Featured Post

AmeriKKKa continues her inevitable (Yep.) slide into Third World madness.

Behold the fleas with which that mangy orange cur has infested conservatism! SUCKERS! Neo-Nazis battling commies in the streets? Welcome...

"Let no freedom be allowed to novelty, because it is not fitting that any addition should be made to antiquity. Let not the clear faith and belief of our forefathers be fouled by any muddy admixture." -- Pope Sixtus III

Friday, March 10, 2006

"Vicariously liable"

Does this mean I am "vicariously liable" to support Angelina Jolie's love child just because I thought she was hot in her last movie?

JAKARTA, Indonesia -- Exxon Mobil Corp. said yesterday it will appeal the ruling by a U.S. judge allowing villagers to sue the oil giant for reputed abuses by Indonesian troops at facilities it operated in Aceh province.

The decision last week by U.S. District Judge Louis Oberdorfer was welcomed by human rights groups, but Exxon said it could set a precedent of companies abroad being held "vicariously liable" for actions by the government of the host country.

The International Labor Rights Fund, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, filed suit in 2001 on behalf of 11 unnamed villagers in Aceh, on the northern part of the island of Sumatra, accusing Exxon's Indonesian subsidiary of allowing its facilities to be used by soldiers to torture and rape Acehnese villagers. (Thanks to The Washington Times for the heads up.)

Religion of Tedious Ignorance and Death Update.

I know, I know...

Iranian University Holds 'Holocaust Myth' Conference...

Water signs on Saturn moon raises possibility of extra-terrestrial saloons.


LEFT: Marvin the Martian wonders if he should buy another round.


Whiskey and water, anyone?

I prefer mine straight, but these hard-drinking scientists seem to be genuinely excited.

The potential discovery of water on one of Saturn's moons would add a new environment in the solar system where life could exist, according to scientists.

NASA's Cassini spacecraft made the surprising find on Enceladus during its mission around Saturn and the ringed planet's natural satellites.

The probe may have found evidence of liquid water that erupts like geysers from Yellowstone park in the western United States, NASA said Thursday.
"The rare occurrence of liquid water so near the surface raises many new questions about the mysterious moon," NASA said.

"We realize that this is a radical conclusion -- that we may have evidence for liquid water within a body so small and so cold," said Carolyn Porco, Cassini imaging team leader at the Space Science Institute in Boulder, Colorado.

"However, if we are right, we have significantly broadened the diversity of solar system environments where we might possibly have conditions suitable for living organisms," Porco said.

The discovery should make Enceladus a research priority along with Saturn's largest moon, Titan, where the European Space Agency's Huygens probe landed in January 2005, scientists said. (Thanks to Breitbart.com and Drudge for the heads up.)

The next battleground in the war on Big Babykilling? Tennessee.

KATU in Portland, Oregon (of all places!) brings us this war story from the newly opened Tennesseean Front.

The state Senate on Thursday passed a proposal to amend the Tennessee Constitution so that it doesn't guarantee a woman's right to an abortion.

The 24-9 vote was the first step of many toward officially amending the state constitution. The measure would go before voters if the General Assembly approves it twice over the next two years.

The state Supreme Court has ruled that the Tennessee Constitution grants women a greater right to abortion than the U.S. Constitution.

Imagine that. I'll bet you $20 they could find a right to marry a dolphin if they want.

Abortion rights supporters are attacking the measure as a stepping stone to prohibiting all abortions in Tennessee if the U.S. Supreme Court overturns the landmark abortion decision in Roe v. Wade.

We can only hope. And pray.

"The resolution is an all-out attack on the women of Tennessee and seeks to rob women of their right to make choices about their own health, safety and personal welfare," said Hedy Weinberg, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee.

Heehee!

Sen. David Fowler, a Republican sponsor of the bill, proposed a similar resolution last year that cleared the Senate but stalled in a House committee.

"I regret this will cast me as being hardhearted, unsympathetic and unkind but that's not who I am," Fowler said.

Wow. Stand up and be a man. Tell the world you are trying to save little kids from being chopped up and thrown in the trash.

"Politics doth make cowards of us all."

Tennessee has a long process for amending its constitution, requiring approval by both chambers in session of the General Assembly, two-thirds approval by both chambers in the next session, and then approval by voters. (Thanks to Drudge for the heads up.)

Fyodor's Headlinks. (Antique media edition.)

LEFT: U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney speaks during his keynote address to the U.S. Labor Department's 2006 National Summit on Retirement Savings at the Willard Hotel in Washington March 2, 2006. REUTERS/Larry Downing (Emphasis mine. Get the joke, kiddies? And they wonder why nobody takes them seriously.)

REUTERS runs 'Cheney retire' picture on wire...

WASHINGTON POST to slash 80 newsroom jobs -- today...




(Thanks to Drudge for the heads up.)

Another sports story. (But it's really about Catholicism.)

A Miracle from Coogan's Bluff
by Steve Rushin

On Oct. 3, 1951, Ed Lucas raced home from school in Jersey City to see, on the family's new Philco, Bobby Thomson win the pennant for his beloved New York Giants. The 12-year-old then ran outside to celebrate on the sandlot, where he was promptly hit between the eyes by a line drive, a blow that detached both retinas and left him permanently blind.

Ed's mother, he likes to say, was a professional boxer. (She boxed apples and oranges at the A&P warehouse.) That winter Rosanna Lucas marched her deeply depressed son to the American Shops, a Newark men's store, where she introduced him to part-time employee Phil Rizzuto, a Yankees star who befriended the boy.

Rosanna also wrote to Giants manager Leo Durocher about Ed, who asked her to bring her son to the Polo Grounds. "We went on June 14, 1952," Ed says. "My mother waited outside on the centerfield porch because women weren't allowed in the clubhouse. I met Bobby Thomson and all the Giants. Almost every player brought me a bottle of soda. I couldn't drink them all."

That fall Ed enrolled at St. Joseph's School for the Blind, a boarding school in Jersey City, where the nuns demanded that he make his bed and match his clothes. When he walked the strange hallways with his arms out in front of him, Frankenstein-style, his house mother, Sister Anthony Marie, slapped his wrists down to his sides. When he protested that he couldn't see, she said, "Isn't that a shame? We're all in the same boat here. Pick up your oar and start rowing."

If only we had nuns like that these days, the world would be a much better place.

For all you pansies out there filled with hatred of The One, True Church, keep reading.

In 1962 Ed graduated from Seton Hall with a degree in communication arts, after which he, and his tape recorder, became fixtures in the Shea and Yankee Stadium press boxes. The players he interviewed for sundry New Jersey radio stations and newspapers often interrupted his questions to ask their own. In 1965 Mets rookie Ron Swoboda asked Ed, "Did anyone ever describe this ballpark to you?" Told no, Swoboda took him by the hand and led Ed on a lap around the warning track, where they ran their hands along the outfield wall, reading its contours as if they were written in Braille.

That same year Ed married. Eventually he had two sons, Eddie and Chris. But when the boys were four and two, respectively, Ed's wife, like Ed's Giants, left him forever.

I assume this is Mr. Rushin's Creative Writing 201 way of saying Mrs. Lucas died. (Keep reading, kiddies.) May God have mercy on her soul.

He raised the boys as a blind single parent with superhuman powers. Or so it appeared to Eddie and Chris, who boasted at school that their father could read with the lights out. "I wanted their lives to be as normal as possible," says Ed.

For Eddie and Chris it was not unusual to wake up and see Billy Martin drinking coffee at their kitchen table. Yankee Stadium became the boys' second home. Says Chris, "Huge stars like Mickey Mantle would tell me my dad was their hero."

Many years later Phil Rizzuto was in his local flower shop in Union, N.J., when the florist told him about her niece, Allison Pfeifle, a nurse whose detached retina left her legally blind and no longer able to work as a nurse.
Rizzuto asked Ed if he'd be willing to give Allison a pep talk. Ed and Allison talked on the phone for several years before they met in person. On their first date the two baseball nuts went to Shea Stadium, where Ed introduced Allison to one of his manifold friends, then Dodger Darryl Strawberry.

