Suspended NFL Players Aren’t Having Games “Stolen” From Them

Featured

The Left’s “no consequences” expectation of life has led to another false implication of wrong treatment, this time a sportswriter commenting on the Cincinnati Bengals’ Adam Jones suspension for one game as the result of an arrest in January.

“This is also the first [Bengals] player of any consequence to see games stolen[emphasis added] from football since Cedric Benson had a three-game suspension reduced to one upon appeal for misdemeanor assault cases in 2011.”1

Jones was arrested for an incident at the Millenium Hotel in downtown Cincinnati.  Police charged him with “misdemeanor assault, disorderly conduct, obstructing official business and felony harassment with a bodily substance.”  The original felony charge, harassment with a bodily substance because he spit on a nurse,3 was dismissed by Hamilton County Prosecutor Joseph Deters, but the misdemeanors were deferred to the county’s municipal courtwhere he later entered a guilty plea.4

The agreement between the NFL and the players has moral clauses in its standard player contracts.

“Par. 2: EMPLOYMENT AND SERVICES. Club employs Player as a skilled football player. Player accepts such employment. He agrees to give his best efforts and loyalty to the Club, and to conduct himself on and off the field with appropriate recognition of the fact that the success of professional football depends largely on public respect for and approval of those associated with the game.”

” Par. 15: INTEGRITY OF GAME. Player recognizes the detriment to the League and professional football that would result from impairment of public confidence in the…integrity and good character of NFL players. Player therefore acknowledges his awareness that if he…is guilty of any other form of conduct reasonably judged by the League Commissioner to be detrimental to the League or professional football, the Commissioner will have the right, but only after giving Player the opportunity for a hearing at which he may be represented by counsel of his choice, to fine Player in a reasonable amount; to suspend Player for a period certain or indefinitely; and/or to terminate this contract.”5

“Stolen” is the past participle of “to steal” which is “to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, especially secretly or by force.”6

If Adam Jones signs a contract just like every other player in the NFL, damages the “public respect for and approval of those associated with the game,” and is suspended as provided by paragraph 15 of the contract—how is that stealing a game from him?

 

 1 – “Jones suspended one game by NFL,” by Paul Dehner Jr., Kentucky Enquirer, 7/22/2017.

2 – “Prosecutor:  Felony charge dismissed against Bengals’ Adam Jones,” by Amanda Kelley, http://www.wlwt.com/article/prosecutor-felony-charge-dismissed-against-adam-jones/9167558, 3/22/2017.

3 – “Video:  Adam Jones tells cop ‘I hope you die’,” by Kevin Grasha, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/23/video-adam-jones-tells-cop-hope-you-die/96969964/, 1/24/2017.

4 – “Bengals’ Adam Jones suspended by NFL for first game of 2017 season,” by Will Brinson, https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/bengals-adam-jones-suspended-by-nfl-for-first-game-of-2017-season/, 7/21/2017.

5 – “Current Ethical Issues In Sports Law,” Marquette University School of Law, by Scott A. Andresen (Andresen and Associates, P.C.), https://law.marquette.edu/assets/sports-law/pdf/Andresen.pdf, 7/9/2015.

6 – http://www.dictionary.com/browse/stolen

Advertisements

How a Citizen Should Deal With Injustice

Featured

“I am a citizen of this country — and that is no little honor.”

So said the actor Frank Morgan (1890-1949) in the 1943 movie, “A Stranger in Town.”  He played the part of a Supreme Court justice who was on hunting vacation near a small town where no one knew him and he became aware of the corrupt political machine which controlled the townspeople.

Without revealing his identity or elevated position of responsibility in the justice system, he set out to help those who were trying to right things.  Near the end, he gave his reasons for becoming involved even though it wasn’t where he lived.  The quote was only a small part of his reply and summarized his civic philosophy.

If we truly appreciate what our citizenship means, we will fulfill our duties by targeting  with what needs to be corrected directly.  We won’t waste energy on mere public displays of how offended we feel, but apply our efforts to acquiring the means to accomplish necessary changes.  The focus is on the injustice, not us.

This another case where we must learn from those who have gone before us.

Why Are Egyptian Sarcophagi Not Worthy of the Same Respect Shown to Modern Era Graves?

Featured

The longer one lives, ideas or questions which should have been obvious seem to pop up from nowhere and stun the thoughtful.

