barack Obama tells an audience of black ministers, including the Rev.  Jeremiah Wright, that the U.S. government shortchanged Hurricane Katrina victims  because of racism.

“The people down in New Orleans they don’t care about as much!” Obama shouts  in the video, which was shot in June of 2007 at Hampton University in Virginia.  By contrast, survivors of Sept. 11 and Hurricane Andrew received generous  amounts of aid, Obama explains. The reason? Unlike residents of majority-black  New Orleans, the federal government considers those victims “part of the  American family.”

The racially charged and at times angry speech undermines Obama’s  carefully-crafted image as a leader eager to build bridges between ethnic  groups. For nearly 40 minutes, using an accent he almost never adopts in public,  Obama describes a racist, zero-sum society, in which the white majority profits  by exploiting black America. The mostly black audience shouts in agreement. The  effect is closer to an Al Sharpton rally than a conventional campaign event.

Continue reading...

14 Responses to Obama Video: Typical Hack Politician

  • The pandering is strong with this one.

  • As amazing a weapon as this video is, it probably will do little harm to Obama’s campaign because the only people who will view it already will not be voting for him as the MSM will sweep it under the rug, just as they have everything else.

    I truly hope that Romney can find a way to bring this video of Obama’s rant up in the debates, but I imagine he probably will not.

  • “What we should take from this video is what we already know:  Obama is not a leader, not a conviction politician with core beliefs he is dedicated to.  He is a careerist who has only one aim:  the success of Barack Hussein Obama.”

    Exactly what Nebuchadnezzer’s aim was. No principles. No convictions. Just ISM – I, Self and Me. Pride, arrogance, hubris, narcissism. Daniel chapter 4 is God’s response.

  • We need more opportunitah for the communitah in this … (extremely dramatic pause)… countrah.

  • Daledog:
    We need more opportunitah for the communitah in this … (extremely dramatic pause)… countrah.
    If Romney parroted this, he could intorduce Obama’s speech without mentioning it.

  • Just because he has no original thoughts and wants the same thing as the majority of Congressional Dems these days (after the demise of the Blue Dogs) doesn’t mean Obama has no convictions other than himself. That would be a better description of Bill Clinton. Obama himself said that he eagerly sought out the Marxist professors. Like many current Democrats he believes in a watered down or even lazy Marxism without Marx. They extol Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez and the Chinese Politburo. They do not even extol Denmark, France or England. Not autocratic enough. They certainly don’t extol Germany or Switzerland. Too budget conscious and hard working. If the political class approves of what he is doing he is happy. They figure they can control things all the way down. If you look at how people love them in the cities and states they control the tightest who can gainsay them?

  • This video is both remarkable and unremarkable. It’s unremarkable in a sense because it doesn’t reveal anything about Obama that people who have been paying attention didn’t really know. The man has been an open book – quite literally. The man wrote a book dedicated to his Communist father. What’s remarkable is that this has been out in the open for anyone to see, yet so few (comparatively) even notice.

  • It’s unremarkable in a sense because it doesn’t reveal anything about Obama that people who have been paying attention didn’t really know. The man has been an open book –

    Or maybe the man’s just Zelig.

  • Saw this on Hannity yesterday.

    And what is this about Obama telling industry and military to not announce any lay-offs before the election – leave it till after the election, even though ……”you will be in breach of the law, we (the taxpayer) will pay your fine”.
    That sounds awfully like bribery and corruption to me, let alone blatant breach of the law of the land.

    Roll on Chicago Politics.

  • Art,

    Are you saying Obama/Zelig is Jewish or Lutheran? Just kidding . . .

  • T SHAW “Are you saying Obama/Zelig is Jewish or Lutheran? Just kidding . ”

    Doesn’t he claim he’s Irish when the mood suits him??

  • Hack politician or not, he knows what appeals to his audience and that is enough to get him elected. All the hyphenated Americans are behind him and he will work behind the scenes to assure the Big Men of each of those communities that they’ll be paid off.

  • as I am watching Romney beat O right now I am feeling pretty good – people are easily able to see, if they want to see, the double talking, circuitous thinking, the attacks on the consumer seller economy in each response– the oil companies make a profit every time they sell their product he says, the insurance companies jerk you around he says- the common sense and straightforward plain talk of Romney is great– esp since people have been seeing that old video for the last 24 hours– and are already wondering how they are to know if Obama means what he says

  • Romney is dominating the debate. Obama has been on the defensive all night. Obama had the mistaken reputation of being a policy wonk. He has had the misfortune tonight of debating a true policy wonk. Mirabile Dictu, this is a real debate instead of a joint press conference!

The Biden That Keeps on Giving

Wednesday, October 3, AD 2012

Veep and beloved National Clown Joe Biden is continuing to do his best to elect Mitt Romney President.  His immortal phrase about the middle class being buried for the past four years will live in campaign lore as long as we have presidential campaigns.  Like all true comedic geniuses, Joe makes certain that his hilarious routines rest on truth.

I wonder if Joe coordinated his remark with Speaker of the House Joe Boehner who released this on September 24th:

Continue reading...

October 28, 1980: Carter-Reagan Debate

Wednesday, October 3, AD 2012

Tonight we are having the first of three Presidential debates between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.  They have both been engaged in debate preparation, and I would imagine that in both camps close study has been made of the best presidential debate performance ever by a candidate:  that of Ronald Reagan against Jimmy Carter on October 28, 1980 in their one and only debate.  Reagan was everything in the debate that a candidate should be:  relaxed, in command of the facts, humorous and a master of devastating one liners:  “There you go again!”  Reagan at the end asked the essential question that almost all American voters do ask themselves when judging a president:  “Am I better off than I was four years ago?”  American presidential elections usually come down to the state of the economy, and Reagan understood this, and used the poor state of the economy in 1980 with devastating impact against Carter.  I was a Reagan supporter and watched the debate with keen interest.  After the debate I had no doubt that Reagan was going to win, and probably overwhelmingly.  Here is a video of the complete debate:

Continue reading...

6 Responses to October 28, 1980: Carter-Reagan Debate

  • I will not watch the debate tonight. I shall spare myself the emotional turmoil and anxiety. But I do pray that Mitt Romney does well, exposing Obama for who and what he is.

  • Amen, Paul.

    Luke 12:11-12: “When you are brought before synagogues, rulers and authorities, do not worry about how you will defend yourselves or what you will say, for the Holy Spirit will teach you at that time what you should say.”

    Come Holy Spirit, fill the hearts of your faithful and kindle in them the fire of your love.

    V. Send forth your Spirit, and they shall be created.
    R. And You shall renew the face of the earth.

    Let us pray.

    O, God, who by the light of the Holy Spirit, did instruct the hearts of the faithful, grant that by the same Holy Spirit we may be truly wise and ever enjoy His consolations. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.

  • May our Lord be with Mitt Romney and his family through this trial.
    Campaigning and debating are so far removed from the actual work of the office which is what he can and would do respectfully for every citizen. Mitt Romney is a gentleman.

    The DNC and its mouthpieces have sunk so far below any hint of good, respectful behavior and civilized, intelligent discourse. They’ve trained their voting blocks to relinquish thought, react in vehemence, and keep shorter and shorter attention spans in this world of information superhighways. May the Lord open their hearts and minds to see and hear the death, destruction, and rampant sin they unleash with violent intent.

    Animals have far more innate sense.

    Also, I will be looking forward to 11:00 pm today.

  • Thank you Donald McClarey. May you live long and prosper under God, through Him and with Him and in Him.

  • Did you e-mail a copy to the Romney camp?
    It seems much of what he talks about are the same problems today.
    “Those who fail to know the errors of history are doomed to repeat them” (or words to that effect)

  • Your prayers we’re answered…Mitt did a great job. teleprompter barry looked nude before the American people. Please keep your prayers going.

A New Low-Part II

Tuesday, October 2, AD 2012

This is beyond parody.  The above video is an attack ad against Mitt Romney by a man who purports to have picked up his garbage.  His complaint?  Well Mitt Romney  never came out to shake his hand or give him something to drink.  I guess Romney helping to pay his salary isn’t enough.  The stupidity behind this ad is mind boggling.  Will we next have an attack ad from Romney’s newspaper boy who is insulted because Mitt hasn’t written him into his will?  Sheesh!

Continue reading...

7 Responses to A New Low-Part II

  • Perhaps we can hear from Obama’s half-brother in Kenya.

  • Thanks for the part that Romney wrote – the more I find out about him the more I like him

  • The Romney quote is indeed pretty awesome.

  • Romney didn’t shake his hand??? No-o-o-o-o-o-o!!!!

    I guess he’s too much enraptured under the spell of Obamagic to realize that he is far worse off today than he was four years ago. That Obama shook him down.

    “Since 2009, the middle 20% of American households saw their average incomes drop 4%. In 2011 alone, they fell 1.7%. The poorest 20% have fared even worse under Obama, Census data show. Their incomes have dropped more than 7% since 2009, and are now lower than they’ve been at any time since 1985, after adjusting for inflation.”

    Read More At IBD: http://news.investors.com/100212-627662-under-obama-poor-middle-class-incomes-fall-sharply.aspx#ixzz28B813L1r

  • Romney is much more a man of the people than Obama. And I would think that sanitation workers, who make plenty, are too busy making their rounds and trying to stay on schedule to high-five or shake hands with residents.

  • basically while the Romney campaign has struggled to hammer home any central theme besides “Obama’s a swell guy but he’s in over his head” (though it’s occasionally be more aggressive) the Obama campaign has been ridiculously cynical and offensive.

    it’s the flipside of the weird messianism of the ’08 campaign. Romney doesn’t caaaaaare about your “lady parts,” you regular salt-of-the-earth folks that Obama just loves (don’t get too clinger-ish though,) etc. etc. he “shut the door behind him” once he got rich as Mrs. Obama implied at the Dem Convention (crock of shit of course, but of course leftists have also talked about how he “only helps Mormons” or whatever.)

    but Obama caaaares. he cares a lot.

    i don’t vote based on whose campaign i like better of course, but in addition to all the regular stuff, it’d be nice to not see stuff like this legitimized with a reelection.

