Socio-economics and The Catholic Church (by ContraSuggest)

Many people, including many Catholics, continue to express confusion on what the Church’s position is on socio-economic issues.  Many believe that Church teaching stands against capitalism, while expressing tolerance for such evils as socialism and communism.  I can understand the confusion.  Various popes throughout the decades have expounded on these subjects, critiquing various economic systems and situations that negatively impact Christ’s children, and so the papacy has always opposed any roadblocks to human dignity.  Since poverty is chief among these roadblocks, any system of government, economic system, or variant economic system, seen to promote paucity and exploitation has been a target for papal criticism.  No economic system is perfect, and insofar as abuses of individual dignity have occurred in capitalist systems, capitalism at times has been subject to papal censure.  This does not mean that the Church is opposed to capitalism in toto.  At the same time the Church has consistently rejected the legacy of Marx.  Consider this quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, section 2425:

The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modern times with “communism” or “socialism.”  She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of “capitalism,” individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.

In the second sentence of the above passage, note the italics that I have added to accent the word “in.”  The Catechism is merely criticizing a sometimes abuse within capitalism, the brutal Darwinian notion of survival of the fittest that all Christians should deny.  Contrast this with the absolute rejection of totalitarian socialism and communism in the first sentence.  The Catechism continues:

Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for “there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market.”  Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.”

Again, rejecting centralized planning is a total rejection of communism and socialism because centralized planning is a feature only of those two systems, there is no ambiguity here.  Any government that sets itself above its citizens will ultimately set itself above God, and is thus atheistic and totalitarian.  Some people read the remainder of the passage as anti-capitalistic; I don’t believe that it is.  “Reasonable regulation of the marketplace” is something that the American Founders wouldn’t have disagreed with; after all, they created an orderly system of laws based upon human dignity and enshrined them in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution.  The preamble to the Constitution talks about the new government promoting “the general welfare” by “securing the blessings of liberty.”  The Declaration talks about the inalienable natural rights of every person.  Only a closed mind could interpret the Church’s  total rejection of left-wing socio-economic ideologies, combined with criticism of Darwinian notions of survival of the fittest, and conclude they’re hearing a rejection of capitalism.  It’s my belief that the Church does not expressly embrace any one economic system because it recognizes that any system run by sinners will have abuses.  This is more a recognition of our fallen state than it is a critique of economic systems.    

What’s your opinion?  We’d like to know.

Cold War Parallels Within Obama’s America? (by ContraSuggest)

There are some obvious differences between the plight of constitutional conservatives fighting for freedom in the new USSA (Union of Socialist States of America), and those that fought for their freedoms during the Cold War in the captive Warsaw Pact nations of the USSR.  Yet there are many more notable similarities, and we can learn much in how to combat the evils of statism within our country, from studying the strategies employed by the anti-Soviet forces at the tail end of the last century. 

There is a distinction between hard tyranny (the kind imposed by the Soviets), and soft tyranny (the kind imposed by American statists, led by President Obama).  The former impute laws and rules that, above all else, require total obedience to a centralized government authority; ultimately enforceable by violent, jack-boot police and military tactics.  The latter, excluding the overt violence, cloaks itself in existing law and tradition (while at the same time violating them at every turn), offering up counterfeit panaceas; ultimately eroding our rights and freedoms through attrition.  The great danger of soft tyranny is that it will always yield to hard tyranny, unless derailed in its formative stages.  That hideous transformation is taking place right before the eyes of any American still paying attention.  That’s why it’s essential, despite our monumental setbacks that we fight against the statists at all costs.

During the dark days of the Cold War there were many notable civil protests and political movements from inside the Soviet prison house of nations that began to seriously challenge the opressive authority of the Soviet Empire.  Many of these protest movements were supported from without by the anti-Soviet strategies employed by NATO under US leadership.  The events that took place in East Germany in 1953, in Hungary (a great student protest) and Poland in 1956, the so-called Spring of Prague in Czechoslovakia in 1968 (during which time large groups of young men rose up to reform the Soviet-imposed system), and the Solidarity Movement in Poland thru the 1980s (an anti-Soviet labor movement), were watershed events in the slow death of the Soviet Empire, even though they were often answered with bloody crackdowns that tragically killed tens of thousands.  In the present day USSA we see first and second amendment violations being enshrined in law, the continued death march of abortion rights, and the continued collectivization of the economy, which are clearly the beginning of a systemic attack on our constitutional liberties that, if allowed to stand, can only end in abject tyranny.  We had all better wake up and start playing hardball now, if we do not, there will most certainly be blood in the streets in a few short years.   