Recent example: since it’s disrespectful to disturb graves (outside of criminal investigations), why is it OK to open the sarcophagi(elaborate coffins) of Egyptian mummies?  Is there an arbitrary waiting period so that some day all existing cemeteries can be opened at will?

Or are the ancient civilizations considered somewhat “less than human”?  This is disturbingly similar to how some view “primitive” cultures or the unborn.

 

1 – a stone coffin, especially one bearing sculpture, inscriptions, etc., often displayed as a monument, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/sarcophagi

 

 

 

“… Are a Way to Show Off the Body and Be Provocative” — Is This a Sensible Goal of Fashion?

Featured

A basic Google search for the meaning of “provocative” includes:
“arousing sexual desire or interest, especially deliberately”

The entire quote, which is the subject of this article, is as follows:

“Short shorts are a way to show off the body and be provocative, and everyone has a choice on how to show off their body, no matter their size.”1

Since women have been used by men at historic levels since the 1960’s 2,3 and recent disclosures about the decades of sexual abuse against women, is this a smart approach?  Giving the benefit of the doubt, are bodies being advertised in order to seek more than a short-term relationship like a lifelong mate?  OK, maybe not.

Are revealing clothes being worn to elicit jealousy from other women?  Honestly?… It couldn’t be that it’s being done to boost one’s self-image since a woman should already be familiar with her positive physical attributes every time she dresses.  Or is there some perverse wish in arousing the aforementioned sexual desire in men in order to exert some power over them?  No way!

Regardless of the motives, it’s ironic that the ill-advised quote comes from a magazine named “Women’s Health.”  How women dress should be given serious and responsible consideration as it does have an impact on our society.

 

1 – Gabrielle Porcaro, Women’s Health, as reported in the USA Today section of the Cincinnati Enquirer, by Maria Puente, 7/31/2017.

2 – “Cohabitation in the United States has increased by more than 1,500 percent in the past half century. In 1960, about 450,000 unmarried couples lived together. Now the number is more than 7.5 million.”  From “The Downside of Cohabiting Before Marriage,” by Meg Jay, The New York Times, 4/14/2012. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/15/opinion/sunday/the-downside-of-cohabiting-before-marriage.html

3 – Meanwhile, the U.S. population will not have increased 100% since 1960 until sometime in the next decade.  Taken from https://www.census.gov/newsroom/cspan/1940census/CSPAN_1940slides.pdf

Why Ordinary Agreements with North Korea are Destined to be Futile

Featured

Open Doors1 noted that “Christians [in North Korea] try to hide their faith as far as possible to avoid arrest and being sent to a labor camp.”2  Given such a threatening environment for people of faith, we can conclude that attempting to solve the recent arms development problem with Kim Jong Un by negotiating routine treaties is not a high percentage strategy.  Why?  As Bishop Fulton J. Sheen (1895-1979) once said:

“Can we not see that if law is divorced from morality and religion, then treaties cease to be obligatory and begin to be mere arrangements, binding only so long as they are advantageous?  Rob international justice of its roots in morality and treaties are hypothetical, not categorical; convenient tools, not honorable obligations, while law becomes an attorney’s cloak woven from the flimsy fabric of legalistic phraseology artfully placed on the shoulders of arbitrary power.”3

Perhaps this is why Ronald Reagan used the Russian proverb “trust but verify”4 in his meetings with Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev on armaments in the 1980’s.It was essential in those discussions given the forty years of the Cold War.  It may be too optimistic with North Korea given their approach to life and religious rights.

 

1 – “Open Doors USA is a non-profit organization focused on serving persecuted Christians in more than 60 countries through:  Bible & Gospel Development, Women and Children Advancement, and Christian Community Restoration.”  https://www.opendoorsusa.org/about-us/

2 – “North Korea’s War On Christianity: The Globe’s Number One Religious Persecutor,” by Doug Bandow, https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougbandow/2016/10/31/north-koreas-war-on-christianity-the-globes-number-one-religious-persecutor/#25c3033556e3, 10/31/2016.

3 – “The Quotable Fulton Sheen,” edited by George J. Marlin, Richard P. Rabatin, and John L. Swan.  Doubleday, New York, 1989.  Quote was taken from “The Divine Verdict,” New York: P. J. Kennedy and Sons, 1943.

4 – “doveryay, no proveryay” according to Google translate https://www.google.com/search?q=russian+to+english+dictionary&oq=russian+to+english&aqs=chrome.3.69i57j0l5.11111j1j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

5 – Including: “doveryai, no proveryai,” as found in http://www.usmedicine.com/editor-in-chief/doveryai-no-proveryai-trust-but-verify/, by Chester “Tip” Buckenmaier, July 2014.  His article focused on the problems with and approaches to fix the problems with VA hospitals.