Ed is now 67. His former house mother, Sister Anthony Marie, is 88. She still calls Ed to ask how he's doing and if he needs anything. "I know now that those nuns saved me," Ed says. "If it wasn't for them, I'd have spent my life on a corner with a cane and a cup."

Amen to that, Brother! (Memo To The Haters: Nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah!)

On March 10 Ed and Allison will be married in a small ceremony in an ancient cathedral -- they will exchange vows in Yankee Stadium, across the East River from the long-vanished Polo Grounds. When Allison walks down the aisle, she'll walk from the Yankee dugout to home plate. Ed's best men are the boys he raised, 39-year-old Eddie and 37-year-old Chris. The guest list includes Phil Rizzuto, former Yankees catcher Rick Cerone and former Yankees manager and G.M. Gene Michaels. "It is so touching to me because all my dad has ever done is sacrifice for other people," says Chris. "He's never once complained about his life and in fact has always felt blessed to have his family and friends. I think the universe, in a way, is now blessing him back."

Bless and protect them, Lord.

"Baseball took my sight," says the giddy groom-to-be. "But it also gave me my life." (Thanks to Sports Illustrated for the heads up.)

Evans & Novak KNOW.

The Evans-Novak Political Report

March 8, 2006
Washington, D.C.
Vol. 41, No. 5b


GOP Congress in open rebellion against Bush.

The Republicans' Doomsday scenario remains a possibility

GOP Doomsday:
Since everyone -- including panicky GOP congressmen -- seems to be talking about a "probable" Democratic takeover of the House, we thought it would be appropriate to lay out the precise scenario in which this could happen. What follows is an account of the GOP's doomsday scenerio, which would result in a Democratic majority with 218 to 220 seats (a one to five-seat margin).


Same-sex marriage could bury Democratic governor in Wisconsin

We go three-for-three in our Texas primaries predictions

Two Illinois House primaries will be very close -- we pick the winners.


For a free e-mail subscription go here.

13 terrorists in Iraq now know the truth.

From ABC News:

Iraqi authorities hanged 13 insurgents (Ah, yes. Insurgents. Of course the freely elected authorities of Iraq couldn't possibly be right in calling them terrorists. Here's a simple test for all you kiddies out there to help tell the terrorists from the insurgents. Terrorists attack innocents and insurgents attack military assets. - F. G.) Thursday, marking the first time militants have been executed in the country since Saddam Hussein was ousted, the government said. A series of explosions, including a car bomb that struck a Sunni mosque, and a shooting killed 16 civilians and wounded 31 as a dust storm enveloped the capital.

The U.S. military, meanwhile, confirmed claims that a mass abduction from a security firm was the work of kidnappers masquerading as Interior Ministry commandos.

In political developments, Shiite politicians said they had asked Kurdish President Jalal Talabani to convene parliament March 19, one week past the constitutional deadline, marking an apparent compromise in the battle over a second term for Shiite Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari.

The Cabinet announcement listed the name of only one of those hanged, Shukair Farid, a former policeman in the northern city of Mosul, who allegedly confessed that he had worked with Syrian foreign fighters to enlist fellow Iraqis to kill police and civilians.

"The competent authorities have today carried out the death sentences of 13 terrorists," according to the statement.

It said Farid had "confessed that foreigners recruited him to spread the fear through killings and abductions."

A judicial official said the death sentences were handed down in separate trials and were carried out in Baghdad.

"The 13 terrorists were tried in different courts and their trials began in 2005 and ended earlier this year," an official of the Supreme Judiciary Council said, speaking on condition of anonymity due to fears of reprisal from insurgents.

Today is a Day of Abstinence.

Abstinence
The law of abstinence requires a Catholic 14 years of age until death to abstain from eating meat on Fridays in honor of the Passion of Jesus on Good Friday. Meat is considered to be the flesh and organs of mammals and fowl. Also forbidden are soups or gravies made from them. Salt and freshwater species of fish, amphibians, reptiles and shellfish are permitted, as are animal derived products such as margarine and gelatin which do not have any meat taste.

On the Fridays outside of Lent the U.S. bishops conference obtained the permission of the Holy See for Catholics in the US to substitute a penitential, or even a charitable, practice of their own choosing. They must do some penitential/charitable practice on these Fridays. For most people the easiest practice to consistently fulfill will be the traditional one, to abstain from meat on all Fridays of the year. During Lent abstinence from meat on Fridays is obligatory in the United States as elsewhere.

Those who are excused from fast or abstinence
Besides those outside the age limits, those of unsound mind, the sick, the frail, pregnant or nursing women according to need for meat or nourishment, manual laborers according to need, guests at a meal who cannot excuse themselves without giving great offense or causing enmity and other situations of moral or physical impossibility to observe the penitential discipline.

Aside from these minimum penitential requirements Catholics are encouraged to impose some personal penance on themselves at other times. It could be modeled after abstinence and fasting. A person could, for example, multiply the number of days they abstain. Some people give up meat entirely for religious motives (as opposed to those who give it up for health or other motives). Some religious orders, as a penance, never eat meat. Similarly, one could multiply the number of days that one fasted. The early Church had a practice of a Wednesday and Saturday fast. This fast could be the same as the Church's law (one main meal and two smaller ones) or stricter, even bread and water. Such freely chosen fasting could also consist in giving up something one enjoys - candy, soft drinks, smoking, that cocktail before supper, and so on. This is left to the individual.

One final consideration. Before all else we are obliged to perform the duties of our state in life. Any deprivation that would seriously hinder us in carrying out our work, as students, employees or parents would be contrary to the will of God.---- Colin B. Donovan, STL

What do you call it when they don't see how they have swerved into self-parody?

I am certain the Germans have a six syllable long word for it.

Murtha to Receive JFK Profile in Courage Award
(CNSNews.com) - Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.), the subject of a recent Cybercast News Service investigation into his military and political record, will receive the John F. Kennedy Profile in Courage Award for his stance against the Iraq war. Full Story

Yet another reason to reelect Rick Santorum.

Pittsburgh's other newspaper: Anti-Santorum political group raises funds

An independent political group critical of U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum is raising thousands of dollars from contributors that include entertainer Barbra Streisand and media mogul Robert F.X. Sillerman, whose company owns "American Idol."

A group of Pennsylvania political operatives formed The Lantern Project last year as a tax-exempt organization known as a 527 group, and IRS filings say the group's purpose is to educate the public on issues in the 2006 elections.

Their public presence at the moment is limited to an anti-Santorum Web site known as "Santorum Exposed," but organizers say they are looking at many different ways of communicating with voters, including television ads.

Saint of the Day and daily Mass readings.

Today is the second Friday of Lent. It is a Day of Abstinence.

Today is the Feast of the Martyrs of Armenia. They were forty soldiers who died rather than renounce their Catholic faith. Pray for us, all you angels and saints.

Today's reading is
Ezekiel 18:21-28.
Today's Responsorial Psalm is
Psalms 130:1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8.
Today's Gospel reading is
Matthew 5:20-26.


[Links to the readings will be from the NAB until I can find another chapter and verse searchable Douay-Rheims Bible on-line.]


Everyday links:

The Blessed Virgin Mary
The Rosary
Our Mother of Perpetual Help
Prayers from EWTN
National Coalition of Clergy and Laity (dedicated to action for a genuine Catholic Restoration)
The Catholic Calendar Page for Today


Just in case you are wondering what exactly Catholics believe, here is

The Apostles Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son Our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.He descended into Hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into Heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. Amen.


Memorare

Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that any one who fled to thy protection, implored thy help or sought thy intercession,was left unaided.Inspired with this confidence, I fly unto thee, O Virgin of virgins my Mother; to thee do I come, before thee I stand, sinful and sorrowful; O Mother of the Word Incarnate, despise not my petitions, but in thy clemency hear and answer me. Amen.


St. Joseph, her most chaste spouse, pray for us.