  • All Obama has are dirty tricks, lies, and dead diplomats.

    However, I agree with truth-teller, Vice President Biden, ” . . . the middle class has been buried over the past four years.”

The Reality Gap

Monday, October 1, AD 2012

We’ve reached the point in the election where the press decides to mostly report on how the election is being perceived rather than on any particular events, and since the president is doing well in the polls this results in a lot of “desperate Republicans do foolish things” stories. The flavor of the week seems to be the media’s discovery that somewhere out there in the right-leaning internet, there are people who have made a hobby of “re-weighting” polls in order to reflect what the re-weighters think is a more likely partisan composition of the electorate come election day.

There is, yes, a certain sad desperation about this. Now that election reporting is often more about “the race” than about issues or events, being behind in the race is crippling and so people come up with way to try to explain it away. Those with long memories (eight years counts as long in our modern age) may recall that when Bush was so rude as to be ahead of Kerry in the 2004 race, Michael Moore and those like-minded rolled out a theory that all the polls were wrong because an army of voters who only used cell phones and not land lines (and thus couldn’t be polled) were out there ready to vote against Bush.

However, just as everyone’s getting ready to announce that Republicans, in their constant flight from the “reality based community” have decided they don’t believe in polling, we find out that the left has its own reality problem: They’re convinced that the economy has been getting better over the last couple months, despite the fact there’s little reason to believe this. Gallup and the Pew Research Center both have data out showing that Democrats’ opinions of the economy and the job market have suddenly started improving, despite almost universally bad news over the last several months.

As you can see, partisan affiliation wasn’t much of a dividing factor in assessments of the economy a year ago, but now that a bad economy might mean President Obama not being re-elected, Democrats obediently come to the conclusion that the economy really isn’t that bad. According to Pew, the same divide now exists on the job market, consumer prices, the financial market, real estate, and even gas prices. You would think that at least people could agree on what the level of gas prices is, but no, apparently not, though the gap is narrower there than elsewhere: 89% of Republicans say they hear mostly bad news about gas prices while 65% of Democrats do.

The trope goes that you are entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. However, as the political divide has become wider and more entrenched opposite sides increasingly do have their own facts, as reality become filtered through a partisan lens.

Continue reading...

8 Responses to The Reality Gap

  • The polls have tightened now that we are in October. In one day the poll average has fallen from 4.0 advantage Obama to 3.2 advantage Obama on the Real Clear Politics Average:

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

    This happens almost every presidential election cycle. A cynic might observe that the closer we get to election day the more that pollsters want their polls to be accurate.

    As for some of the wilder polls that we saw in September showing Democrat turnout in states highers than 2008, the best election for Democrats since 1964, Jay Cost explains why they were bogus:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/morning-jay-are-polls-tilted-toward-obama_653067.html?nopager=1

  • As for the economy, it takes a special type of mindset to view it and not regard it as a disaster. I can barely understand someone thinking that Obama has done a bad job but Romney would do worse so they are sticking with Obama, but to deny the evidence before their eyes, what we have all been living through the past four years, is simply delusional.

  • Here are two answers to skewed polls: “Caller ID” and “voice mail.”

    About 91% (see Instapundit post) of us that have caller ID and see a number we don’t know let the call go to voice mail; the lying liberal poll organization hangs up; and we delete it. I let it happen about six times a day.

  • Certainly, I hope that Rasmussen has been more accurate overall than a lot of the one-off polls, and I can believe that polling is tricky because it’s likely to be a low turn out election where victory relies primarily on who shows up to vote — but I think the efforts to do amateur poll re-weighting based on party affiliation are, while well intentioned, kind of silly. Party identification is one of the things you seek to measure in the poll, not one of the things you should weight it by. If you get way too many people of one party, that may indicate your sample is bad. But polls should only be re-weighted to fit non-changing demographics (sex, income, age, race) not changing demographics like party identification.

    That said, I have a certain sympathy, at least, with the desire to fight the polls. Polling is necessarily imprecise and hard to understand, and it’s used far too often as a way to shape the vote. Insisting that the economy took a sudden turn for the better during the late summer, on the other hand, is fairly crazy.

  • Regarding the polls, I agree that Rasmussen is probably the best but even he is using a D+3 model which is why Obama is coming out on top in his calculations. Do people really believe that the democrats will have that much of an advantage on election day? Sorry – I’m not buying it. If Romney holds on to the independents, and the republican/conservative/libertarian/tea party people come out in big numbers and draw even with the democrats, which I think is very likely, than Romney wins. Better yet, if they match the 2010 election which was a R+1, then Romney wins comfortably. Even if you bring it down to a D+1, Romney still wins. Why don’t they start presenting polls that reflect this possibility? I would like the media to say: People, this is what we think will happen if the turnout is D+3, D+2, D+1, even, R+1, etc., etc. Some honesty from them would be refreshing.

  • I think what you neglect in all the controversy about polls is some problems with the sampling frames not as severe in previous years:

    1. Low response rates generally.

    2. Difficulties in contacting people who lack landlines.

    3. Variable methods among pollsters which produce divergent results (manifest now in a way it was not thirty years ago).

    4. Odd and novel biases in propensity to respond (manifested in exit polls eight years ago).

    And, yes, the curious partisan balance in some published polls is an indication there could be problems with the sampling method used. We are not going to find out how serious the problems have been for another month.

  • I wonder how much the local job market colors these responses, especially with various industries doing better/worse. Prior to leaving Seattle, things seemed ok (not great, not horrible) with regard to employment (aerospace was ramping up). Here in Waco, things seem better. Heck, we are having a hard time filling new positions at my current employer. On top of that, the local politics are very different too.

  • Pingback: Now Who Is Second Guessing the Polls? | The American Catholic

Obama Forward!

Sunday, September 30, AD 2012

For only $25.00 you too can have from the official Obama campaign store a portrait of Fearless Leader with his campaign slogan Forward!   Sheesh!  If the Obama campaign must steal  a Nazi slogan, the least they could do is come up with an updated version of the old Hitler Jugend Vorwarts! Vorwarts!

Continue reading...

6 Responses to Obama Forward!

  • Likely Das Obama stole it from Chairman Mao.

    “Most characteristic of this preaching [of the Great Leap Forward] was its utopianism, the promise of a bright future just in the offing, “three years of suffering leading to a thousand years of happiness.” — Franz Schurmann writing in Ideology and Organization in Communist China

    The parallels don’t end with “Vorwart!”, N.B., “three years of suffering leading to a thousand years of happiness.”

    Reality: three years and nine months of misery leading to far more misery.

  • Oh my goodness, coming from a country dealing with socialism propaganda, that poster really freaks me out. May Our Lady help us.

  • The eagle, the creature of St. John the Evangelist and the symbol for the swiftness of Divine Justice flies over the youth core in Hitler’s film. The blood of innocence flows in the O of “forward”. The red ink of debt to fund vice and murder flows in the O of “forward”. Into the red ink of debt and the blood of innocence, the world, led by Obama, sinks into the abyss of the O of forward as Donald McClarey says. The blind leading the blind, both fall into the pit. Obama is not sustained by virtue, nor by angelic love for God, nor by moral compassion, nor by innocence, nor by truth, nor by God. God is removed from our culture. Obama commands the forward removal of God, into the Red Sea of debt and innocent blood.

  • Unfortunately, both Der Fuehrer and Derbama stole the slogan from Wisconsin, my home state. Rumor has it there are petitions floating to rescind the Badger State’s. But that would be only to cave. We won’t.

  • FORWARD TO WISCONSIN needs to be flaunted

  • 1st John 2:18-19

    18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

    Many Antichrists: Robespierre, Napolean, Calles, Mao, Stalin, Hitler, Obama, etc. Nebuchdnezzer was made to eat grass on all fours like an ox for arrogance such as this. It’s all in Daniel chapter 4.

A Fundamental Threat to American Democracy

Friday, September 28, AD 2012

Jimmy Carter’s pollster Pat Caddell calls out the Mainstream Media covering up the Obama administration’s lies on Libya as a fundamental threat to American Democracy:

PAT CADDELL: Thank you.  Glad to be with you.  This could take a long time, but we don’t have that, so let me just get right to this.  I think we’re at the most dangerous time in our political history in terms of the balance of power in the role that the media plays in whether or not we maintain a free democracy or not.  You know, when I first started in politics – and for a long time before that – everyone on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, despised the press commonly, because they were SOBs to everybody.  Which is exactly what they should be.  They were unrelenting.  Whatever the biases were, they were essentially equal-opportunity people.  That changed in 1980.  There’s a lot of reasons for it. It changed—an important point in the Dukakis-Bush election, when the press literally was trying to get Dukakis elected by ignoring what was happening in Massachusetts, with a candidate who was running on the platform of  “He will do for America what he did for Massachusetts”—while they were on the verge of bankruptcy.

Also the change from evening news emphasis to morning news by the networks is another factor that’s been pointed out to me. Most recently, what I call the nepotism that exists, where people get jobs—they’re married to people who are in the administration, or in politics, whatever.  But the overwhelming bias has become very real and very dangerous.  We have a First Amendment for one reason.  We have a First Amendment not because the Founding Fathers liked the press—they hated the press—but they believed, as [Thomas] Jefferson said, that in order to have a free country, in order to be a free people, we needed a free press.  That was the job—so there was an implicit bargain in the First Amendment, the press being the only institution, at that time, which was in our process of which there was no checks and balances.  We designed a constitutional system with many checks and balances.  The one that had no checks and balances was the press, and that was done under an implicit understanding that, somehow, the press would protect the people from the government and the power by telling—somehow allowing—people to have the truth.  That is being abrogated as we speak, and has been for some time.  It is now creating the danger that I spoke to.