Some of the former United States of America can continue to be effective incubators for movements (similar to those during the Cold War mentioned above) against Obama’s secular-socialist machine.  But we still face the same old problem: we have no leaders emerging that can effectively spearhead the fight.  The knockout blow against the Soviets during the last decade of the Cold War was delivered by Ronald Reagan, blessed Pope John Paul II, and Margaret Thatcher.  Three titans of history, who despite their relative differences, concentrated their moral authority and formidable political and rhetorical firepower against the bane of Soviet Communism.  Those three legends, and the loyal people who worked for and supported them, won the Cold War.  Where are such people now?  Not all Americans are stupid; if we properly explain the present dangers, there are those who will respond.  But who will rally them?  In too many ways the former United States have become a microcosm of the old Warsaw Pact nations; they’re becoming enslaved to the will of a malevolent central authority that is determined to erase our liberties.  America was the leader in defeating the communism that pledged to bury it; who will now save Amerika from the forces that would bury it from within?

Thought Excerpts from Inside the Head Of Paul Bardus (A Typical 21st Century Amerikan Guy) (by ContraSuggest)

Monday, 11:30 AM, Paul’s Bedroom

CNN Reporter: …new pope is Argentina's Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the former archbishop of Buenos Aires, who takes the name Pope Francis.  Francis, 76, is the first non-European pope in the modern era, the first South American pope and the first Pope Francis.  His election comes on the first full day of the cardinals' conclave in the Sistine Chapel.  The new pope, who succeeds Pope Benedict XVI, asked the crowd to pray for him.

Inside Paul Bardus’s Head:  Oh sh*t! What time is it?  Eleven-thirty already?  Slept through the alarm again; TV still on from last night. That had to be the best weed ever; still buzzed, head pounding though, must be the Jacks.  Back hurts; feels like a knot… oh, slept on the remote…  Hey, nice hat Francis, do you wear that because you lost a bet?  Wonder if he takes that thing off when he fondles little boys?  Sh*t, I hope Paul Jolley doesn’t get voted off of Idol.

Inside Paul’s Car, after leaving Wendy’s drive-through, 12:17 PM

Z-100 News Brief: …up to 73 weeks of total benefits is still the maximum available to unemployed workers in California. A regular claim provides up to 26 weeks of benefits and federal extension benefits provide up to another 47 weeks of benefits, provided by the federal government due to the length and severity of the economic downturn.  The White House has still not come to terms with the House of Representatives on a budget deal; the CBO now estimates the national debt to be in the $16 trillion range…

Paul’s Head: Obama is so cool, he really gets it.  F**king a**hole Republicans should stop busting his balls; mmm, fries are so good when they’re hot.  Gotta remember to call Bob about meeting his girlfriend’s friend next Saturday; can’t wait to lay into that!  We really beat the sh*t out of that rental last week, returned it after Bob puked in the trunk, and totally got away with it!  Bartender was awesome, drinks were so strong, can never remember what’s in a kamikaze, but they had some kick!  Need to find out by next month for the big ski trip.  F**k!  I’ll never get that pickle out from in between the seat and the console! 

Leaving Amanda’s house, 3:45 PM

Paul’s Head: This is really starting to piss me off, been seeing her for a week already and still haven’t nailed her.  What a pain in the balls; had to play it cool in front of her father; my God, what a tool that guy is!  Having to sit and pretend to be interested in his stupid sh*t is torture.  Your daughter is hot, but it’s not worth having to hear about what it was like when you grew up, how young people had more respect then.  Bitching about how union demands forced his company to close, and being out of work along with everybody else.  Well I’m out of work too, a**hole.  He was just breaking my balls; he knows I’m union.  My rep said he should have something for me soon, real soon.  I’m done with Amanda anyway, ain’t calling that bitch no more.              