Prayer to St. Anthony, Martyr of Desire

Dear St. Anthony, you became a Franciscan with the hope of shedding your blood for Christ. In God's plan for you, your thirst for martyrdom was never to be satisfied. St. Anthony, Martyr of Desire, pray that I may become less afraid to stand up and be counted as a follower of the Lord Jesus. Intercede also for my other intentions. (Name them.)


PRAYER TO SAINT MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the divine power, thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

Thursday, March 09, 2006

The testimony of Faheem Thomas-Childs' mother.

From Philly.com:

Patricia Arnold remembers the message to her son Faheem Thomas-Childs - the same admonition she has given to all her children for years - when she sent him off to school on Feb. 11, 2004.

"Watch out for the cars, watch out for strangers, and if somebody's shooting, duck," Arnold said in testimony yesterday.

If you are one of those responsible for making the world this kind of place, I am certain there is a particularly nasty circle of Hell waiting for you.

Faheem, 10, was shot in the head outside the entrance to his North Philadelphia elementary school that day, caught in the crossfire of what prosecutors said was a battle between drug gangs. Two of the alleged instigators of the gunfire, Kennell Spady, 21, and Kareem Johnson, 22, are on trial in the murder case.

Prosecutors remained confident even though several witnesses have backed away from statements they made to police about the gun battle, in which more than 90 shots were fired within minutes.

Seconds after the gunmen fled, Philadelphia Police Officer Eugene Frasier arrived and found Faheem lying unresponsive on the ground by Peirce Elementary School.

Faheem's condition was so dire, he said, that officers drove him directly to Temple University Hospital. There, a school official handed Frasier a backpack found next to Faheem to help police learn the boy's identity. When he opened the backpack, a Valentine's Day card fell out, the officer said.

"It said, 'I love you, Mom,' " Frasier testified.

May God have mercy on his soul.

The 11-year veteran officer said in an interview later that seeing that card left him in tears.

His description of the Valentine cleared half the courtroom - the half with Faheem's family - as several began weeping uncontrollably.

Arnold said her son picked up the card, which encouraged its recipient to have a heart check-up, at a local drugstore.

"He always cared," she said. "He cared so much."

After the shooting, officials pleaded for help from an outraged public and mustered a $100,000 reward. But fear of reprisal from those involved, officials said, has made it difficult to get information.

That was evident when the trial opened Tuesday, when the first witness before Common Pleas Court Judge Jane Cutler Greenspan - Spady and Johnson waived their right to a trial by jury - said she could no longer recall what she earlier swore she saw.

And yesterday, another witness, Russell Brown, said he no longer remembered being at the scene of the shooting despite previously identifying several alleged participants.

"I'm not even sure where I was at the time," Brown, 42, testified.

Brown and Renee Williams - also 42 and also remembering little yesterday - had told police they had seen both defendants near the school about the time of the shooting.

Prosecutors said such obstacles are more common than not in homicide cases in the city.

"It angers me. You're disappointed. You're frustrated," Assistant District Attorney Mark Gilson said. "I still find it hard to accept the fact that these people can't come into court and tell the truth."

With that, Gilson pointedly complimented the testimony of Letitia Briscoe, 28, who was unflinching in her recollection of the day.

She said she was walking down the street when she saw a man holding a toddler muttering to himself and then later heard him saying: "It's not the right place. There's kids out here."

Briscoe said she then saw another man walking from a car and coming toward the first gesturing wildly, cursing and yelling.

" 'We're going to do this,' " Briscoe recalled the man saying. " 'We're going to do it right now.' "

Then three men emerged from the car.

She said that as she walked away, she heard gunfire start and then continue from a variety of weapons. She said she took cover behind a junked car and heard bullets ricocheting, glass breaking and children screaming.

Moments later, she said, she saw the car the men had exited speeding away in reverse.

Faheem's mother said two of her daughters were turned away by a crossing guard during the shooting. When they returned home, she said, they told her a boy had been shot.

She sent a daughter back to the school to see if Faheem was all right. Arnold said her daughter told her that she did not see him and that everyone in his class was crying.

Then she said she looked out the window and saw a police officer sobbing outside before knocking on her door.

She was taken to the hospital, where her family - including eight children in addition to Faheem - held vigil for five days.

"I told my kids to stop crying," Arnold said. "I didn't want that to be the last thing he heard."

Bless and protect Faheem's family, Lord.

Struggling to maintain its popularity in an increasingly hostile universe, The Find The Hottest TV News Babe Contest battles on.



Here are the babes of KTBC in Austin, Texas.

Possibly the last Teaport Dome Scandal Update.

Drudge: DUBAI FIRM TO GIVE UP STAKE IN U.S. PORTS -- AFTER CONGRESS SAYS DEAL DEAD...

United Arab Emirates-owned DP World said Thursday it would transfer its operations of American ports to a U.S. "entity" after congressional leaders reportedly told President Bush that the firm's takeover deal was essentially dead on Capitol Hill.

"Because of the strong relationship between the United Arab Emirates and the United States and to preserve that relationship ... DP World will transfer fully the U.S. operations of P&O Operations North America to a United States entity," Edward H. Bilkey, DP World's chief operating officer, said in a statement.

The announcement did not specify which U.S. company would be involved. (Read DP World's statement -- PDF)

The UAE firm's purchase of P&O, the British company that manages cargo and passenger terminals at several ports on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, has stirred up bipartisan opposition.

Unusually rancorous debate on the issue has split Bush from his GOP allies in Congress at a time when the president's approval ratings have plunged and midterm elections approach. (Read a timeline of the ports deal)

A source involved in talks between the White House, Congress and DP World told CNN the exact meaning of the UAE firm's statement is unclear, in part because the details of the transaction have not been worked out.
"The next steps are very hard to predict at this point, either in terms of who they'll actually sell to and in terms of what it means for U.S. relations in the region," the source said.

A source told CNN that the White House believes DP World's American assets would be sold to a U.S. firm.

Out of the mouths of babes...

The Kids Are Alright
Bradley Lehman of Hockessin, Del., weighs in with a letter to the editor of Wilmington's News Journal:

Because I am 17 years old, some people might say that I am not mature enough to understand many issues. However, let me just say that I get more laughs reading the opinion page than I ever have from the comics.

Delawareans seem to be fixated on bashing President Bush and proposing new conspiracy theories whenever they seem convenient.

President Bush did not cause Hurricane Katrina or the complications afterwards. New Orleans was built below sea level so they should have seen it coming and made preparations themselves.

If Dick Cheney shoots someone by accident on his own time, it is none of your business and neither he nor the president has any obligation to tell you about it.

Finally, it seems unreasonable to me that Bush was able to graduate from Yale University, be elected governor of Texas, and earn the respect and confidence of enough of his peers in the Republican Party to be nominated as their presidential candidate if he is indeed as dim-witted as you say.

I am willing to wager that the majority of Delawareans who get their information from this sorry excuse for a newspaper have barely enough brainpower to govern their own lives, let alone governing a nation of almost 300 million.


Note to pedants: We know alright isn't a word; but please take up any complaints with the World Health Organization.

And "governing" should be changed to "govern". But that stuff is minor. He is at least ten times smarter than Boobra Stresshand.

The prospects of the Ds versus the Rs in November's House races.

From Best of the Web Today:

As Jay Cost notes on RealClearPolitics.com, Republicans so far are defending 17 open House seats, vs. just 9 for Democrats. But "the Democrats enjoy little-to-no real advantage because of open seats":


In 2006, the quality of Republican open seats is very poor from the Democrats' perspective. Consider the following:

Of the 17 open Republican seat districts, Bush won 15 in 2000 and 2004. Bush's median percentage of the vote in 2000 in all 17 was 55%. In 2004 it was 57%

Of the 17 open Republican seats, Bush increased his percentage of the total vote by an average of 3% between 2000 and 2004.

The median Cook Partisan Voting Index of these 17 districts is
Republican +5. In other words, the median district of these 17 tends to vote Republican 5% more than the nation.

Simply stated, Democrats are not salivating at this set of 17. These are not the sorts of districts that have shifted against Bush and the GOP enough to give the Democrats a real shot.