This morning, just this morning, Gallup released their latest poll on the trust, how much trust—the Congressman [Lamar Smith] made reference to an earlier poll—when it comes to reporting the news accurately, fairly, and fully, and it’s the highest in history.  For the first time, 60% of the people said they had “Not very much” or “None at all.”  Of course there was a partisan break: There were 40% who believed it did, Democrats, 58% believed that it was fair and accurate, Republicans were 26%, Independents were 31%.  So there is this contempt for the media – or this belief—and there are many other polls that show it as well.  I want to just use a few examples, because I think we crossed the line the last few weeks that is terrifying.

Continue reading...

6 Responses to A Fundamental Threat to American Democracy

  • Wow! I have no other words. The new media is a threat to the very Democracy they say that they support. And that’s the problem. This is NOT a Democracy. It is – or is supposed to be – a Constitutional Republic where the individual right to life and liberty are sacrosanct and inviolable, whether by a simple majority or by dictate of political leaders.

  • I guess I’m too nice a guy to say those things about Romney although I did give a sanitized version of it in another thread But I don’t think he’s doing as bad as McCain who practically told people to vote for the other guy. Romney is merely saying it’s understandable why people would make the mistake of voting for the other guy because he deserves our complete sympathy.

    As for the press I agree with Caddell’s alarm only because the strength of the government today vis a vis earlier times to enforce its will in micromanaging everything. Periodically there has been a rabid partisan press as in Jefferson’s day or in the 1930s where most of the papers were anti FDR (rightly or wrongly). What’s different now is that the Repubs and Romney are so comfortable with being the butt of all the attacks and not hiring their own press to communicate through. After all they are more ashamed of talk radio than they are embracing it (and they hate the Repubs who fight back or even speak up). The Repubs Stockholm Syndrome, which started at the Congressional level in the 1960s and at the Presidential level perhaps with Daddy Bush seems unshakeable now. The Repub convention except for Eastwood was a perfect demonstration of it. Gingrich and Reagan seem to be the aberrations not the standard bearers. If they lose under these circumstances it may well prove fatal.

  • But I don’t think he’s doing as bad as McCain who practically told people to vote for the other guy.

    Can you give an example?

  • Yeah look up what he said to the NAACP.

  • The bias has grown much worse this election cycle so I don’t watch most of it. I just wish they would actually report the news from both sides but what we see now is the constant attack on Romney & Obama always gets a pass.

  • The threat to our way of life isn’t solely from the lying, liberal media, it’s also raging in unionized, public education and clueless academia.

    The election will tell us more about the soul of America than about Obama or Romney.

Now This is Bare Knuckles

Friday, September 28, AD 2012

Hey Mitt, perhaps your ad men might want to take a look at the ads put out by my personal hero Allen West.  One of two black Republican Congressmen, he was redistricted into a much less Republican district and was thought to be easy pickings for his Democrat opponent.  Instead, West is clobbering Patrick Murphy, and is now leading by eleven points.  How did he do it?  Because he knows what he believes in and he fights for his beliefs.  Conviction and honest emotion go a long way in politics, along with a verbal hard right to the kidneys every now and then:

Continue reading...

4 Responses to Now This is Bare Knuckles

  • I love Allen West.

    But I despise and loathe Barack Hussein Obama.

    Yet I am called racist by liberal acquaintances.

    Maybe they are correct since I am biased in favor of the human race made of men, women and babies.

  • If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
    2 Chronicles 7:14

  • “Whoever acknowledges me before men, I will also acknowledge him before my Father in heaven.”
    Matthew 10:32

  • “NO” to God, our Creator and the endower of our unalienable rights is “NO” to freedom, “NO” to our U.S. Constitution and “NO” to our First Amendment freedoms, “NO” to all ualienable rights. The Democrats have lost all control of their party. What can the democratic Party offer besides chaos. Let the democratic party go home and clean its own house before it tries to run our nation.

Libyan Lie

Friday, September 28, AD 2012

From day one the Obama administration knew that the Libyan attack on our Benghazi consulate and the murder of our ambassador was an al-Qaeda-linked terrorist attack that had nothing to do with the Mohammed video.

U.S. intelligence officials knew within 24 hours of the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya that it was a terrorist attack and suspected Al Qaeda-tied elements were involved, sources told Fox News — though it took the administration a week to acknowledge it.

The account conflicts with claims on the Sunday after the attack by U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice that the administration believed the strike was a “spontaneous” event triggered by protests in Egypt over an anti-Islam film.

Two senior U.S. officials said the Obama administration internally labeled the attack terrorism from the first day in order to unlock and mobilize certain resources to respond, and that officials were looking for one specific suspect.

 

In spite of that, President Obama and members of his administration for days afterwards pretended that the attack was in reaction to the video.  Go here to read a first-rate time line put together by the Washington Post blog.  Why the lie?  Several reasons.

1.  Osama dead and General Motors alive- One of the few foreign policies successes of the Obama administration was the killing of bin Laden.  A successful  al-Qaeda attack on the anniversary of 9-11 undercut this in a huge way.

2.  Now we have to do something?- In the midst of the Presidential campaign the last thing Obama wanted was to admit that this was a terrorist attack.  Such an admission would require that he take action.  In fact Obama has done precious little in the aftermath attack.  More than two weeks after the attack, the FBI still has not examined the attack site at Benghazi.

3.  AppeasementThe Mohammed video bogeyman allowed Obama to do what his preferred policy is to the jihadists:  pretend that if we bend over backwards not to offend Muslims, everything will be sweetness and love between Islam and the West.

Continue reading...

23 Responses to Libyan Lie

  • “It ain’t lying if it advances the agenda.” Yogi Bubba

  • Donald,
    This search for the total evil of Obama is going to give you a heart attack…and I mean that literally. It’s already got T. Shaw changing the spelling of his last name. Let’s take Hitler. He was evil but he was not guilty therefore of every sin one could imagine. It was possible for Christians to sinfully slander Hitler by accusing him of sins outside his actual sins. An evil man is not a free target wherein slander no longer applies. Appease jihadists? Obama’s family is permanently in danger from Al Qaeda for the Bin Laden go ahead. I believe Al Qaeda will eventually strike them even decades from now. Obama either gets credit for all the Al Qaeda his people have killed or none of your favorite presidents get credit for anything they did.

  • “One of the few foreign policies successes of the Obama administration was the killing of bin Laden.”

    I’d say that’s credit.

    You are correct in saying that attributing sin/guilt falsely regardless of the evil extent of the individual so attributed is wrong. Bearing false witness is a sin, period, and about whom that witness is given has no impact on the sin itself, although it will certainly play a part in any atonement or penance.

    But the opposite is also true: it is equally wrong to excuse evils/sins by dint of an outstanding good. Hitler and the Nazis gave the world a number of excellent and still very useful technical advancements (VW Bug, anyone?) but that does not excuse him or them from the atrocities of the Holocaust or the guilt of starting the most costly war the world has ever known.

    So, Don did give credit where it was due, but that does not mean he has to give a pass to everything else about this administration that has gone so woefully, dangerously wrong.

  • Rubbish Bill from beginning to end. My heart is in excellent condition as attested to by my Doctor earlier in the week. I have never claimed that Obama is the embodiment of evil, but rather a fairly typical hack politician from Chicago. As to Obama and the topic of this post, there is no charitable explanation of what he did in the wake of the Benghazi attack, none. The attacks on al-Qaeda by Obama have been for purely domestic political considerations and because al-Qaeda can no more be made peace with than a treaty can be established with a pack of rabid dogs. His Cairo speech of June 4, 2009 illustrates his true policy, and contains such gems as these:

    “I have come here to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world; one based upon mutual interest and mutual respect; and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive, and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles – principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.

    I do so recognizing that change cannot happen overnight. No single speech can eradicate years of mistrust, nor can I answer in the time that I have all the complex questions that brought us to this point. But I am convinced that in order to move forward, we must say openly the things we hold in our hearts, and that too often are said only behind closed doors. There must be a sustained effort to listen to each other; to learn from each other; to respect one another; and to seek common ground. As the Holy Koran tells us, “Be conscious of God and speak always the truth.” That is what I will try to do – to speak the truth as best I can, humbled by the task before us, and firm in my belief that the interests we share as human beings are far more powerful than the forces that drive us apart.

    Part of this conviction is rooted in my own experience. I am a Christian, but my father came from a Kenyan family that includes generations of Muslims. As a boy, I spent several years in Indonesia and heard the call of the azaan at the break of dawn and the fall of dusk. As a young man, I worked in Chicago communities where many found dignity and peace in their Muslim faith.

    As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam. It was Islam – at places like Al-Azhar University – that carried the light of learning through so many centuries, paving the way for Europe’s Renaissance and Enlightenment. It was innovation in Muslim communities that developed the order of algebra; our magnetic compass and tools of navigation; our mastery of pens and printing; our understanding of how disease spreads and how it can be healed. Islamic culture has given us majestic arches and soaring spires; timeless poetry and cherished music; elegant calligraphy and places of peaceful contemplation. And throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/04/us/politics/04obama.text.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
    Obama has rose colored glasses for Islam and dark colored glasses for the US. I pity those unable, or unwilling, to grasp this truth.

  • Readers who want more than the Bin Laden kill…go here…

    http://abcnews.go.com/politics/t/blogEntry?id=14638964

  • Libyan Lie sounds like a good song title.

  • Well, duh. ABC news. Silly us.

  • “MSM’s so-called journalists do not report and will not so much as ask or investigate anything that does not advance the big liberal lie).

    Faked but accurate. For the liars truth, facts, realities, and history do not exist. They are putty in their hands. They use them to make a point, to do good as they see it. And whatever they need to twist or omit is justified by their purity of intentions – and they always have the purest of intentions – Exterminate the unborn! Sanctify sodomy! Sexual exploitation of young women! False but justified.

    Hate-filled liars despise facts and truth. They rely on hysterics, insults, lies and weeping and gnashing of teeth to advance their horrid ideas and destructive policies. The state-run MSM and PBR/S also eschew facts and truth, which are not susceptible to their calumnies, distortions, distractions, exaggerations, omissions, and outright lies.