In Front of Bob’s house, 5:05 PM

Headline, Yahoo’s home page on Paul’s I-Phone: Two teens arrested in baby shooting death.  A mom tries to shield her 13-month old son with her arms when a gunman and his young accomplice attack her.

Paul’s Head: Where the f**k is he?  Said he’s be here at 3:30; been jerking off here for 15 minutes already; not picking up his phone or answering texts; I’ll check my e-mail and see if he left anything.  Dead baby?  What the f**k?  After that Newton thing they should just get rid of all these f**king guns already, no one should be allowed to own one; at least then this sh*t will stop.  F**king rednecks and their guns, enough already!  Is that a cigarette burn on my leather?!  Sh*t, Bob is always smoking in here.  I’m gonna kick his ass, where the f**k is he anyway?  Did my phone just buzz?  Oh, it was just my stomach growling, I’m starved, where is he?!  Finally, a text!  OK, he’s late and will be here in 10 minutes, and we’re going to O’Malley’s tonight; very cool. 

Returning to Bob’s house, 3:20 AM

Evening news headlines AP, CNN, Fox, et al.: Death toll spikes in Iraq, new wave of suicide bombers kills 50 in Afghanistan, city of Detroit Bankrupt, Mexican drug cartels step-up violence on the border, Tenement fire kills 15 in the Bronx, Jerry Sandusky interview to air…       

Paul’s Head: I am so f**king drunk!  Holy sh*t, did Taylor Swift get implants?  That’s pretty cool!  After I sleep this off, me and Bob gotta talk about what we’re gonna do next month to celebrate my 30^th birthday.                     

On The Counterfactual Anti-Catholic Lies of Author Dan Brown (by ContraSuggest)

A few weeks ago, while at a Christmas party with some close friends, the subject of Dan Brown’s movies and novels came up in one of our conversations.  One friend said that she thought Brown was clever for having convinced readers and viewers that the things depicted in his movies were factual.  Another remarked that Angels and Demons wasn’t nearly as offensive to Catholics as The Davinci Code.  While strictly true, these opinions conceal the harmful effects of Brown’s foul anti-Catholic slander and malicious libel.  For no other phenomenon in our cultural milieu of filth has done more to sustain a false, hateful view of the Church than Brown’s books and movies; justifying the last respectable bigotry in Amerika: anti-Catholicism.

What exactly do Brown’s books and movies say about the Catholic Church that has me so upset?  Well here’s a sampling of some of the lies he proffers followed by brief responses to each:

Lie:

The Catholic Church has led a centuries-long and ruthless campaign against science and reason

Truth:

Church doctrine in no way contradicts science, but has always been supportive of it.  In fact, the physical sciences grew out of the unique Catholic doctrinal framework

Lie:

The Church murdered the great astronomical pioneer Copernicus

Truth:

Copernicus, a life-long, devout Catholic priest, was, at the end of his life, bed-ridden for several days and died of a cerebral hemorrhage at the age of 70; no historical source reflects that the Church had anything to do with his death

Lie:

Galileo was a member of the anti-Church secret society known as the Illuminati.  The Church nearly put Galileo to death for believing that man was not the center of the universe

Truth:

Galileo couldn’t have been a member of the Illuminati because he died in 1642, more than a century before the Illuminati was formed in Bavaria in 1776.  Galileo’s life was never in danger, even when he was found guilty by a Church court after advocating, what was then, the not provable heliocentric theory of the solar system, and brazenly insulted Church officials including the pope by caricaturizing them as simpletons in his book Dialog On The Two Great World Systems.  As punishment, he was placed under house arrest in his villa, was attended to by his daughter (who was a nun) went on to study and write unimpeded, completing his greatest astronomical work, and died a peaceful death at a ripe old age

Lie:

Many devout Catholic thinkers and artists were in reality closet atheists that hated the Church

Truth:

There is no historical source that backs up Brown’s claim about the great Catholic thinkers he disparages.  Myriad early pioneers in numerous scientific fields of inquiry were devout Catholic laypeople and priests

Lie:

Opus Dei is a murderous Church cult controlled by the pope

Truth:

Opus Dei is a legitimate, peaceful Catholic organization; made up mainly of laypeople.  The founder of Opus Dei is a canonized saint of the Catholic Church

Lie:

Jesus was not divine; he married and fathered children

Truth:

There is overwhelming historical evidence that points to Jesus Christ’s crucifixion; there is no credible evidence, from secular nor religious sources, that indicates he was not crucified and survived to father children

Lie:

Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ lover, and she, not Peter, was the true head of the early Church

Truth:

The only source that indicates Mary Magdalene may have been an intimate of Jesus, and had a lead role in the early Church is a 2^nd century, forged Gnostic gospel.  