Also, MoveOn.org is still actively campaigning for Democrats, and as Donkey Cons Lynn Vincent and Robert Stacy McCain note, "MoveOn has never won anything":

They failed to prevent Clinton's impeachment, failed to help Dems take back Congress in 1998, failed to elect Al Gore, failed to help Gore win the Florida recount--failed, failed, failed. By the time 2004 rolled around, MoveOn's presence in any political controversy was a certain bellwether of failure: Whatever side MoveOn is on, the other side wins.


Most recently, the Cons note, MoveOn used the campaign of Ciro Rodriguez against moderate Democrat Rep. Henry Cuellar as a fund-raising tool--and helped lead Rodriguez, who lost to Cuellar two years ago by a few dozen votes, to a drubbing earlier this week.

The Theology of the Body: 53. Life in the Spirit Based on True Freedom

In his General Audience of 14 January 1981, the Holy Father continued his catechesis on Theology of the Body by further examination of St. Paul's teaching on life according to the Spirit. It is purity of heart, which is the necessary condition for charity and true freedom.


Life in the Spirit Based on True Freedom

Continuing his weekly catechesis, the Holy Father addressed the following message to the numerous pilgrims gathered in the Paul VI Hall.


1. St. Paul writes in the Letter to the Galatians: "For you were called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another. For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself'" (Gal 5:13-14). We have already dwelled on this enunciation. However, we are taking it up again today, in connection with the main argument of our reflections.

Although the passage quoted refers above all to the subject of justification, here, however, the Apostle aims explicitly at driving home the ethical dimension of the "body-Spirit" opposition, that is, the opposition between life according to the flesh and life according to the Spirit. Here he touches the essential point, revealing the anthropological roots of the Gospel ethos. If the whole law (the moral law of the Old Testament) is fulfilled in the commandment of charity, the dimension of the new Gospel ethos is nothing but an appeal to human freedom. It is an appeal to its fuller implementation and, in a way, to fuller "utilization" of the potential of the human spirit.

Freedom linked with command to love

2. It might seem that Paul was only contrasting freedom with the law and the law with freedom. However, a deeper analysis of the text shows that in Galatians St. Paul emphasizes above all the ethical subordination of freedom to that element in which the whole law is fulfilled, that is, to love, which is the content of the greatest commandment of the Gospel. "Christ set us free in order that we might remain free," precisely in the sense that he manifested to us the ethical (and theological) subordination of freedom to charity, and that he linked freedom with the commandment of love. To understand the vocation to freedom in this way ("You were called to freedom, brethren": Gal 5:13), means giving a form to the ethos in which life "according to the Spirit" is realized. The danger of wrongly understanding freedom also exists. Paul clearly points this out, writing in the same context: "Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another" (ibid.).

Bad use of freedom

3. In other words: Paul warns us of the possibility of making a bad use of freedom. Such a use is in opposition to the liberation of the human spirit carried out by Christ and contradicts that freedom with which "Christ set us free." Christ realized and manifested the freedom that finds its fullness in charity, the freedom thanks to which we are servants of one another. In other words, that freedom becomes a source of new works and life according to the Spirit. The antithesis and, in a way, the negation of this use of freedom takes place when it becomes a pretext to live according to the flesh. Freedom then becomes a source of works and of life according to the flesh. It stops being the true freedom for which "Christ set us free," and becomes "an opportunity for the flesh," a source (or instrument) of a specific yoke on the part of pride of life, the lust of the eyes, and the lust of the flesh. Anyone who lives in this way according to the flesh, that is, submits—although in a way that is not quite conscious, but nevertheless actual—to the three forms of lust, especially to the lust of the flesh, ceases to be capable of that freedom for which "Christ set us free." He also ceases to be suitable for the real gift of himself, which is the fruit and expression of this freedom. Moreover, he ceases to be capable of that gift which is organically connected with the nuptial meaning of the human body, with which we dealt in the preceding analyses of Genesis (cf. Gn 2:23-25).

The law fulfilled

4. In this way, the Pauline doctrine on purity, a doctrine in which we find the faithful and true echo of the Sermon on the Mount, permits us to see evangelical and Christian purity of heart in a wider perspective, and above all permits us to link it with the charity in which the law is fulfilled. Paul, in a way similar to Christ, knows a double meaning of purity (and of impurity): a generic meaning and a specific meaning. In the first case, everything that is morally good is pure, and on the contrary, everything that is morally bad is impure. Christ's words according to Matthew 15:18-20, quoted previously, clearly affirm this. In Paul's enunciations about the works of the flesh, which he contrasts with the fruit of the Spirit, we find the basis for a similar way of understanding this problem. Among the works of the flesh Paul puts what is morally bad, while every moral good is linked with life according to the Spirit. In this way, one of the manifestations of life according to the Spirit is behavior in conformity with that virtue which Paul in the Letter to the Galatians seems to define rather indirectly, but which he speaks directly of in the First Letter to the Thessalonians.

Virtue of self-control

5. In the passages of the Letter to the Galatians, which we have previously already submitted to detailed analysis, the Apostle lists in the first place among the works of the flesh: fornication, impurity and licentiousness. Subsequently, however, when he contrasts these works with the fruit of the Spirit, he does not speak directly of purity, but names only self-control, enkrateia. This control can be recognized as a virtue which concerns continence in the area of all the desires of the senses, especially in the sexual sphere. It is in opposition to fornication, impurity and licentiousness, and also to drunkenness and carousing. It could be admitted that Pauline self-control contains what is expressed in the term "continence" or "temperance," which corresponds to the Latin term temperantia. In this case, we would find ourselves in the presence of the well-known system of virtues which later theology, especially Scholasticism, will borrow from the ethics of Aristotle. However, Paul certainly does not use this system in his text. Since purity must be understood as the correct way of treating the sexual sphere according to one's personal state (and not necessarily absolute abstention from sexual life), then undoubtedly this purity is included in the Pauline concept of self-control or enkrateia. Therefore, within the Pauline text we find only a generic and indirect mention of purity. Now and again the author contrasts these works of the flesh, such as fornication, impurity and licentiousness, with the fruit of the Spirit—that is, new works, in which life according to the Spirit is manifested. It can be deduced that one of these new works is precisely purity, that is the one that is opposed to impurity and also to fornication and licentiousness.

Called to holiness

6. But already in First Thessalonians, Paul writes on this subject in an explicit and unambiguous way. We read: "For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from unchastity; that each one of you know how to control his own body(1) in holiness and honor, not in the passion of lust like heathens who do not know God" (1 Th 4:3-5). Then: "God has not called us for uncleanness, but in holiness. Therefore whoever disregards this, disregards not man but God, who gives his Holy Spirit to you" (1 Th 4:7-8). In this text we also have before us the generic meaning of purity, identified in this case with holiness (since uncleanness is named as the antithesis of holiness). Nevertheless, the whole context indicates clearly what purity or impurity it is a question of, that is, the content of what Paul calls here uncleanness, and in what way purity contributes to the holiness of man.

And therefore, in the following reflections, it will be useful to take up again the text of the First Letter to the Thessalonians, which has just been quoted.

NOTE

1) Without going into the detailed discussions of the exegetes, it should, however, be pointed out that the Greek expression to heautou skeuos can refer also to the wife (cf. 1 Pt 3:7).

Spending plan would eliminate 150 programs.

Don't hold your breath, kiddies. The Repansycans don't really have the stones.

From
The Right Angle, a blog at Human Events Online comes some wishful thinking.


By: Ivy J. Sellers
Posted 03/08/06
04:30 PM

Here's a breakdown of the Republican Study Committees budget proposal, according to the RSC press release:

RSC Budget:

Balances the budget within the budget window

Includes pro-growth tax policy (guards against automatic tax increases)

Makes no changes to Social Security

Makes real reductions in discretionary spending

Includes reconciliation/entitlement reform

Increases defense spending

Decreases foreign aid

Significantly restructures three cabinet agencies

Eliminates federal programs

Includes budget process reform

Note: The 1995 "Contract with America" budget did all of these things.