  • Readers can check the interview here of Ali Soufan. one of few FBI who spoke Arabic back in the day of 2001 and who actually interrogated terrorists and received the FBI directors award for Excellence in Investigative work. He broke with CIA people on the need for waterboarding and was on O’Reilly refuting a CIA person with whom he disagreed on effectiveness of rapport versus torture. He praises Obama for the kills but also for broadening international contacts in the war on terrorism…hopes that a Romney group would not reverse the latter and gives Obama an A minus with criticsms near the end of the interview:

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/09/11/former-fbi-agent-ali-soufan-on-bin-laden-s-death-war-on-terror.html

  • Except CIA official Jose Rodriquez denies that Soufan was actually effective. In fact he points out how terrorists mocked him.

  • If Soufan were impartial, he’d rate Obama F-minus for intelligence: both military and IQ. E.G., the well-planned, organized/inside job diplomatic murders in Libya:

    Obama propaganda 24/7 said the Osama slaying was a huge victory: spucatum tauri.

    So what if Ali Soufan is/was against water-boarding (it’s one trick pony time again):

    I think Instapundit: “A thoroughly documented new report on the impact of US drone campaign was released by NYU School of Law and Stanford University Law School. Entitled “Living Under Drones: Death, Injury and Trauma to Civilians From US Drone Practices in Pakistan”, the report details the terrorizing effects of US drone assaults as well as the numerous, highly misleading public statements from US officials about that campaign. The study’s purpose was to conduct an “independent investigations into whether, and to what extent, drone strikes in Pakistan conformed to international law and caused harm and/or injury to civilians”.

    And there is this:

    “…American progressives cheered loudly when a similar question was posed by Al Gore in a widely celebrated 2006 speech he gave on the Washington mall denouncing the Bush/Cheney assault on civil liberties:

    “‘If the president has the inherent authority to eavesdrop on American citizens without a warrant, imprison American citizens on his own declaration, kidnap and torture, then what can’t he do?’

    “What has always amazed me about that is that, there, Gore was merely decrying Bush’s mere eavesdropping on Americans and his detention of them without judicial review. Yet here Obama is claiming the power to decide who should be killed without a shred of transparency, oversight, or due process – a power that is being continuously used to kill civilians, including children – and many of these same progressives now actually cheer for that.”

    Lesseee: Ali Soufan – Muslim?

    Dulce Islami inexpertis.

  • Ironic Bill that the interview of the very self serving Ali Soufan, who has been doing his best to stay in the public eye since he went public in 2009, was published on September 11, 2012, the date of the Benghazi attack and contains this nugget:

    “For the first time you have Muslim countries, European countries working together hand in hand,” Soufan explains. “It was clearly outlined in Obama’s speech in Cairo, [which] in the Middle East was viewed as ‘the time of unilateral action is not going to be there anymore.’ What he decided to focus on upon creating these partnerships to counter violent extremism, talked about human security, economic development, education, literacy, women’s rights, a lot of these issues.””

    Yeah, as Cairo and Benghazi demonstrated that day Obama has done a bang up job in getting Muslim countries on our side.

  • Bill,

    “Yogi Bubba” was a play on Yogi Berra (“It aint bragging if it’s true.”).

    You’re correct. I could not possibly have more disrespect for the racist autocrat currently slumming in the White House.

  • It is very hard to Trust Obama, his administration.
    The double speak flows….well like bung-lava!
    “We will draft a sensible conscience clause…”, “the Savings from not being in Afganistain…”, I’m upset.
    Trust is important, and my trust in his words and actions are low. His “trust account is empty” and I agree with Don’s 5 points.

  • Donald,
    I don’t think “countries” that are newly forming have perfect riot prevention techniques or terrorist preventions techniques…since even the US has had its riots and terrorist incidents.
    Here’s Judge Napolitano of Fox interviewing Soufan and at the end calling his book “great”. O’Reilly also interviewed him on Fox and that interview was respectful too. This Fox…Fox…not the NY Times..

    http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/1160137357001/eyewitness-to-the-war-on-terror/

  • Baloney Bill. The so-called Libyan government can’t even protect our FBI agents to go to the attack scene in Benghazi two weeks after the attack.
    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/28/fbi-probe-in-benghazi-as-close-as-400-miles-away/

    As for Cairo, if you don’t think the Muslim Brotherhood government was involved in the riots at our embassy I have some swamp land down in Florida to sell you. Then we have Pakistan, that grand American ally, holding a public holiday for violent protests over the Mohammed film, while the Transport Minister of Pakistan places a bounty for the murder of the maker of the Mohammed film.

    Napolitano is an isolationist and paleocon who believes that Abraham Lincoln was a tyrant. I view his opinion in the same awe as I would that of a bag lady screeching obscenities on the street. As for O’Reilly, not one of the great intellects of our day, he interviewed both Soufan and Jose Rodriquez and appeared to give greater credence to Rodriquez for what little that is worth.

  • Sounds awfully like the darling of conservatives, Leo Strauss.

  • The truth actually MPS is that almost all conservatives in America have never heard of Leo Stauss, let alone hailed him as their darling.

  • Sounds awfully like the darling of conservatives, Leo Strauss.

    I am not sure what you meant by this, but Leo Strauss in this country is a bogey in a deeply stupid discourse. This man, now nearly 40 years deceased, was a philosophy professor with almost no involvement in political discussion at any level. There were a couple of subcabinet officers in the Bush Administration who had taken a couple of courses from him during their undergraduate years and a widely admired critic of higher education (Allan Bloom) was a student and disciple of Strauss. That is the extent of the conduit of his ideas to contemporary Republican politics. It has not prevented the addle-pated in the palaeo nexus from positing some high level cabal of initiates manipulating public policy (with William Kristol as the exalted cyclops). Unless you are pleased to be mistaken for a latter-day manifestation of the tendencies that gave you the John Birch Society, I would suggest you not bring up the name Leo Strauss.

  • By denying Strauss’s influence Art and Don are demonstrating their complete allegiance to Strauss, because as we all know true Straussians are the ones most adamant in denying his influence. The fact that few outside of higher educational circles even claim to know who the man is therefore a sure-fire sign that the man’s philosophy completely permeates modern society.

    (That was sarcasm for the sarcasm impaired.)

  • “The so-called Libyan government can’t even protect our FBI agents to go to the attack scene in Benghazi two weeks after the attack.”

    Then how is CNN wandering around Bengazi picking up the odd diary left behind by the movers? The Admin has no intention of investigating this or any other inconvenient terror attack. They are in the process of accelerating the release of terrorists from Gitmo. They are going to keep the FBI in Tripoli until 2013 or 2017 depending.

    As I said somewhere else, there is also the issue that the Libyan government is permeated with Al Qaeda types as well as Brotherhood types.

  • Philosophy prof? Clueless clowns making up stuff about stuff.

    Last Phil class I attended was a final x in May 1970. The clueless clown asked me “Are you in the right place?” I was and I wasn.’t. I passed the useless required course and got my three vacuous credits.

    Bottom line Obama and stooges are 24/7 lying.

  • I was being flippant.

Bishop Thomas John Paprocki: Democrat Party and Intrinsic Evil

Thursday, September 27, AD 2012

Bishop Thomas John Paprocki of the Springfield, Illinois diocese minces no words as to what is at stake in this election:

My dear brothers and sisters in Christ:

Much attention was given at the Democratic National Convention held recently in Charlotte, N.C., to the fact that all references to God had been purged from the draft version of the party platform. After outcries of protest from outside as well as within the Democratic Party, the sentence with the same reference to God used in 2008 was restored to read, “We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

Before anyone relaxes and concludes that all is well now that the Democratic Party Platform contains a single passing reference to God, the way that this was done should give us pause. Convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa had to call for the voice vote three times because each time the sound level for the “ayes” and the “nays” sounded about even, far short of the two-thirds necessary according to convention rules to amend the platform. That did not stop the convention chairman from declaring, “The ayes have it!”

What is troubling about that is the blatant disregard for the rules and for the apparent wishes of about half the delegates. The reference to God is back in the platform apparently because President Obama wanted it back in. That may be fine for now, but if a future president wants references to God taken out, apparently that can be done regardless of the wishes of the delegates if that is what The Leader wants. That does not bode well for democracy in the Democratic Party.

Even more troubling is that this whole discussion about God in the platform is a distraction from more disturbing matters that have been included in the platform. In 1992 Presidential candidate Bill Clinton famously said that abortion should be “safe, legal and rare.” That was the party’s official position until 2008. Apparently “rare” is so last century that it had to be dropped, because now the Democratic Party Platform says that abortion should be “safe and legal.” Moreover the Democratic Party Platform supports the right to abortion “regardless of the ability to pay.” Well, there are only three ways for that to happen: either taxpayers will be required to fund abortion, or insurance companies will be required to pay for them (as they are now required to pay for contraception), or hospitals will be forced to perform them for free.

Moreover, the Democratic Party Platform also supports same-sex marriage, recognizes that “gay rights are human rights,” and calls for the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, the federal law signed by President Clinton in 1996 that defined marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman.

Now, why am I mentioning these matters in the Democratic Party Platform? There are many positive and beneficial planks in the Democratic Party Platform, but I am pointing out those that explicitly endorse intrinsic evils. My job is not to tell you for whom you should vote. But I do have a duty to speak out on moral issues. I would be abdicating this duty if I remained silent out of fear of sounding “political” and didn’t say anything about the morality of these issues. People of faith object to these platform positions that promote serious sins. I know that the Democratic Party’s official “unequivocal” support for abortion is deeply troubling to pro-life Democrats.

So what about the Republicans? I have read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin. The Republican Party Platform does say that courts “should have the option of imposing the death penalty in capital murder cases.” But the Catechism of the Catholic Church says (in paragraph 2267), “Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm — without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself — the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent.”

One might argue for different methods in the platform to address the needs of the poor, to feed the hungry and to solve the challenges of immigration, but these are prudential judgments about the most effective means of achieving morally desirable ends, not intrinsic evils.

Certainly there are “pro-choice” Republicans who support abortion rights and “Log Cabin Republicans” who promote same-sex marriage, and they are equally as wrong as their Democratic counterparts. But these positions do not have the official support of their party.