Lie:

The early Church concocted a body of lies which became the canonical gospels.  The four gospels were declared canonical by Constantine at the Council of Nicaea

Truth:

The four official gospels, Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, were unofficially considered canonical from a time earlier than the forged, Gnostic gospels were even written, and at least 150 years prior to Constantine and the council of Nicaea.  The Church eventually had to declare that the four gospels were canonical, in response to the heresies threatening to swallow the Church.  Constantine called for the council because there were secular instabilities as a result of heretical doctrinal challenges.  Constantine had no bearing on the council’s edicts

If every single Catholic on this planet is not outraged by these disgusting lies, then we all might as well turn in our rosary beads and convert to Scientology.  Although I didn’t take the time to point out in which book or movie the phony charges originate, rest assured that there are enough falsehoods to go around.  So if Angels and Demons is slightly less disgustingly heretical than The Davinci Code, I suppose we can all be slightly less outraged; but we should be outraged nonetheless.   

Let’s not forget that Brown has repeatedly declared himself to be a meticulous researcher; while the plots of his books are fictional he maintains that the historical and religious references are factual.  Must be nice to have your cake and eat it too.   

One final point, regarding the notion that Brown’s books and movies have not had a discernable influence on people due to the fact they’re merely “harmless works of fiction.”  I would remind readers that many works of fiction have had massive impact on the world; some for better, some for worse. Notable examples are Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom's Cabin and Upton Sinclair's The Jungle.  These works of fiction had a huge impact on people’s perceptions and on the events of history.  It’s particularly disturbing with Mr. Brown that works of fiction, containing pseudo-historical content, which claim to be well-researched, savage the Catholic Church with mean spirited lies and invented history.  Being a writer of fiction does not justify the waging of cultural warfare and the spreading of filthy lies about the one true Church.

What’s Become of The Catholic Church? (by ContraSuggest)

In the wake of the destruction following the reelection of President Obama, and after lengthy discussions with several good friends (solid conservatives all) I now understand the need to address several paramount issues. 

Of foremost importance is the tragic fact that poorly catechized Catholic Americans greatly contributed to Obama’s reelection by voting for him in large numbers (Catholic Hispanics by a much wider margin than white Catholics).  “Liberal Catholics,” whatever their ethnic backgrounds, are able to justify their mistaken, leftist view of Catholic doctrine only with the aid of liberal U.S. priests and bishops, who infest the Church, and shamelessly continue to traffic in heretical pedagogy.  We need clear distinctions here: Catholic doctrine as taught by the Church Magisterium is unerring; leftist apostate priests and bishops violate that doctrine and fail to properly extend it to everyday political issues. 

I intend to illustrate several things here.  First; how the Church came to be riddled with leftist clergy who fill lay people’s heads with all sorts of un-doctrinal falsehoods.  Second; I will dispel, once and for all, the false, pitiable belief that “Jesus was not political; therefore Catholics should not be political either.”  And finally; I’ll show how conservative economic principles are consistent with Catholic doctrine on a specific, issue by issue basis. 

The Tragedy of Vatican II:

One of the great self-inflicted wounds of the Catholic Church, especially in America, was suffered by the misapprehensions surrounding Vatican II.  The intent of the Second Vatican Council (convened in the early 1960s by Pope John XXIII) was for the Church to meet the destructive challenges posed by modernity; instead the Church allowed the excesses of the modern world to shape the Church.  After VII, Catholic liberals moved through the dioceses of Western Europe and America, purging the liturgy of traditional hymns and high-sounding language and seeking to reconcile faith with secular forms of “liberation.”  The same Marxist, counter-cultural forces that invaded the courts, the universities, the media, charitable organizations and all our great cultural institutions, also polluted the instrumentalities of the Catholic Church.  Many of the priests and bishops of today were the counter-cultural hippies of the 1960s.  Fifty years later, the legacy of these changes manifests in a majority of U.S. Catholics voting to reelect a president who is both a poster child for infanticide and an advocate of liberation theology.  The damage done in the U.S. by the Marxist-cartoon-rendering of Vatican II, begat several generations of Catholics who are morally ignorant and insulated against the duties imposed upon them by Catholic doctrine.