The "Contract with America: Renewed" proposed by the Republican Study Committee would eliminate at least 150 programs from the FY 2007 budget.Here are a few that stand out:

The NASA Education Program: designed to encourage students to study space-related disciplines, the federal government already operates and funds 207 educational program -- this one is a duplicate.

Economic Assistance to Egypt: Egypt is the second largest recipient of U.S. foreign assistance, but according to the proposal, "its human rights record remains poor" and "Egyptian authorities continue to mistreat and torture prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, hold detainees in prolonged pretrial detention, and occasionally engage in mass arrests without charge." (Note: funding through the separate Foreign Military Financing Program would continue.)

U.S. Travel and Tourism Administration: Designed to promote the U.S. to foreign travelers, the International Trade Administration does the same thing. Most states have their own programs as well.

Corporation for Public Broadcasting: Taking in $400 million annually, the CPB still continues to run "questionable programming" -- like sex education partially paid for by the Playboy Foundation -- and popular programs such as "Sesame Street" could fund PBS itself.

National Endowment for the Arts: The public pours enough into the arts, no federal funding is needed (Billions were privately donated in 2001 -- the NEA's $105 million that year made up less than 0.4%).

Education Programs for Native Hawaiians: Since they aren't a tribe, only a racial group, it's unconstitutional that Native Hawaiians would receive more than federal funding than other ethnicities. Financial assistance is already provided through other programs.

Ms. Sellers is news producer for Human Events Online.

You think you know because the NYT tells you so. But you don't know.

When will everyone realize that maximizing the number of murdered children is the goal of totalitarians like the fools at the NYT?

Michael J. New, at
Human Events Online, exposes the fact twisting necessary to produce the desired results.


The New York Times on Monday published a front-page article, "Scant Drop in Abortion Rates if Parents are Told," that reported the newspaper's conclusion that recently enacted parental involvement laws have not reduced the incidence of abortion among teens. On its surface, the newspaper's statistical analysis appears convincing, but a closer look at its data and methodology call its conclusions into question.

The article's reporters tracked the percentage of pregnancies among girls under age 18 that end in abortion before and after the passage of parental-involvement legislation in six states. The passage of such legislation, according to the Times' analysis, has little effect on the percentage of pregnant minors who obtain abortions. Furthermore, says the article, following the enactment of parental-involvement legislation, minors' childbearing decisions continued to track those of women ages 18 to 19, who are not directly impacted by parental-involvement legislation.

This Times' analysis, however, contains several significant shortcomings. First, it examines data from only six of the approximately twelve states that have passed parental involvement laws since the mid-1990s. Second, its abortion data come from state health departments, which researchers agree tend to be unreliable; academics who study the incidence of abortion nearly always use data from either the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) or the Alan Guttmacher Institute (AGI) because these sources employ more reliable collecting and reporting mechanisms. Finally, the Times analyzes the percentage of pregnancies that end in abortion rather than the percentage of teens who have abortions. Because relatively few teens give birth each year, the Times' measure can fluctuate dramatically, making the data difficult to analyze properly.

Furthermore, the Times ignores the likelihood that the presence of parental-involvement laws may reduce abortions not only by influencing the decisions of girls who are already pregnant, but also by reducing the number of teenage girls who become pregnant at all. An analysis of the percentage of total teen pregnancies that end in abortion will not lend any great insight into the effectiveness of parental-involvement laws in reducing abortions by changing minors' sexual behavior.

Indeed, a more rigorous analysis of parental-involvement laws, such as I performed last year, tells a considerably different story. Using data on teen abortions from the Centers for Disease Control (now updated to include every year until 2002, the last year for which data are available) and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau, I calculated more accurate teen abortion rates than is possible with the Times' data. Teen abortion rates reflect the approximate likelihood that a girl between the ages of 13 and 17 in a particular state will undergo an abortion in a particular year...

Due to time constraints, we now move to further action...

It is regrettable that the Times reporters refused to acknowledge academic research that contradicts their conclusions. This continues the newspaper's trend of poor reporting on abortion statistics over the last decade. For example, during the 2004 election season, the Times reported Glen Harold Stassen’s erroneous finding that abortions had increased during the George W. Bush's presidency. When the Alan Guttmacher Institute later released more comprehensive data showing that abortions had actually declined since President Bush's inauguration, the Times was among the media outlets that failed to report the finding, much less correct its own record.

The Times reporters, like Stassen, ground their conclusions in data from the health departments of a small sample of states. The Times' analysis also overlooks much contradictory evidence rooted in superior data. Policymakers and citizens should have access to conclusions based on the highest quality data and research methodology. Researchers, policy organizations, and media outlets like The New York Times should be committed to upholding the highest standards for the research that they present to the public. In this case, the "The Paper of Record" fell far short of that ideal. The Times could begin to remedy that failure by making public its reporters' datasets and methodology, which so far it has been unwilling to release.

Mr. New is an assistant professor at the University of Alabama.

Feminists to Women: Shut Up and Do As You're Told, Stupid

Don Feder simply poleaxes the left-fascist women-haters:

Back in the 1980s, when conservative social critics suggested it was better for the mothers of young children to stay home (instead of consigning them to day-care gulags), feminists were furious.

"How dare you tell women what to do!" they screeched. "The nerve -- trying to tell us how to live our lives!"

So, guess who's now telling women how to live, and excoriating them for thinking independently? Feminists. Under a veneer of empowerment, the movement has always been fascistic. It's instructive to now see the sisters goose-stepping out of the totalitarian closet, truncheons raised to smash errant skulls.

No surprise here. The left always does what it accuses its enemies of doing.

Leading the charge is Linda Hirshman, lawyer, professor and scourge of stay-at-home moms.

Recently, ABC's Good Morning America (which my friends at the Media Research Center call "Good Morning Morons") showcased Hirshman's rant on two consecutive shows, in segments titled Mommy Wars: To Work or Stay at Home? and How to Raise Kids: Stay Home or Go to Work?

Typical of what passes for balance on the networks, Good Morning America afforded roughly 80% of each segment to Hirshman's views. Dissenters got nodding notice to maintain the pretence of fairness.

Hirshman has attained celebrity status by alerting us to the under-reported crisis of our time -- despite decades of feminist indoctrination (delivered from the classroom to entertainment television -- where what used to be called housewives are practically nonexistent) -- women are actually choosing to stay at home and nurture their children. Global terrorism, global warming – kids' stuff, by comparison.

ABC cited census data showing 54% of mothers with a graduate or professional degree no longer work full-time. This is bolstered by Hirshman's own study of 30 women whose wedding announcements appeared in The New York Times in 2003 and 2004. Only five are now working full-time outside the home. Ten work part time. The rest lead lives unsatisfactory to Hirshman and her allies.

Did you ever noticed how some people constantly screech in favor of "choice" until your choice gets in the way of their power? Then you get to see the political thugs as they really are.

Feminists are threatened by this phenomenon. It's ideology -- and not the interests of women, individually or collectively -- that drives them.

Hirshman's position: Stay-at-home moms are leading impoverished lives, wasting their educations, short-changing their children (who miss the joys of being raised by total strangers who are paid to care about them) and doing incalculable damage to the cause of women's rights.

Isn't that the euthanasia argument? "Your life is meaningless and useless. Therefore I will kill you."

Curious, eh kiddies?

"I think it's a terrible mistake for these highly educated and capable women to make that choice (choosing children and home over career), Hirshman declares. "I am saying an educated, competent adult’' place is in the office." Yes, I think we got that.

Heehee.

The Ms. Magazine Poster Person isn't buying the argument that raising the next generation is in any way, shape or form fulfilling. "I would like to see a description of their daily lives that substantiates that," Hirshman harrumphs. "Their description of their lives does not sound particularly interesting or fulfilling for a complicated person, for a complicated, educated person," she adds.

You're not complicated, sweetie. You're just stupid. (Of course, I can see how that might make everything seem complicated to you.)