Again, I am not telling you which party or which candidates to vote for or against, but I am saying that you need to think and pray very carefully about your vote, because a vote for a candidate who promotes actions or behaviors that are intrinsically evil and gravely sinful makes you morally complicit and places the eternal salvation of your own soul in serious jeopardy.

I pray that God will give you the wisdom and guidance to make the morally right choices.

May God give us this grace. Amen.

Continue reading...

81 Responses to Bishop Thomas John Paprocki: Democrat Party and Intrinsic Evil

  • Listening to Bp. Paprocki say the bishops “lack the humility to speak on matters outside [their] competence” made me cheer and brought a tear of joy to my eye at the same time. He is defintely a minority amongst his brethren in the USCCB.

  • I forgot to add that he said that at the USCCB general meeting a few months ago.

  • May he be the first of many – not the last of the few.

  • It is SO refreshing to hear the truth! God bless you Bishop Paprocki! I would only ask you to continue to use your First Amendment Rights of freedom of speech and announce as a private citizen who you are voting for at the federal and state levels that will have a voice on the issues you mentioned.

    I would also ask you to send a copy of your statement to all of your brother bishops and ask them to join you.

  • Yet, I know Catholics who will still vote for Obama. They’re liberals who in their arrogance really believe they are smarter and morally superior to us “conservatives.” They tell me they see the “big picture” and “what’s best for the common good.” How they’re able to look pass child murder and sodomy always amazes me. I’m praying that the Holy Spirit will open their eyes and turn their hearts – for their sake and for the sake of our country.

  • Yes sir, that’s my bishop. My favorite lines: “In 1992 Presidential candidate Bill Clinton famously said that abortion should be ‘safe, legal, and rare.’ That was the party’s official position until 2008. Apparently, ‘rare’ is so last century that it had to be dropped”.

    “I would only ask you to continue to use your First Amendment Rights of freedom of speech and announce as a private citizen who you are voting for at the federal and state levels”

    Not sure I agree with that. Balloting is secret for a reason and I don’t think we should set a precedent of expecting or demanding that ANY citizen, including bishops, state whom they are going to vote for. Besides, I think the answer to the question of whom the Bishop is NOT going to vote for is pretty obvious. Beyond that, several morally acceptable alternatives are available (vote GOP, vote third party/write in, or don’t vote at all).

  • Well, actually Don the Kiwi, he seems more like the last of the few. Many prominent individual bishops like Cdl Dolan and Abp Chaput as well as USCCB as a whole, spend way too much time using their good offices carrying on about matters outside their competence. They spend way too much time making statements opposing capital punishment and defending illegal immigrstion. These statements are not only ill informed, but I believe they go to the lengths of being dishonest. Cdl. Dolan equated the state of AZ’s legitimate effort to deal with its illegal imigrtion problem (SB 1070) with the Klu Klux Klan. I do not see how that is not an act of libel. For a Catholic bishop, especially one of Dolan’s prominence to engage in such in act is a scandal. But yu can judge for yourself:

    http://www.catholic.org/politics/story.php?id=36322

    So, hearing Bp Paprocki tell his brother bishops at a USCCB to basically shut up on matters outside their competence was an understatement, but a breath of fresh air nonetheless.

    With few exceptions, the Church Militant in the U.S. is sorely lacking in adequate generals to lead in the war we are up against. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional in mmy opinion.

  • @Elaine Krewer

    “Not sure I agree with that. Balloting is secret for a reason and I don’t think we should set a precedent of expecting or demanding that ANY citizen, including bishops, state whom they are going to vote for. Besides, I think the answer to the question of whom the Bishop is NOT going to vote for is pretty obvious. Beyond that, several morally acceptable alternatives are available (vote GOP, vote third party/write in, or don’t vote at all).”

    Yes, “balloting” is secret if one wants it to be. But many prominent people publically tell people who they are supporting. This election is unlike any we have ever had. The Church, itself, has a stake in it that they can’t just rely on the Supreme Court to protect them; they have to protect themselves. “A bird in the hand is better than two in the bush,” and they have a bird in hand with this election. There is no way this man should be reelected president BUT he has lots of money behind him (I wonder why) and a lying news media and a fawning entertainment industry who will do all they can to protect and boost him up while trying to destroy his opponent. The Church has an army of people, but over half of them remain in and vote for the Decadent Party. Why? Because the bishops have failed in helping them to learn how to develop a properly formed conscience with their confusing booklet, “Faithful Citizenship.” This “instruction” booklet, created to supposedly enable a Catholic to discern how to develop a properly form conscience was intentionally written, I suspect, to enable a Catholic to “feel” correct in voting for who ever they want to. That is why after so many years of babies being murdered, and so many years of “Faithful Citizenship,” so many Catholics still give their name identification and votes to the pro-abortion, Decadent Party, and that includes a majority of the registered-to-vote clergy, and bishops, too.

    So, here we are, at a cross road. Catholics are the largest, single voting block for the Decadent Party. The bishops realize it; they enabled that to continue with “Faithful Citizenship” and have never really done anything to change it after seeing how Catholics continued voting. Do the bishops want to see the Supreme Court stacked with more pro-abortion justices? Do the bishops want to see more abortions paid for with taxpayer dollars? Do the bishops want to see theirs and their flocks’ freedom of religion continued to be destroyed? Do the bishops want to close down Catholic schools and hospitals? Do the bishops want to see marriage destroyed? Which party do the bishops what to see in power when Archbishop Weakland’s autobiography comes out in a month or two telling about his homosexual lifestyle as priest and bishop? Which party do they trust to treat the Church right, the Decadent Party or the Decent Party? Do they really want Catholics to vote for a third party or do a write in? No, it is time the bishops step up and lead by example. This is a spiritual war, not just an election. And God placed them in a leadership position to lead the troops into battle. It’s time to lead by example and tell us who THEY are voting for. That way Catholics will KNOW what the end result is of having a properly formed conscience.

  • Romans 1:28-30

    “They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed, and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant, and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil.”

    in 2012, “they” are concentrated among democrats.

  • If churches want to get political, they must be taxed like any other business.

  • First rate idea John. Right after the Federal and State governments begin paying Churches for the charitable work they do, the hospitals they provide and the schools they run. Every government budget in this country would collapse if governments had to pick up the slack caused by Churches ceasing to engage in charity.

  • The Church is made of people, and these people pay taxes. Even the priests and bishops surely pay income taxes the same as any other person who receives an income. So why should the Church (i.e., the people who make up the Church) have to pay taxes twice for their freedom of speech? Just because the liberal elite doesn’t like the truth in the message?

    PS, there are no taxes in either Heaven or Hell, and we all end up in one of those two places, Purgatory being a pit stop on the way for those bound for Heaven.

  • BTW, isn’t Planned Parenthood tax exempt? What about all the Eco-wacko enviro-nazi groups? They are politically active. If the Church is to be taxed, then why not them? Liberals never can their proposals to their logical conclusions.

  • @John

    “If churches want to get political, they must be taxed like any other business.”

    What is “political” about what the churches are talking about?

  • @John,

    Yes! We’ll start with the black racists that call themselves “the Reverend . . . ”

    And, move on to ACORN, every taxpayer-funded community group, etc.

  • My beloved American Catholics, this is the time to Vote for your Final Eternal Destination. The Catholic Church Divine Teachings of God’sTruth has already convicted anyone who will vote for Obama and his “Merchants’ of Death” Gospel. From far off here, we hope the Novena you have commenced to-day – the 29th of September, will influence you all to make the ONLY RIGHT DECISION.

  • God bless Bishop Paprocki. May the remainder of the American bishops follow his lead.We pray that God will give all of us courage in these difficult days.

  • [email protected] and all, there was a sermon on EWTN (repeats three times today) by the Bishop of Lincoln describing the spiritual essence of what is happening and how our prayer can help. I can’t do justice to his words about the power of the seven Archangels and the rest of them in helping us with those taken by the fallen angels; he said we pray for the souls of people controlled by the demons who tempt and destroy good.

    Novena from 9/29 (Feast of the Guardian Angels) to 10/7 (Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary) is for all to do in these days of the struggle.

    religiousliberties.org/novena/ has the prayer (s).

  • Parocki, should look a little closer at the alternative before he makes his proclamations. I know of few Catholics that can stomach the policies of selfishness, uncaring the the poor, seniors, & less educated by the alternative – they will all be voting the other way. shame shame Parocki

  • Too many Catholics LPM are precisely of your mindset. It apparently never enters into your, or their, calculations that the ruinous economic policies of Obama will ultimately lead to the slashing of the government handouts that seem to be the be-all and end-all for casting ballots. Beyond that, you care not a fig for abortion, gay marriage, the HHS mandate or a host of other issues where the current regime is directly opposed to the Catholic Church. You are selling out the Church for the Welfare State, and you will not even have the Welfare State much longer.

  • Donald, I’m afraid we are at very opposite poles on this issue.

    The Pope himself said national healthcare is a right.

    http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/11/19/pope-is-no-tea-partier-benedict-backs-guaranteed-health-care-fo/

    Gay marriage is what my neighbor does and does not infringe upon me. The fact that my neighbor can’t be with their partner in a hospital does seem like quite the travesty though.

    On HHS – why are we suddenly upset about coverage of contraceptives by Protestant employees at our facilities when they were covered before? (we know none of the Catholics are using them … right?). Perhaps we can require them to eat fish on Fridays or attend church on Holy Days of Obligation too.

    Don’t make a deal with the devil on a single issue. Change the single issue. Saving a party of selfish people is a herculean task.

    I could go on.

    You should list all of the ruinous Obama policies and lets go through them.

  • @LPM –

    “Parocki, should look a little closer at the alternative before he makes his proclamations. I know of few Catholics that can stomach the policies of selfishness, uncaring the the poor, seniors, & less educated by the alternative…”

    You must have misunderstood him. He WAS talking about the decadent Democrat Party, the party that loves intrinsic evil and doesn’t want to hear about God or the capitol of Israel in their party platform.