Jesus Wasn’t Political- Really?

Contrary to the belief of many uninformed Catholics, sacred scripture tells us that Jesus involved himself deeply in politics!  True, he wanted no part of Roman politics; but he fully immersed himself in Jewish politics.  Jesus’ main antagonists in the New Testament narrative were the Pharisees.  Who were they?  They were scribes or lawyers. But there was no separation between law, politics, and religion in 1^st century Jewish culture.  When the Pharisees repeatedly attacked and challenged Jesus’ proclamation of God’s kingdom, what was our Lord’s reaction?  Did he disengage; did he run; did he claim to be above the debate, withdraw and hide?  Of course not.  Our Lord continually engaged them; took on their rigid propaganda and revealed it for what it truly was.  The Pharisees' beliefs regarding the subjects of ritual purity, table fellowship, tithing, and divorce, were at the same time religious, cultural, and political.  Although Jesus did praise the Pharisees for some things, he clearly rebuked their beliefs on all these counts.  Catholic clergy and lay people need to proudly and vociferously immerse themselves in issues that are both religious and political, if we truly want to emulate the actions of our savior.  Our non-negotiable religious beliefs, such as the sanctity of innocent human life, from conception to natural death, will naturally inform the way we vote.  Bishops or priests that refuse to acknowledge this are aiding and abetting the commission of sin on a massive scale, and should be removed from their sees.  Ignorant pro-abortion Catholics had better stop whining about God not being on anybody’s “side”, and start concerning themselves as to whether or not they are on God’s side. 

Catholic Doctrine vs. Conservative Principle:

Contrary to the belief of the monolithic intelligentsia, conservative principles are compatible with Catholic social teaching.  Here are several solid examples.     

On Welfare Statism:

Simply put, conservatives don’t reject the notion that government is tasked with an economic regulatory and social welfare role.  The question is how do we define those terms and what should that role be?  What governmental actions (or inactions) constitute the reasonable and moral fulfillment of that role within the Catholic framework?  So let’s start by asking ourselves: has the plight of the underprivileged in America been helped or hurt by dooming the inner city poor to cycles of generational dependency on a massive monolithic federal bureaucracy that we’ve euphemistically called the Welfare State?  The poor have obviously been hurt.  Conservatives have stood against the Welfare State; liberal statists have made it a reality.  The establishment of inner city welfare plantations is totally out of line with Catholic teachings on caring for the poor.  There have been numerous sensible, market-based, effective conservative alternatives to the leftist culture of dependency.  However, liberals continue to spin the malicious fairytale, believed by many Catholics that conservatives desire a pitiable, destitute underclass left to fend for themselves.  Leading conservatives have long offered viable alternatives to the bane of leftist welfare statism; proposals that would temporarily care for the downtrodden while providing them with the tools to better their plight.  Many proposals have been public/private faith based efforts.  These myriad proposals, truly helping the indigent as our Catholic faith calls us to do, have been repeatedly rejected by leftists in both major political parties.       

Representative Paul Ryan’s proposed reforms of Medicare are by definition compatible with the precepts of Catholic social teaching.  Absent Ryan’s proposed reforms, Medicare will rapidly go bankrupt, doing untold harm to seniors who depend on that program for their healthcare needs.  Liberals can’t seem to explain how standing idly by as Medicare goes bankrupt is somehow in line with Catholic teaching.  Conservatives don’t oppose poorly performing government welfare programs because they wish to cast the impoverished into the wilderness.  We oppose them because they do great injury, not only to the people they were supposedly designed to help, but to our society as a whole.  As Charles Murray illustrated in his well-researched book, Losing Ground (1984), welfare programs are inimical to the institution of marriage.  Using the typical example of a poor couple, he demonstrated that welfare benefits available to the woman create a disincentive for the couple to stay married, or if living together, to get married.  Marriage, one of the treasured Catholic sacraments, drops the probability of poverty by 82%.  Once again, the liberal solution stands against Catholic teaching while the conservative view stands with it. 