What Hirshman means is: "I don't find their lives particularly interesting or fulfilling -- and my judgment is the measure of all things." And to think, feminists have been accused of elitism.

I detect a strong hint of solipsism hanging about this Hirshman dame.

Hirshman belittles those women who believe there's no substitute for mom. She pushes a proposition absurd on its face -- that there is no difference in the "happiness levels" of children consigned to the Joyful Tots Detention Center, versus those raised at home.

Heehee. I'll bet ol' Don doesn't like government schools either.

In the first place, only someone with a PhD. (a complicated, educated idiot) thinks happiness levels can be measured. And what about the disease and abuse (physical and sexual) rampant in day care? How about the fact that children in day care tend to be more aggressive and less socialized that their raised-at-home peers?

Have you ever witnessed the heart-rending spectacle of a three-year-old crying and pushing its mother away -- screaming that it wants to be taken to day care? Nor will you.

Right on, Brother.

As a counterpoint to Hirshman, Good Morning America presented Debbie Klett, a mother who left a job in ad sales and founded a magazine called Total 180, to spend more time with her kids.

Klett: "For me, I feel it is vital to be there for my children every day, to consistently tend to their needs, to grow their self-esteem, and to praise them when they're right, guide them when they're not, and to be a loving, caring mom every minute of the day."

Why, the anti-social wretch!

Heehee.

To clinch her argument, Hirshman notes the divorce rate is over 40%. These ninnies, says she, they devote themselves to hubby and kinder, then they're cast aside in a divorce and see their standard of living take a nosedive.

But it was feminists in the '70s who pushed no-fault divorce, which -- they maintained -- would liberate women from stultifying marriages. Now they're using the divorce rate to scare women into the workforce. Talk about chutzpah.

SURPRISE!

Hirshman has a prescription for the ticking of biological clocks: "Have a baby. (If you must.) Just don't have two," which makes work outside the home difficult.

Also, Hirshman advises, find Mr. Mom -- a guy who's into diapers and dirty dishes. "You can either find a spouse with less social power (read: money) than you or find one with an ideological commitment to gender equality (read: gender sameness)."

I can just picture the personal ad: "Feminist seeks socially inferior, self-neutered male who believes that men and women are emotionally androgynous. Objective: A matrimonial merger and the production of one child, who will be raised by the proverbial village on The Feminist Mystique and Our Bodies, Our Selves (between viewings of Thelma and Louise and G.I. Jane)."

Heehee!

In the '80s, young women had a word for such fine specimens -- "wimp."

Linda Hirshman is doing a great service to humanity. She is glaringly obnoxious proof of what conservatives have been saying for decades -- feminists hate the family. (Hirshman: "The family -- with its repetitious, socially invisible, physical tasks -- is a necessary part of life, but allows fewer opportunities for full human flourishing than public spheres like the market or government.")

Like that cow believes in the market.

BTW, don't you think she means "repetitive" instead of "repetitious"?

In other words, the female insurance executive or the female junior college instructor (lecturing a roomful of bored freshmen in a 101 course) is engaged in stimulating, fulfilling, socially useful activity, while the mother who sees a human being developing on a daily basis, and shapes that life more than anyone else, is a brain-dead drudge and a dupe.

There are a lot of conservatives-from-the-waist-up who believe the exact same thing.

Here's the ultimate irony: Feminists are anti-feminine. (That's not irony. It is a logical conclusion of those in rebellion against Reality. - F. G.) They reject hearth and home, procreation and childrearing (unless it's done by "professionals"). They deny the maternal instinct. They condemn the feminine urge to nurture and to create a safe haven from the perils of modern life. (They also deny the male imperative to serve and protect.) Everything that's distinctive about their sex, they abhor.

Except when they need to exploit those differences to get what they want.

Because they hate their nature, they are self-loathing. Most are miserable -- and deservedly so.

For almost 20 years, I worked in a newsroom with these resentful, envious, humorless harpies. An uglier lot you will never find -- this side of Alien vs. Predator.

Instant digression: Check out E. Michael Jones' Monsters of the Id and his ideas on the Alien movies.

Most were deeply unhappy with their lives, always ready to take offense at imaginary slights, convinced that any lack of advancement was due to a chauvinist conspiracy and angry at those who challenged feminist dogma. They were about as much fun as Hillary on a bad hair day (speaking of resentful, envious, humorless harpies).

Who in their right mind would take life advice from such spiritually misshapen creatures? ABC News, of course.

This article was originally posted at GrasstopsUSA.com.
(Thanks to Human Events Online for the heads up.)

CINO Democrasses Update.

The Forces of Reality strike back at the 55 Democrass congressthings who put the power of Blasphemy, Buggery, and 'Bortion above the love of God. Michael Westfall writes at Human Events Online:

Catholic League President William Donohue said that the Democrats who signed this document "are trying to convince the public, and especially Catholics, that one can be a good Catholic and differ with the Catholic Church on abortion.

"The Catholic Democrats' response to Donohue was that his statement was an "ideologically-driven condemnation of this serious effort to address the whole range of Catholic issues."

This is ridiculous and is very misleading.

They suggested that Donohue was parroting the Republican line on abortion, that reversing Roe v. Wade is the only answer. This is more double talk and supports their "new direction" away from the Catholic Church and its teachings. In reality the overturn of Roe v.Wade is the only solution that will stop this baby-killing in its tracks.

Amen to that, Brother.

While these Democratic leaders say that they agree on the "undesirability of abortion" their statement is painfully void of any reference to stopping abortion in the Democrat party’s platform. If they are honestly against abortion then why don’t they put solid language in their platform to stop abortion? Could it be that abortion is not quite as undesirable to them as they suggest and that Donohue is correct?

Yep.

This political fighting back and forth garners the headlines and shamefully supersedes in importance the real issue which is that millions more of our unborn will be sacrificed on the altar of American politics until politicians come together and address this issue.

National Director of Priests for Life, Rev. Frank Pavone also quickly asserted that these legislators have made a big mistake by introducing a bundle of contradictions into the debate.

Lord, bless and protect Father Pavone and his good work.

For these Democratic leaders to loudly proclaim that America must protect its most vulnerable citizens and then from the same mouth declare that they will not vigorously protect America's totally defenseless unborn children is political double talk. It is sheer hypocrisy.

It's worse than hypocrisy. I suspect Mr. Westfall is just being polite.

Rather then continue America's holocaust of the unborn, these powerful politicians should have been ceaselessly using their influence to educate the public to this horrendous procedure. They should have been using the authority of their leadership positions to eradicate abortion rather than linking up as a group with a certified pro-choice leader activist such as Congresswoman DeLauro who was once Executive Director of a major organization whose sole purpose is to keep abortion alive. These Democrats have never been properly taken to task on their ineffectiveness relative to ending abortion. It is time to take them to task.

Amen to that, too!

These Democrats know the score, and they can't plead ignorance. How can any civilized person look into the tormented face of an aborted baby, see the tiny limbs that were ripped apart and not have any feeling for this child? How can they have no remorse and not actively and honestly work to end this gruesome practice and dark stain on America? This is insane!

No. it is rebellion!

Our nation would be up in arms if any innocent segment of Americans were physically ripped apart, burned beyond recognition with painful saline solutions and then flushed down the toilet like a piece of waste. It would be unacceptable, as it should be. If any Americans were pulverized in the industrial strength garbage disposals or had a scissors put to the back of their heads and their brains removed, people would be in shock. To even suggest it sounds barbaric, yet that is precisely what abortionists can legally do to our unborn thanks to our Supreme Court and the political group of people that call themselves our government’s leaders. They will soon want to be re-elected, and they will soon be asking you for "your" support.

I'd like to think we would be outraged if, say, American Jews were being killed like we kill babies. But the evidence suggests otherwise. Sure, killing babies is easier because they are silent and invisible. But what if the Jews went quietly, convinced they were only being relocated for their own protection. Would we notice? Would you notice?