  • LPM, you are right: “Saving a party of selfish people is a herculean task.”

    The more we try, the worst the Decadent, Democrat Party gets.

  • Liberal progressive Democrats, placing Government as God and blasphemously making Obama their Christ, obviously do not think that conservative orthodox Christians possess any reading or critical thinking skills.

    The link that LPM gave goes to the Huffington Post, indeed a part of the Magisterium of satan’s church of liberal progressivism. However, the article fortunately includes a link to the Zenit article which records the Pope’s actual speech. That speech is here:

    http://www.zenit.org/article-31001?l=english

    Now the Pope said, “It is necessary to work with greater commitment at all levels so that the right to health is rendered effective, favoring access to primary health care.”

    Contrary to LPM’s assertion, the Pope did not say, “It is necessary to work with greater commitment at all levels so that the right to health care is rendered effective…”

    Nor did the Pope say, “Government must provide cost-free health care.” BTW, in John Chapter 12, when Jesus feet were being bathes with costly oil, Judas iscariot said that the oil could have been sold and the proceeds gone to feed the poor. Scripture says he did not state this because he cared for the poor, but because he carried the money purse and used to steal therefrom. So everytime I read of advocacy of social justice with my tax dollars being made by people like LPM, I think of Judas Iscariot.

    Now what LPM ignores is what the Pope did say towards the end of his speech, “Unfortunately, next to positive and encouraging results, there are opinions and lines of thought that wound it: I am referring to questions such as those connected with so-called ‘reproductive health,’ with recourse to artificial techniques of procreation entailing the destruction of embryos, or with legalized euthanasia. Love of justice, the protection of life from conception to its natural end, respect for the dignity of every human being, are to be upheld and witnessed, even against the current: the fundamental ethical values are the common patrimony of universal morality and the basis of democratic coexistence.”

    Additionally, if LPM is going to insist that we comply with the Pope’s words on health care by virtue of his office as supreme Pontiff, the Episcopus Primus Iter Pares, then equally so ought we to comply with the Pope’s words on the threat to liberty that the current culture of radical secularism (which sacramentalizes the infanticide of the unborn and the filth of homosexuality) presents. That speech is here:

    http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2012/january/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20120119_bishops-usa_en.html

    I shall be unequivocal:

    Death to Democracy – two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner!
    Defeat abortion and homosexual perversion!
    Long Live Liberty!
    Viva Cristo Rey!

  • “The Pope himself said national healthcare is a right.”

    You can look long and hard and you will never find any endorsement of ObamaCare by the Pope.

    “Gay marriage is what my neighbor does and does not infringe upon me. The fact that my neighbor can’t be with their partner in a hospital does seem like quite the travesty though. ”

    Changing the definition of marriage has no impact on you? Ridiculous. As for the hospital canard that is solved by a simple legal document called a power of attorney.

    “On HHS – why are we suddenly upset about coverage of contraceptives by Protestant employees at our facilities when they were covered before?”

    Because the government is mandating the coverage with no option for the employer to opt out. Does freedom of conscience mean nothing to you?

    “Don’t make a deal with the devil on a single issue.”

    Actually that is what you have done. “Take care of me Nanny State! Wah!” You sell out your Catholic birthright for a fool’s gold guarantee of being cared for by the State.

    If you are really interested in what the Pope says, go here to read his warning as to how religious freedom is under threat in America:

    http://the-american-catholic.com/2012/01/20/pope-benedict-religious-freedom-under-threat-in-america/

  • “Death to Democracy – two wolves and one sheep voting on what’s for dinner!”

    No Paul, Democracy is a grand thing. Our problem is not Democracy but the attacks on it.

  • Donald,

    I should make a difference between (1) Democracy being simply majority rules regardless of the right of the individual to life and liberty and (2) Democracy being a Constitutional Republic where the right of the individual to life and liberty is sacrosanct. The former resulted in the Athenian crowd voting that Socrates should die and the mob in the courtyard of Pontius Pilate crying, “Crucifige eum, crucifge eum!” The latter is what our nation once was and now is not. I am sorry that my comment does not include or address this distinction.

  • @donald:

    “In fact Pope Benedict joined WHO’s call for universal health coverage just before its report hit the press. He called health care a moral responsibility of government and an “inalienable right,” regardless of social and economic status or ability to pay. He cautioned that the privatization of health care should “not become a threat to the accessibility, availability, and quality of health care.””

    http://www.uscatholic.org/culture/social-justice/2011/01/papal-prescription

    You: “Changing the definition of marriage has no impact on you? Ridiculous. ”

    why? It doesn’t impact me, is there something special about you that you are impacted? It doesn’t impact a Catholic marriage, it’s a state definition.

    You: “Because the government is mandating the coverage with no option for the employer to opt out. Does freedom of conscience mean nothing to you?”

    Mark 12:17 “Well, then,” Jesus said, “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar, and give to God what belongs to God.” His reply completely amazed them.

    you: “Actually that is what you have done. “Take care of me Nanny State! Wah!” You sell out your Catholic birthright for a fool’s gold guarantee of being cared for by the State.”

    What is the Catholic position on the death penalty? I think it’s clear

    What is the Catholic position on helping the poor? I think it’s clear

    What is the Catholic position on taking care of children? I think it’s clear

    What is ….

    I could go on

  • “In fact Pope Benedict joined WHO’s call for universal health coverage just before its report hit the press.”

    Once again that is not an endorsement of ObamaCare as the opposition of the Bishops in this country indicate. I note that you did not address the concern of the Pope that I linked to about the assault on religious freedom by the Obama administration.

    “why? It doesn’t impact me”

    Don’t be deliberately obtuse. Heterosexual marriage is the foundation of our civilization. Homosexual marriage extends to a sexual perversion the same honored status of marriage to the union between man and woman blessed by Christ at Cana. That you can’t see how this impacts you is an indication of how unimportant the Faith is to you. The whole drive for homosexual marriage is directly contrary to the teaching of the Church that homosexual sex is always evil. It has nothing to do with marriage per se, but rather is another way that homosexual activists seek to compel people to act as if homosexuality is normal and good.

    “give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar,”

    Our consciences do not belong to Caesar and neither does our Church.

    “What is the Catholic position on the death penalty?”
    Actually Obama is not against the death penalty. The Catholic position on the death penalty right now, as opposed to the position of the Church for 1950 years, could charitably be called confused.

    “What is the Catholic position on helping the poor?”

    That we each have an individual duty to the poor. Christ did not spend time in Judaea crying out for Caesar to establish a welfare state.

    “What is the Catholic position on taking care of children?”

    That they are best taken care of by their parents in the bonds of Holy Matrimony. That the Church is opposed to homosexual adoption, something pushed by the Obama administration. That sex education is best left up to parents, as opposed to the State. That they are not to be slaughtered by the type of child murder called abortion.

  • The Catholic position on death penalty is clear: visiting the death penalty on the unborn is murder. The blood of 53 million innocents cries out to the Lord for vengeance, and Scripture says, “Vengeance is mind; I shall repay.” Payment time draweth nigh.

    The Catholic position on helping the poor is clear: each member of the Body of Christ is to do corporal works of mercy and not abdicate that responsibility to Caesar. It’s called personal responsibility and accountability.

    The Catholic position on taking care of children is clear: raise them in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

    No people who allow the death penalty to be visited on the unborn or who accept the sanctification of the filth of homosexual sodomy deserve health care. The people of Judah and Israel found this out the hard way. It took deportation by Nebuchadnezzer and Sennacherib to bring them to that realization. The wages of sin are death!

    “Seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness and all these things shall be added unto thee as well.” That’s the ticket to recovery.

    The Gospel of conversion and repentance precedes health and prosperity. All the time. Everywhere. And in every case.

  • Donald

    millions of Catholics and I disagree with you.

    You want to avoid providing healthcare to others, you confuse you religious belief with state actions, you are willing to vote for the party of the death penalty, you keep discussing some nanny state which is some concoction of the selfish.

    I must admit this quote “Heterosexual marriage is the foundation of our civilization. Homosexual marriage extends to a sexual perversion the same honored status of marriage to the union between man and woman blessed by Christ at Cana. That you can’t see how this impacts you is an indication of how unimportant the Faith is to you. The whole drive for homosexual marriage is directly contrary to the teaching of the Church that homosexual sex is always evil. It has nothing to do with marriage per se, but rather is another way that homosexual activists seek to compel people to act as if homosexuality is normal and good.” is funny. I for one find your suggestion that allowing my neighbor to be different and either an endorsement or encouraging it unsupported by mine or anyones commentary. I have no desire to live in your theocracy.

    good luck

  • This is amusing.

    Truth does not depend on what millions of Catholics think or don’t think. Truth is not subject to a Democratic vote.

    Scripture says that sodomizers, adulterers, fornicators, thieves, liars, murderers and drunkards do NOT get to enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. It doesn’t matter what millions of Catholics think. BTW, God destroyed Sodom and Gommorah because of their sexual filth. God does NOT change. He always does the same thing in the same way. So we should buckle up.

    Jesus came to establish the Kingdom of God which is a theocracy. And Heaven most assuredly is a theocracy where Scripture says the sexual perverts are unwelcome. On the other hand, chaste and celibate people of same sex attraction are welcome.

    So if someone doesn’t want to live in a theocracy, then the only other alternative is hell.

  • Once again you failed to address the statement of the Pope regarding the threat to religious liberty posed by the Obama administration.

    “You want to avoid providing healthcare to others”
    No what I want to do away with is ObamaCare. I have no problem with the State assisting the indigent who need medical treatment, but such a goal does not require turning over our healthcare system to the Federal government.

    “you are willing to vote for the party of the death penalty,”

    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.

    http://www.priestsforlife.org/magisterium/bishops/04-07ratzingerommunion.htm

    “you keep discussing some nanny state which is some concoction of the selfish.”

    If twere only true.

    ” I have no desire to live in your theocracy.”