On “Workers’ Rights”:

Conservatives, as advocates of limited, frugal government, stand against levels of public employee compensation that have exceeded that of their private sector counterparts.  The burden of paying out these soaring public employee benefits has pushed dozens of states to the verge of bankruptcy.  Public and private workers are immeasurably hurt by confiscatory taxation and crippling public debt.  Implementation of leftist policies has created a toxic economic atmosphere for all workers; the antithesis of Catholic teaching as laid out in the encyclical of Pope John Paul II, Laborem Exercens, which supports labor rights and rejects socialism. 

The “Evils” of Laissez Faire and The Free Market:

The term laissez faire is repeatedly used by liberals as a buzz word to assail conservatives and show they’re at odds with catholic precepts.  However, general opposition to regulation or interference by the government in economic affairs, and trust in the market, is not socially irresponsible.  Look, for instance at the concept of insurance.  It’s a free-market way of taking care of those suffering life’s vicissitudes.  And there is plenty of market incentive to deal with the unemployed.  Employers deal with the unemployed through markets all the time—by hiring them.  Those who have lost their homes still want a place to live, so property owners want to deal with them by renting to them.  How is this somehow anti-Catholic?  Capitalism and the free market are governed by what Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations, called enlightened self-interest.  This concept held that the larger social good is best served by individuals pursuing private interests.  There is no other country in the world where this principle has been allowed to thrive to a greater extent than in the United States; and, as a result, no other country which is wealthy enough to so compassionately care for it’s poor and downtrodden.  It is ham-handed, ill conceived federal government programs that are truly cruel and incompatible with Catholic teaching.

The Ultimate Evil: Big Corporations!

The conservative view of big corporations is in no need of alteration in order to bring it in line with reason and Catholic social goals.  Profitability of big corporations is essential because that profitability is intertwined with the economic well-being of the average person on the street.  Not only do these corporations employ average working stiffs like us, but our 401K, retirement/pension plans and stock portfolios are invested in those same corporations.  This isn’t the world of 30 years ago when only 3 in 10 average American workers were invested in the stock market.  By 2008 that figure was 8 in 10.  Why would we want to increase punitive regulation and taxation on the very corporate entities that our personal economic interests are inexorably linked to?  This type of silly, demagogic class warfare thinking makes it impossible to have a rational conversation about the validity of our largely free market economic system.  For instance, our media outlets are very quick to depict multi-national corporations that do business in third-world countries as evil and exploitative.  Ignorant Catholics undoubtedly agree.  The fact of the matter is that, on average, third-world workers earn three times as much working for multi-nationals than they could otherwise.  Although those wages pale in comparison to American wages, keep in mind, we’re talking about people who are cursed with the most extreme poverty.  That’s why they line up by the thousands to work for multi-nationals when those companies set up plants in underdeveloped parts of the world.  And they’re better off for it.  Giving job opportunities to utterly destitute people living in the third world is in no way incompatible with Catholic morals.

Final Thoughts:

In closing, I’ll paraphrase former abortion doctor turned Catholic pro-lifer, Bernard Nathanson, “morality isn’t just something that floats around in the air and sticks to us.  Someone has to explain it, someone has to enunciate it, and someone has to fight for it.  For if we don’t; who will?”  Catholics should be at the forefront of that movement; instead we’ve abdicated our responsibility by allowing the leftists to catechize us into imbecility.  In Matthew chapters 16 and 28, Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail against His church and that he would be with His church until the end of the world (or the end of the age- literally until the end of time).  I believe those words without doubt, but am fearful that much damage can be done by Satan to many individual souls before the end of time.  I am acutely aware of my sins and continually beg forgiveness for having committed them, but liberal Catholics had better wake up soon and look at the blood on their hands and the destruction they’ve left in their wake, before it’s too late.

The Late, Great United States of America: A Requiem (by ContraSuggest)

In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. 

May a once great nation rest in peace.