Because these liberal politicians have been looking the other way and refusing to take a leadership position, they have enabled the assembly-line murder factories for future generations of Americans. So far, America has murdered through abortion well over 46,000,000 of our pre-born. It is truly an American holocaust. What must God think when he looks down at the carnage we have visited upon our innocent unborn children.

The American Shoah. May God have mercy on our souls.

BTW, congrats to Big Babykilling. You've now passed Stalin's murder total.

Now these Democrats have decided to clearly and callously distance their party from their church and therefore the word of God. They say that they want to "reserve the right to obey (their) conscience rather then church teachings". This is a betrayal to fellow Catholics. Who can deny this obvious fact?

It is a rebellion against their Creator and His Son who died to redeem their sins.

This is obviously politically motivated and is pre-election posturing, but this time with tremendous "wiggle room" and a profound twist. That wily twist is that they are making a meaningful "public break" with the Catholic Church to which they all belong.

Only God knows for sure if they belong.

By taking their new convoluted non-position on abortion, they now appear as double-talking fence sitters who once professed to be unequivocally anti-abortion but now take the political position of confusion. Confusion is political deception at its worst.

America needs strong governmental leaders of conviction not weak leaders that lack the courage, strength and sincerity to back their beliefs legislatively. To say one thing and then do the direct opposite is to be a hypocrite. You can't pick and choose whatever truths you want from the Bible to match your governmental party. God’s word doesn’t work that way.

It is plain, and it is simple. There are many pro-life Catholic voters in America who are taking note as to who signed this statement, and who didn’t. American voters are not chumps. They are sickened that America's baby-killing machine continues on without interruption due to the silence and confusion of politicians, just like Hitler’s gas chambers did many years ago.

Baby-toirs.

These Democrats will have a very tricky time convincing the voters, particularly Catholic voters that they can disagree with the Catholic Church on abortion and still remain first-rate Catholics.

There are plenty of Catholics who vote pro-Death. I would be surprised if any of these 55 CINOs loses in November.

Many Democrats who signed on to this pact may get the shock of their political career when they are sent packing as they find that in addition to putting themselves above the teachings of their church, they have also committed political suicide. They may be in dire need of a new profession. Informed and committed Catholics may not vote for a political candidate with opposite fundamental beliefs to their church beliefs.

Let's hope and pray that turns out to be true.

Just like the rest of us, these leaders will ultimately face God's judgment just like the rest of us when they step out of this life. That will be a time and place where doubletalk and double standards won't work. Their refusal to follow the tenets of the Bible and their faith, when they could have made a huge difference to correct this injustice to humanity, will be made intensely apparent to them personally.

AMEN!

For those in our nation who know better but remains silent, or even worse support any politician from any party who refuses to actively fight abortion makes us complicit and as guilty as they are.

AMEN, AMEN, AMEN!

It Takes A Village To Staff A Gestapo Unit Update.

Hitlery projects her own jack-booted fantasies of world domination upon those who dare to oppose her

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, a potential White House candidate in 2008, said Wednesday some Republicans are trying to create a "police state" to round up illegal immigrants.

Hit, dear? Excuse me for interrupting. Are you talking about police states like Slave China and Cuba and (coming soon) Venezuela?

Clinton, D-N.Y., spoke out on the U.S. immigration policy after largely staying away from an issue that has roiled Congress in recent months and spurred a number of conflicting proposals.

Instant translation: After successfully stradling the fence on this issue for a couple of years, the Super Genius stepped in it. Big time.

Speaking at a rally of Irish immigrants, Clinton criticized a bill the House passed in December that would impose harsher penalties for undocumented workers.

Irish? My guess is there weren't too many illegals at that event.

"Don't turn your backs on what made this country great," she said, calling the measure "a rebuke to what America stands for."

The House measure would make unlawful presence in the United States, which is currently a civil offense, a felony.

Clinton said it would be "an unworkable scheme to try to deport 11 million people, which you have to have a police state to try to do." (Thanks to Boston.com and Drudge for the heads up.)

The Hitlery crackup continues apace because her political instincts (such as they are) are always trumped by her totalitarian impulse. Watch the rats jump the Bad Ship Hitlery and swim to Feingold as 2008 approaches.

The assault on the Electoral College continues apace.

Human Events Online has the story of homegrown all-American fascists who are working to dismantle our constitution.

Thought you wouldn’t have to worry about the presidential election for two more years, didn’t you? Well, you’re wrong.

A coalition of former congressmen recently announced a new campaign designed to tear apart the system by which Americans elect their Presidents. They think that they have found an all-new and unique end-run around the Electoral College.

If their plan works, the Electoral College will essentially be gone, at the behest of a mere handful of states. Potentially, the 11 largest states could dictate this change, even if the other 39 states disagree.

But I should start at the beginning.

On February 23, former Rep. John Anderson (R.-Ill.) and former Sen. Birch Bayh (D.-Ind.) announced a proposal that they call the Campaign for the National Popular Vote. The goal of the Campaign is to change the way in which states’ electoral votes are allocated. The group will tackle one state at a time, beginning with Illinois.

State legislators in Illinois have already introduced a bill that is in line with the Campaign’s objectives. If passed, the legislation would require Illinois to enter into an interstate compact with other states enacting similar legislation. Under this interstate compact, each participating state would agree to allocate its entire slate of electors to the winner of the national popular vote. The compact would go into effect when states representing 270 electoral votes (enough to win the presidency) have agreed to the compact.

The eleven most populous states have 271 electoral votes following the 2000 Census. Therefore, if these 11 states were to choose to award their electors in accordance with the national popular vote total, then they could determine the outcome of the election. (If one state bowed out, then it would need to be replaced by a handful of other states.) The decision of these 11 states would hold even if the other 39 states and the District of Columbia voted for the other presidential candidate.

Ironically, Anderson touts this anti-democratic aspect of the plan as one of its greatest benefits. The difficulties associated with passing a constitutional amendment, he notes, are rather hard to overcome. The Campaign for the National Popular Vote would allow Electoral College opponents to bypass these hurdles and impose their new election system with minimal trouble. The Electoral College would be abolished in practice, although not by the letter of the law.

Dr. Walter E. Williams spits into the wind.

Thank goodness we live in an era in which men like Dr. Williams still exist. I fear they will be gone in a generation or two. Then what will happen to the truth?


High up on my list of annoyances are references to the United States as a democracy and the suggestion that Iraq should become a democracy. The word "democracy" appears in neither of our founding documents -- the Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution.

Our nation's founders had disdain for democracy and majority rule. James Madison, in Federalist Paper No. 10, said in a pure democracy, "there is nothing to check the inducement to sacrifice the weaker party or the obnoxious individual." During the 1787 Constitutional Convention, Edmund Randolph said that "in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy."

John Adams said, "Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." Chief Justice John Marshall added, "Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos." The founders knew that a democracy would lead to the same kind of tyranny suffered under King George III. Their vision for us was a republic.

But let's cut to Iraq and President Bush's call for it to become a democracy. I can't think of a worse place to have a democracy -- majority rule. Iraq needs a republic like that envisioned by our founders -- decentralized and limited government power. In a republican form of government, there is rule of law. All citizens, including government officials, are accountable to the same laws. Government intervenes in civil society to protect its citizens against force and fraud but does not intervene in the cases of peaceable, voluntary exchange.

Democracy, what the Bush administration calls for, is different. In a democracy, the majority rules either directly or through its elected representatives. The law is whatever the government determines it to be. Laws aren't necessarily based upon reason but power. In other words, democracy is just another form of tyranny -- tyranny of the majority.

In Iraq, Arabs are about 75 percent of the population, Kurds about 20 percent and Turkomen and Assyrian the balance. Religiously, Shia are about 60 percent of the population, Sunni 35 percent with Christian and other religions making up the balance. If a majority-rule democracy emerges, given the longstanding hate and distrust among ethnic/religious groups, it's a recipe for conflict. The reason is quite simple. Majority rule is a zero-sum game with winners and losers, with winners having the power to impose their wills on the minority. Conflict emerges when the minority resists.