    By your definition you have been living in a theocracy for some time if the definition of a theocracy is not having gay marriage. Since the Church is opposed to gay marriage I assume therefore that you think the Church is attempting to impose a theocracy. Here’s a hint: Catholic teaching that you don’t like does not constitute a theocracy.

  • “you are willing to vote for the party of the death penalty,”

    That would include Obama and the regime’s piratical, untrammeled drone assassination campaigns with no trial, no jury, no habeus corpus, no countless appeals, . . .

    I never imagined I would agree with Ralph Nader on anything. Obama is a war criminal.

  • “Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia”…..so you say

    I believe nearly 50M uninsured does

    Your primacy of a single issue versus a portfolio of selfishness exhibited by the party of selfish and vengeful people make no sense.

    You want the state to define marriage for our church. I don’t care what the state defines for marriage. I care what my church defines for marriage. If you care so much for their definition or marriage, you should care about their definition of divorce too….do you? I could go on.

    I’m still waiting for your response to your first wild assertion – please list all of the ruinous Obama policies and lets go through them.

    -guy

  • I would note once again that you have not addressed the warning of Pope Benedict as to the threat posed to American religious freedom by the Obama administration.

    “Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia”…..so you say

    I agree with the words but they are Cardinal Ratzinger’s, not mine

    “Your primacy of a single issue versus a portfolio of selfishness exhibited by the party of selfish and vengeful people make no sense.”

    Actually I believe that Obama’s enthusiastic support for the child murder known as abortion that snuffs out almost a million innocent lives a year in this country would be sufficient for no decent human being to give him any support whatsoever. As it happens, I also oppose Obama on a whole host of issues.

    “You want the state to define marriage for our church.”

    No, I want the State to recognize that marriage can no more exist between two homosexuals than it can between a man and his car. The attempt to transform marriage into something it is not should offend anyone with an atom of common sense.

    “I’m still waiting for your response to your first wild assertion – please list all of the ruinous Obama policies and lets go through them.”

    You will find hundreds of posts by me and others on this site listing chapter and verse as to Obama’s support for abortion, his HHS mandate, his insane fiscal policies, his ruinous economic policies, his contempt for American liberties, etc. Have a ball reading them.

  • Obama’s enthusiastic support? you should demonstrate the enthusiasm. I’m guessing you can demonstrate as much as you can his ruinous policies.

    you should be able to list them, it should be easy. Don’t expect me to do your work. Its your wild assertion.

    Ratzinger can say anything he wants, you quote it since it supports your position without defense of any of your other positions. Many Bishops / Cardinals say many things – should I gather a list of a few? I’m sure you will find many US positions and policies under attack.

  • I would note once again that you have not addressed the warning of Pope Benedict as to the threat posed to American religious freedom by the Obama administration.

    “Obama’s enthusiastic support? you should demonstrate the enthusiasm. ”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUl99id2SvM

    “you should be able to list them, it should be easy. Don’t expect me to do your work. Its your wild assertion.”

    The posts are there, read them. Even trolls have to work at this blog.

    “Ratzinger can say anything he wants”

    Yes, and since he is now Pope that gives added heft to his letter.

  • @LPM

    “please list all of the ruinous Obama policies and lets go through them.”

    Why don’t you list all of the successful Obama polices?

  • Obama’s enthusiastic support? Yyou should demonstrate how he has been enthusiastic. the enthusiasm. I’m guessing you can demonstrate his enthusiasm as well much as you have been able to demonstrate how his policies have been ruinous can his ruinous policies.

    Yyou should be able to list them, it should be easy. Don’t expect me to do your work. Its your wild assertion.

    Pope Benedict XVI Ratzinger can say anything he wants., Yyou quote him it since he it supports your position even though other statements contradict yours. without defense of any of your other positions. Many Bishops and / Cardinals have issued different statements say many things – should I gather a list of a few? I’m sure you will find many that are critical of American government US positions and policies under attack.

    Editor’s note: Just thought I would help you make your comment a little clearer.

  • LPM “I believe nearly 50M uninsured (does (have the same moral weight)”

    When you start fibbing about numbers you really lose me. You know that number includes 20 M illegal immigrants which Obamacare doesn’t cover since anyone who says it does is a liar right ? You know it includes another 15-20M who Choose not to have health insurance though they could afford it. One of my aunts fit that category. Compelling them to pay for health insurance may or may not be good policy but it is hardly providing the needy a Benefit. So we are left with 10 M with a real problem. Many of these only have short term gaps in coverage or they did until Obama took office and created the category of Out-of-the-Workforce whether-you-like-it-or-not. A 50 page bill could have taken care of this issue without the other 2650 pages tacked on. Finally like most Leftists you confuse medical insurance with medical care. Obama has explicitly stated on national TV that his (rationing) boards will deny care and tell people to take a pain pill (and die out of sight). But to you that is compassion because everyone except illegals of course has “Health Insurance”. Actually you were careful to avoid saying that everyone ( including illegals) doesn’t already have health Care in the US. What kind of health care does a bankrupt country provide? Let’s ask residents of Greece, Spain, Italy and the late great Soviet Union how that worked with their universal coverage.

    Finally let’s get real. Leftists like Obama and yourself want a single payer system. Obama has said so himself on tape. So have many Democrats. OK if single payer is so great, present the reasons to the public and convince them to go to such a system. The deception and corruption evident with Obamacare have poisoned the public’s opinion of it but Progressives like yourself still want to ram it through. Thanks for your compassion.

  • Rozin, Donald and God’s Angels, Saints and Saints-Militant, it is no use trying to drum sense into LPM& Company. They have sold their souls to the Devil. By and by they will come face to face with their Maker…..His words????? “”””THY WILL BE DONE””””. Let us just pray for them. God will win this War, as He has always Done when Satan raises his proud and arrogant head against Him.

  • I love my Catholic faith but the Church leaders are corrupt. The Church wanted Obamacare and lobbied heavily for it. They asked for abortion ‘neutral’ language which they didn’t get. Instead, they got a ‘universal healthcare system’ that pays for abortion, birth control and the morning after pill and will force them to pay also. It makes me cry they would push for a universal health system with a President whose first act as President was to reverse the Mexico City policy but our bishops are blind. Our Pope in First Things wrote an article in 2006 titled,”Europe and It’s Discontents” where he writes, “In many respects, democratic socialism was and is close to Catholic social doctirne and has in any case made a remarkable contribution to the formation of a social consciousness.” So, after Obama was elected he wrote his economic encyclical to give to Obama to let him know he’s on the same page except for abortion. Their economic ideas are alike and if the church wants something they are willing to ask for ‘abortion neutral’ language or call cops on their own parishoners who maybe trying to educate on candidates prolife record but it might threaten their tax exempt status. Ultimately, the Pope has showed his true stripes when he set policy regarding the sexual abuse in the Church and ignored all the abused children for the betterment of the Church. The Church leaders are all about themselves and their kingdom of brick and mortar, the laity and unborn are runover ultimately. We need religious freedom and conscience rights but mine have been run over to promote abortion around the world. I think the bishops are a little too late.

  • [email protected]

    Thank you but I’m not trying to convince LPM, I’m trying to drive him off. Progressives hate facts and thus history (and you know what Burke etc said about that). However they have an endless supply of agitprop techniques to dance around using words.

  • “Once again that is not an endorsement of ObamaCare as the opposition of the Bishops in this country indicate. I note that you did not address the concern of the Pope that I linked to about the assault on religious freedom by the Obama administration.”

    Now, Donald there were individual bishops who raised concerns about how a governement takeover of health care can be squared with the principle of subsidiarity. But the U.S. Bishops, by and large, seemed to have no problem with government run healthcare. The only reason the USCCB finally oppsed Obamacare was its funding of abortion.

    The U.S. Bishops are far more enthusiastic about opposing the death penalty and supporting illegal immigration (issues where a Catholic can faithfully take either side) than they are about opposing Obamacare, even post-HHS mandate.

    With illegal immigration the USCCB filed a friend of the court brief opposing AZ’s SB 1070. You even had Cdl. Mahony and now Cdl Dolan engaging in despicable, and I think libelous, attacks against SB 1070 (I link to Cdl Dolan’s attack in an earlier post on this thread). Did they do any such thing with Obamacare, even with its coverage of abortion? NOOOO!!!!

    I don’t think I need to go into how badly the bishops have allowed themselves to be expploited by anti-death penalty activists. Heck, even Bp. Paprocki’s presentation was fuzzy on that issue. He cites the 2nd Edition of CCC, which any theologically literate person knows is problematically worded with its lumping prudential judgments in with the doctrinal aspects.

    Like I have said before, until the bishops own up to how they have contributed to this mess, it will continue. Mark my word!!

  • Furthermore, I find it odd that Bp Paprocki didn’t just cite the then-Cdl Ratzinger 2004 Letter to Cdl McCarrick,which by the way was issued in Ratzinger’s offical capacity as prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which gives it magisterial heft independent of the fact that he is now Pontiff.

    It seems that our bishops are allergic to that letter because they never mention it when it comes to the death penalty.

  • “I have read the Republican Party Platform and there is nothing in it that supports or promotes an intrinsic evil or a serious sin. ”

    Read that again, you in the Decadent, Democrat Party. The Decent Party has nothing in THEIR party platform that is a “serious sin,” let alone an intrinsic evil. What more is needed to know to have a “properly formed conscience” in who to vote for?

  • Rozin, hear you, loud and clear. However, my experience (and I am a 74 year-old Cradle Catholic to-day) is that those who hate God and His One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church can never be outshouted. So, you can go on hammering them but they will never bend.

    @Greg….please remember Peter, the First Pope, denied His Master Three times and when Jesus was being crucified the whole lot of the Eleven, except young John, were nowhere to be found.

    And when Jesus appeared to them in the Upper Room where they had locked themselves out of fear, they were so ashamed. YET He did not disinherit them of the Apostolate He had bestowed upon them….and we are here, 2,000 year plus, hail and strong and have weathered more horrifying persecution and torture that this one on our hands.