America was once a place where liberty reigned, where citizens were free to choose such essential things as how to care for their own physical and spiritual health, and such seemingly mundane things as what kind of light bulbs to screw into our living room lamps.  Celebrated freedoms made possible by an exquisitely designed government; various co-equal branches whose powers were dynamically balanced against one another, which made possible, on an unprecedented scale, happiness, opportunity, and prosperity for the largest number of people ever in human history.  But there was more; the American system also allowed for majority rule while effectively protecting minority rights.  There have been many occasions over the past few hundred years in which we have seen an erosion of these rights and freedoms.  Then came Barack Obama.            

With the reelection of Obama, for the first time in the 21^st Century, slightly more than half of American voters have clearly expressed that they’re perfectly comfortable with our country’s government assuming the role of a failed, European-style socialist democracy.  Slightly less than half of American voters are skeptical, and would at least entertain the notion that America could again be the superlative constitutional, federated-republic that its Founders intended.

But Americans lost their collective institutional memory somewhere along the way.  Tragically, to most Americans, the freedoms that we once shared are like some half-remembered nebulous dream or myth.  When speaking to most Americans about constitutional rights, one might as well be talking about the flying carpets of the Arabian Nights, the centaurs of ancient Greece, or the existence of Shangri-La.  The leftists have effectively wiped clean America’s institutional memory; with catastrophic results.  And so America will continue to repeat the tragic mistakes of her past.  It’s important to keep in mind that Americans have recovered from making very poor electoral choices in the past.  After two terms of the dreaded Woodrow Wilson, voters were wise enough to ameliorate that decision by opting for the prudent, conservative leadership of Presidents Harding and Coolidge.  Only to be taken-in once again by the siren song of Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression; reelecting that statist for an unprecedented three times.  Yet, as a young man, I was privileged to have witnessed the triumphant two-term presidency of the great Ronald Reagan.

We may someday recapture a piece of our former glory, but at least for now, the America I knew in my youth is clearly dead.  It’s a different country now; the demons of selfishness and hedonism have gripped the people by the throat.  We must continue to fight the darkness by kindling the flames of liberty and freedom during these sad, dangerous times; and fervently pray for the Divine Providence that the Founders believed guided our once great nation.    

O my Jesus, forgive us our sins

Save us from the fires of hell

And lead all souls to Heaven

Especially those most in need of thy mercy

Amen

An Assortment of Sound Opinions (by ContraSuggest)

ITEM: Romney TKOs Obama in First Debate

You really have to hand it to Mitt Romney.  It only took him 90 minutes to cut through the Gordian knot of many months worth of distortions and lies put out there by Team Obama.  We’re constantly reminded by the media that presidential debates really aren’t that important in determining how people are going to vote.  Whereas that may be generally true, it’s certainly not so in the case of an election where the polls are as close as they are now.  Romney’s stellar debate performance has improved his standing in the polls, nationally and in the swing states; although this election still seems to be anybody’s game, Romney is now slightly ahead.  Due to his loss in the first fight, President Infanticide will no doubt be stepping it up in his next two encounters with Romney.  Mitt had better be ready, this is for all the marbles, he has to withstand Oblabla’s punches and come back to deliver a knock-out blow.  In the least he must clearly be perceived as having got the better of the president, if not, he will no doubt lose his slight edge in the polls.  Remember, the next presidential debate is scheduled for Tuesday 10/16/2012, don’t miss it (and Mitt, you’d better bring your A game).           

ITEM: Biden Makes a Biden of Himself

It isn’t difficult to make the jump from 2012 Vice Presidential Debate to a Warner Brothers Road Runner/Wile E Coyote cartoon.  Anytime Joe Biden is on the TV screen, we need to suspend our disbelief, for he is the hero of ignoramuses everywhere.  Picture the opening of such an animated adventure, as the camera freezes on each figure with a mock Latin subtitle: Representative Paul Ryan: Ipsum Exceptionalis; Vice President Joseph Biden: Moronus Interuptis, Obnoxio Equus Rearendus.  Just as the pathetic and hapless coyote tries in vain to kill Road Runner using an endless array of gadgets from the fictional Acme Corporation, so did VP Biden try to take out Mr. Ryan with an assortment of phony facts provided him by his hack handlers.  That strategy alone wouldn’t have hurt Ryan much, so it was combined with an even more disingenuous one; Biden was boorish, overbearing, condescending, and downright nasty.  He indecorously interrupted Mr. Ryan no less than 80 times with assorted grunts, huffs, guffaws, groans, derisive laughter and over-talk.  I was actually frightened at one point when the camera was focused on Ryan speaking during one of his turns, whilst off to his right Biden could be heard either transforming into a werewolf or passing a kidney stone.  I doubt very much if our clueless VP helped to endear himself to the precious independents courted by both tickets in this close election.  I suppose we shouldn’t be too surprised by Joe’s unbecoming-of-a-vice-president performance; after all, liberals are all about civil dialog.  Right?