The ideal political model for Iraq is Switzerland's cantonal system. Historically, Switzerland, unlike most European countries, was made up of several different major ethnic groups -- Germans, French, Italians and Rhaeto-Romansch. Over the centuries, conflicts have arisen between these groups, who differ in language, religion (Catholic and Protestant) and culture. The resolution to the conflict was to allow the warring groups to govern themselves.

Yes! But it makes too much sense and allows none of the competing factions to dominate. In a word, this solution removes a lot of political conflict. People striving to gain power don't like that.

Switzerland has 26 cantons. The cantons are divided into about 3,000 communes. Switzerland's federal government controls only those interests common to all cantons -- national defense, foreign policy, railways and the like. All other matters are controlled by the individual cantons and communes. The Swiss cantonal system enables people of different ethnicity, language, culture and religion to live at peace with one another. As such, Switzerland's political system is well suited to an ethnically and religiously divided country such as Iraq.

By the way, for President Bush and others who insist on calling our country a democracy, should we change our pledge of allegiance to say "to the democracy, for which it stands," and should we rename "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" to "The Battle Hymn of the Democracy"? (Thanks to Townhall.com for the heads up.)

Sobran: David Irving and freedom of speech.

Wow. Not even Joe Sobran gets it. Free speech rights protect minorities, of which the Jews are one. Jews who promote such "hate speech" laws are risking the freedom of their grandchildren.

(I am sad to have to say I am talking about speech actually protected by the US Constitution, not pornography, "art", et cetera.)

Now that an Austrian court has convicted the historian David Irving of Holocaust denial, lots of people are rushing to his defense, sort of. Most of them are taking the position that however odious, detestable, repugnant, abhorrent, repulsive, indefensible, dishonest, and, er, anti-Semitic he is, putting him in prison is the wrong way to deal with him.

After all, Irving could have been effectively ruined and bankrupted by other means, such as calumny. Now he has been made a “free speech martyr.”

Once a man has been convicted, or even accused, of the ultimate crime of opinion, then no matter how many highly acclaimed books he has written, on whatever subjects, his entire life’s work should go down the Memory Hole, and no decent person should pay attention to anything he has ever said. Nothing he says after transgressing against an essential article of the Official Absolute Truth could possibly be of interest anyway.

So far, only Christopher Hitchens, who has himself been accused of Holocaust denial, has pointed out that Irving has never actually denied the Holocaust. But who cares? Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Irving has blasphemed against other sacred topics too. He has written three volumes on Winston Churchill, taking a caustic view of that legend. His scathing biography of Joseph Goebbels was quashed on the eve of its scheduled publication by its own publisher under intense pressure.

There's a pro-Goebbels lobby out there?

The historian Richard J. Evans, who testified against Irving in his famous libel trial against Deborah Lipstadt, has written a book, Lying about Hitler, arguing that Irving has grossly distorted, even lied about, the evidence. But Evans admits that the Holocaust (a term he is uneasy with) has been abused, distorted, and exploited on the other side too, as Norman Finkelstein has charged in his book The Holocaust Industry. Nothing Evans says proves that even on the most severe view, Irving deserves to be called “dangerous,” as Lipstadt has called him. Lipstadt herself now expresses qualms about jailing Irving for his opinions.

“Dangerous” to whom or what? Lipstadt has argued that when the last Holocaust survivors are gone, nobody will be left to testify that it really happened. But you might as well argue that when the last eyewitnesses of World War II are gone, the world may doubt that it ever occurred. How can a trained historian speak such nonsense?

It’s not as if Irving, or anyone else, will ever have the last word on events of that war, or any war. What is called “historical revisionism” is the normal practice of the historian, as new data come to light, old views meet challenges, and new perspectives emerge, themselves having to face controversy. Evans’s rebuttal of Irving is a good example.

Is it really necessary to quote Milton, Jefferson, and Mill again on freedom of speech? Let truth and falsehood grapple, and all that. Even the cynic may agree that in the long run, the smart money is on the truth.

The real question is why Irving’s enemies think the truth needs a handicap — the threat of prison — in order to prevail. Do the Austrian authorities really and truly believe in the Holocaust themselves, or are they just trying to get the Hitler monkey off their own backs and onto Irving’s instead?

In Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four Winston Smith is tortured until he is willing to betray his lover. As rats are set on him to chew his face, he screams, “Do it to Julia! Not me!”

Having been blackmailed with the posthumous Hitler menace for generations, the Austrians and other Europeans are, in effect, “doing it to Julia.” David Irving just happens to be the thought criminal to whom the buck can be passed; he is of course no danger to anyone, and everyone knows it — even those who pretend he is “dangerous.” But he is being punished as if he had incited riots.

Nobody goes to prison for writing wholly fabricated memoirs of the Holocaust. No law against that; it isn’t a “hate crime.” It can even be lucrative! Finkelstein, whose parents were in Buchenwald, hardly overstates the case when he speaks of “the Holocaust industry.”

On the other hand, not a single Holocaust movie has been nominated for an Academy Award this year. Is Hollywood ignoring the danger? And if so, is that David Irving’s fault?

Teaport Dome Scandal Update.

Washington Times:House panel votes no on ports

Washington Post:Congress Prepares for Port Showdown
Lawmakers Take First Steps Toward Ending Bush Deal

Religion of Peace and Love Update.

Yemen Editor Faces Death Penalty Over Mohammed Cartoons(CNSNews.com) - Prosecutors in Yemen have demanded the execution of a journalist after his English-language weekly newspaper published the Mohammad cartoons to show how their publication in European newspapers had sparked a global uproar. Full Story


Washington Post:Poll: Negative Perception of Islam Increasing in the US

USA Today:Osama bin Laden fan clubs, jihad recruiters build online communities

Boston Globe:US Monitoring Iran from Dubai, Boston Globe Reports

Saint of the Day and daily Mass readings.

Today is the Feast of St. Frances of Rome, a devout noblewoman dedicated to God and His children. Her life is a wonderful example of piety and perseverance. Pray for us, all you angels and saints.


Today's reading for the Feast of St. Frances of Rome is
Proverbs 31:10-13, 19-20, 30-31.
Today's Responsorial Psalm is
Psalms 34:2-3, 4-5, 6-7, 8-9, 10-11.
Today's Gospel reading is
Matthew 22:34-40.


[Links to the readings will be from the NAB until I can find another chapter and verse searchable Douay-Rheims Bible on-line.]


Everyday links:

The Blessed Virgin Mary
The Rosary
Our Mother of Perpetual Help
Prayers from EWTN
National Coalition of Clergy and Laity (dedicated to action for a genuine Catholic Restoration)
The Catholic Calendar Page for Today


Just in case you are wondering what exactly Catholics believe, here is

The Apostles Creed

I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son Our Lord, Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried.He descended into Hell; the third day He rose again from the dead; He ascended into Heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father almighty; from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead.I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body and life everlasting. Amen.


Memorare

Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that any one who fled to thy protection, implored thy help or sought thy intercession,was left unaided.Inspired with this confidence, I fly unto thee, O Virgin of virgins my Mother; to thee do I come, before thee I stand, sinful and sorrowful; O Mother of the Word Incarnate, despise not my petitions, but in thy clemency hear and answer me. Amen.


St. Joseph, her most chaste spouse, pray for us.


Prayer to St. Anthony, Martyr of Desire

Dear St. Anthony, you became a Franciscan with the hope of shedding your blood for Christ. In God's plan for you, your thirst for martyrdom was never to be satisfied. St. Anthony, Martyr of Desire, pray that I may become less afraid to stand up and be counted as a follower of the Lord Jesus. Intercede also for my other intentions. (Name them.)


PRAYER TO SAINT MICHAEL THE ARCHANGEL

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil; may God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the divine power, thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.

About Me

My photo
First of all, the word is SEX, not GENDER. If you are ever tempted to use the word GENDER, don't. The word is SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! For example: "My sex is male." is correct. "My gender is male." means nothing. Look it up. What kind of sick neo-Puritan nonsense is this? Idiot left-fascists, get your blood-soaked paws off the English language. Hence I am choosing "male" under protest.

Labels

Blog Archive