    True, your Bishops were, no doubt, asleep when the Evil One was planning how to hit Christ’s Bride. But, believe me, He will defend her and all His faithful Flock . And we remain steadfast and strong and SHALL NEVER BOW OR KNLEEL before the Beast

  • Paul Ryan has said he is comfortable with Romney’s postion on abortion for the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother. Such is an intrinsic evil and a moral absolute. Please Google: “Paul Ryan on airplane comments on abortion” to confirm this. Tom Hoefling of the American Independent Party appears to be 100% in sync with Catholic Teaching.

  • %Ed Hummel,

    “Paul Ryan has said he is comfortable with Romney’s postion on abortion for the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother.”

    So is Pope John Paul II and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Read for yourself:

    “Pope John Paul II, in his groundbreaking 1995 encyclical Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life), stated that legislative compromise was morally acceptable in certain situations.

    ‘[W]hen it is not possible to overturn or completely abrogate a pro-abortion law, an elected official, whose absolute personal opposition to procured abortion was well known, could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of general opinion and public morality. This does not in fact represent an illicit cooperation with an unjust law, but, rather, a legitimate and proper attempt to limit its evil aspects’ (73).”

    “Doerflinger echoed this point in his comments for the Register.
    ‘The Church opposes all direct abortion and federal funding for all such abortion. But without supporting the exceptions, the bishops’ conference has supported the restrictions placed on abortion funding by the Hyde Amendment and similar laws for the sake of the good they do and the many lives they save.’”

    For the sake of the babies the only chance they have is if we elect the Decent Republican Party, the party that Bishop Poprocki says has NO positions supporting intrinsic evil and no serious sins, unlike the Decedent, Democrat Party. Not voting or voting for a third party only helps the Decedent, Democrat Party. They love if people did that. Don’t be a fool, vote for God and country and the only party that can defeat Obama.

  • If Obama is re-elected, his SCOTUS appointees will ensure that the worst abortion regimen on the planet will be in force until the Second Coming of Christ.

    A third party vote likely will assure Obama enshrines untrammeled abortion and tacit infanticide as the law of the land.

  • T. Shaw

    And don’t forget euthanasia for seniors now that hospitals will be fined if 1% of seniors have to be readmitted into the hospital within 30 days of being discharged this first year of Obamacare, 2% the second year of Obamacare, and 3% in the third year. Hospitals will find ways of not readmitting such patients to prevent from being fined. Thank you U.S. Bishops for supporting the initiation of euthanasia in our new “healthcare” universal coverage.

  • “If Obama is re-elected, his SCOTUS appointees will ensure that the worst abortion regimen on the planet will be in force until the Second Coming of Christ.”

    Maybe he doesn’t need to appoint a single one. John Roberts himself says he bows to elected officials actions, perhaps as homage to the Official Bower in Chief. John Marshall RIP

  • We need to rally to the support of such courage when it comes to the surface…Every call and letter of support to the Bishop Jenky’s and Paprocki’s is a stake in the heart of the diabolical…which I suppose would have to have one first. 🙂

  • Rozin: Truth.

    Stilbelieve: Thank you. We’ll see in November if most AARP members will vote for their executioner. Plus, Obamacare is a major reason no one is hiring . . . There are many reasons they didn’t institute it until after this election.

  • “@Greg….please remember Peter, the First Pope, denied His Master Three times and when Jesus was being crucified the whole lot of the Eleven, except young John, were nowhere to be found.”

    Yes, but are these actions we should condone? No, of course not. At least one can say that the Apostles were under a great deal of duress, whereas the bad behavior of some of our most prominent bishops is done in the freest country ever known to mankind…at least for now. Oh, by the way, the Peter repented, as did the Apostles who ran away.

  • “Oh, by the way, the Peter repented, as did the Apostles who ran away.”

    That should read “Peter repented” not “the Peter repented”.

  • John and LPM’s consciences deviate not a whit from the demands of the Left (and share the same bumpersticker depth), yet they pillory the rest of us.

    The Patriotic Association–it’s not just for Chinese collaborationists anymore.

  • “Tom Hoefling of the American Independent Party appears to be 100% in sync with Catholic Teaching.”

    If so, and Mr. Hoefling doesn’t deviate from Church teaching on other indisputables (the HHS mandate, etc), then vote for him.

  • This comment by the bishop has been nothing but extremely helpful for those of us working to win Catholic votes for the President. Keep on keeping on!

  • How any Catholic can support the most pro-abortion president in the history of our nation Kurt is beyond me. At least Catholics who sacrificed to the Emperors of Rome had the excuse of doing so to save their necks. May God forgive all of you misguided souls.

  • “This comment by the bishop has been nothing but extremely helpful for those of us working to win Catholic votes for the President. Keep on keeping on!”

    Catholics for Obama makes about as much sense as Chickens for Colonel Sanders.

  • “Faithful Citizenship,” operates in sovereignty, a sovereignty that constitutes government, a sovereignty that is disembowled by the rejection of the Supreme Sovereign.

  • I wonder if “Kurt” is also including the Bishop’s reference to the Dem convention rejecting mention of God three times after it was taken out of the platform. It was reinserted only after a media firestorm forced Obama to respond. I guess I can see how Catholics for Obama might ignore the disconnect between their religion and abortion. However for Obama Catholics to also be cool about the Dems dismissing God (and Obama has been quite consistent himself in that regard) seems like they are making religious affiliation a complete sham. Maybe Kurt means “Recovering Catholics” for Obama.

  • John says:

    “If churches want to get political, they must be taxed like any other business.”

    The Supreme Court Justices are not paid for JUSTICE. The Supreme Court Justices receive compensation. How can one be paid a price for Justice? The Catholic Church proclaims the Gospel. Donations are given, along with gifts, and behests. You would tax donations and gifts? The church property is held in trust for all generations. Isn’t it bad enough Obama has mortgaged our posterity for the next ten generations? You would have our posterity not even have the benefit of the proclaimation of the Gospel through our gifts and donations? Perhaps the Gospel proclaimed by the Church sounds political to you, but it is God speaking to all men and Divine Providence for all men, a Divine Providence prayed for and invoked in our Declaration of Independence. Can one get any more “political” than to invoke our founding principles of all men being created equal and endowed by “their Creator” with unalienable rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness? Anyone who denies our founding principles denies his own citizenship in America. The Catholic church is just reminding you, John, that when you choose to reject God, you reject your founding principles and lose your citizenship in America and become a citizen of wherever that might be. Lenin called his supporters “useful idiots.”

    The Church speaks God’s truth to the people. The state is to speak God’s truth to the people. The Church is the servant of God. The state is the servant of the people. There was no HHS Mandate in the ACA when Congress passed the ACA. Now, there is an HHS Mandate in Obamacare, inscribed after Congress passed the ACA. Who in God’s world has sovereign authority to cheat and swindle their constituents and then tell the people that it is good for them? Wife beaters and batterers assault their wife and then tell them that they asked for it. The HHS Mandate is an abuse of power and ought to be put on the ballot, along with abortion, and SS unions and prayer ban. You do believe in democracy, don’t you John?

  • Kurt,

    You won’t be getting into Heaven if you vote democrat.

  • Too much involvement with politics T. Shaw and I wonder if anyone can get into Heaven. (Of course I suspect the same thing regarding the Law, so pray for me!)

  • From Dale’s link:

    “According to Smith’s group, “Faithful Citizenship meetings were organized by the Diocese of Cleveland with the goal of aiding Catholics in preparing themselves to vote this November. The forums, led in part by open Obama-supporter Karen Leith, downplay abortion and religious freedom, issues of irreducible importance to Catholic voters.”

    Similar efforts in my diocese. Lots of equivocation. “Yes, Dems support abortion but Repubs are opposed to programs helping the poor, therefore vote for Dems.”

    In all charity, the bishops are disordered in their reasoning and at risk for cooperation with evil if they do not come out more forcefully against the Dems as Bishop Paprocki has.

  • Don’t miss the anti-Mormon pushpolling campaign either, Phillip.

    And the Obama campaign’s refusal to actually condemn the tactic they are benefitting from.

    “We say it’s out of bounds, but we’re not going to call on others to forego pro-Obama hatemongering.”

  • As to the pro-Obama campaigns in the parishes, I’m not remotely surprised. There are plenty of self-styled Catholics who proclaim their vociferous opposition to–and even hatred of–the pro-life movement. All without any consequences, so why should we expect anything different?

  • Upon further review, let me apologize for that brutal comment to Kurt. I don’t have any right to ascribe such nasty motives to him, and I am sorry for doing so.

  • This is what we do when we are being ripped apart from the “inside”! May the Holy Spirit, attracted by gestures like the one Dale just offered, move back into our lives…please Dear Lord.

  • Mac,

    I add you to the list, which is quite long, sadly. Pray for the living and the dead, a Sprirtual Work of Mercy.

    Here is a spritual suggestion for our catholic Obama-Worshipers. Pray for the love of humility [The First Joyful Mystery]. We are all sinners. We must constantly pray for forgivenesss; for grace to avoid sin; and for deliverance from evil. No one is good except God.

    All things are possible, including our salvation, for God.

  • “Don’t miss the anti-Mormon pushpolling campaign either, Phillip.”

    We have had quite a few drive by Trolls breathing fire and brimstone about Mormons the past few months and they all go straight to our trash file.

  • I deleted two comments. Please people, we don’t need to wish for people’s death on this blog. Stop it.

  • Thank you Paul. Folks, crazy comments just hurt our cause and will not be tolerated on this blog.

  • Don, I applaud you for removing such comments. As I have freely admitted, I am not sure how much success of those of us Catholics supporting the President have obtained by our own efforts. 90% of the persuadable Catholics we have won over to supporting the President has been caused by a negative reaction to the acts of Catholics attacking the President. Those Catholics who at this stage might still vote one way or the other have already concluded that they do not risk damnation by a vote for Obama. In fact, I’m confident a majority of Catholic intended Romney voters don’t think their vote is helping to save them from hellfire.

  • Pingback: A PARTIAL CRITIQUE OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY PLATFORM | Catholic Labor Network