ITEM: Obama: Mr. Consistency?

This past week the great condom president, Barrack Obama, told supporters at a campaign rally, that he can be counted on for his consistency.  With a presidential debate approaching, the subject of which will be foreign policy, I thought it would be instructive to briefly review the president’s consistency on foreign affairs.  Over the past four years, the Obama administration has pursued a dangerous and confused smorgasbord of anti-terror and war initiatives.  The lack of consistency in his approach has sent mixed signals to our allies and communicated weakness to our enemies.  Consistency?  Here’s a quick recap of Obama Administration consistency on foreign policy:

• Taking the position that armed enemy combatants captured on the battlefield should receive full US Constitutional rights, including due process and civilian trials; while at the same time increasing overseas unmanned predator drone strikes against enemy targets; executions without the benefit of due process and fair trials
• When taking office, the 911 Five were on course to be tried by a military tribunal; Obama and Attorney General Holder resolved to instead try them in civilian court; four years later they’re back to being tried in military tribunals 
• When he ran for president in 2008, Obama continuously vowed to close the Guantanimo Bay detention facility; four years later it’s still in operation
• In the early days of the uprisings against the ruling Iranian regime, Obama held that the US shouldn’t meddle in Iran’s internal affairs, then later made public statements of solidarity with the protestors
• In Afghanistan, tried to replicate the successful surge strategy employed by President Bush in Iraq, a strategy that Obama roundly condemned.  Because of the vast differences of the two battlefield landscapes, the strategy that worked in Iraq is failing in Afghanistan, as is evidenced by a resurgent Taliban
• Ordered the killing of Osama bin Laden, who was located and executed through and by the very Bush/Cheney military/intelligence policies that Obama condemned in 2008

ITEM: Two Marriage Turncoats Defeated In NY!

Last year I blogged on the subject of four turncoat Republican senators here in New York. 

·             Mark J. Grisanti (Buffalo) [FINISHED]

·             James S. Alesi (Rochester) 

·             Stephen M. Saland (Hudson Valley)

·             Roy J. McDonald (Albany)  [FINISHED]

These slugs ran for office vowing to their constituents that they would uphold marriage as an institution between one man and one woman.  When Governor Andrew Cuomo decided that he was going to aid in the dismantling of marriage by leading the charge to redefine it, he and like-minded folk with very deep pockets, convinced the four aforementioned Republican senators to change their minds and break their promises.  Only with the votes of these traitors did same sex marriage become law in the Empire State.  The cash that they took for selling-out was supposed to fund their efforts to fend off any primary campaign challenges against them as a result of their sleazy votes.  The thoroughly decent and stalwart folks at the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) vowed to take down the turncoats by funding their primary opponents.  Now for the good news; last month, Saratoga County Clerk, Kathy Marchione, soundly defeated Roy McDonald in the Republican primary in New York’s 43^rd Senate District.  One down. 

Senator James Alesi has mysteriously retired!  What were you afraid of James, were you scared to face the voters of your district after stabbing them in the back?  Guess we’ll never know.  Two down (and good riddance to bad rubbish). 

Steve Saland had a much more difficult than expected primary win against a tough challenger by the name of Neil DiCarlo.  DiCarlo will now run on the Conservative Party line in the general election to further plague Saland’s chances at reelection.  Senator Grisanti will also be challenged by a Conservative Party Candidate in the general, as well as a Democrat.  Only the electoral defeat of these Republican defectors will convince other Republican senators not to betray their constituents.  And the fight goes on.