Instead of Protesting for $15/hour Fast Food Jobs, Why Not Work in Construction?

Featured

Here’s a dual problem which could be solved simultaneously.  For starters:

“A shrinking pool of homes for sale across the country and in the Cincinnati area is pushing up prices – exacerbating an already existing affordability gap for many buyers.”1

Then why aren’t more houses being built?

“’It’s just hard to find enough construction workers today to build more,’ [Issi] Romem [chief economist at Buildzoom] said. ‘The economy has lost a lot of young workers, and the construction industry is aging much faster than other industries.  There are far fewer construction workers available today than there were before the housing boom, which hurts the push to build more.’”1

Meanwhile, we see it frequently, and especially on the coasts, a demand for a $15 per hour minimum wage – even though costs of living vary greatly across the nation. Based on data for early this year, New York and California (where much of the noise emanates from) have the fourth and second highest cost of living for the fifty states.2  Therefore, it would be insane for a $15/ hour minimum wage to be forced upon the median state, South Dakota, where $11.03 per hour would accomplish the same as $15 in California.  Based on its lowest of all costs of living, only $9.38 would be needed in Mississippi.  How many jobs would be eliminated in that state if it was required to pay 60% more for the same work?

Back to the shortage of construction workers.  “Construction workers [in New York City] earn a median hourly wage of $18.68.  Hourly wages typically start from $10.93 and go up to $41.47.”  Also, due to the erratic nature of the work, average earnings for general construction workers was $35,750 in 2014. Carpenters earned about $10,000 more and iron and steel workers $17,000 more.3

Minimum wage for fast food workers in New York City was officially raised to $12.00 at the beginning of this year… a job not intended to be a career to support a family.  It will increase annually until it reaches $15.00 by the end of 2018.

Assuming fifty weeks of forty hours, the fast food worker would earn $30,000 starting in 2019 – if jobs aren’t eliminated because of the 25% increase over two years.

Maybe the construction workers will get a nice raise, too, buy maybe not.

This is not to say that fast food isn’t difficult at times, but compared to construction?
In the end, why work really hard in temperature extremes and be subject to erratic work schedules based on the weather for $35,750 as a general construction worker4 when big government says you should receive $30,000 for mostly indoor work?  (also possible as big government forces these businesses to offer 40-hour weeks someday)

Perhaps we’ve solved the mystery of why there’s a construction worker shortage.

 

1 – “Affordability Poses Homebuyer Challenge, by Randy Tucker, Kentucky Enquirer, 7/29/2017.

2https://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/, for Ohio readers of this blog, $10.20 per hour accomplishes the same as $15.00 in California (understanding, of course, it will be higher for the urban areas and lower for rural).

3https://www.sokanu.com/careers/construction-worker/salary/New%20York/

4https://labor.ny.gov/formsdocs/factsheets/pdfs/p716.pdf

Baseball Players are Being Referred to as Mere “Pieces” More Frequently

Featured

[also posted on http://www.sportuoso.wordpress.com]

All industries and cultures have jargon.  Sometimes it involves the creation of entirely new words as the IT business does frequently (e.g. malware and defragging), while other commonly used words are simply redefined over time such as “backlog” or “cell.”1

Baseball is no different.  It has terms first used in other sports:  screw ball, grand slam and innings.2,3,4  It has also come up with a few of its own:  sacrifice fly5 and squeeze play.6

Conversational lexicon changes daily especially when modern media like Twitter truncates words and invents abbreviations like “LOL.”  Baseball has its own innovation with the word “piece” being most popular during June and July as the no-waiver trading deadline approaches.  It is used to represent the player(s) who are available to attract big name stars in return.  When used excessively, it seems to reduce the status of a human player to mere pawns in a game.  True, players may feel that way if their contracts give them limited say in what happens to them.  However, we should try to maintain respect so as not to diminish the dignity of the person.  Otherwise, we end up with these:

“And it doesn’t hurt that he’s on a cheap contract that runs out after the season, making him a fairly easy and obvious trade piece if the A’s remain buried in the AL West… Either way, barring a turnaround from the Bucs, he seems quite likely to be a top trade piece this summer… With free agency beckoning, the veteran reliever is probably the Phils’ clearest trade piece… Neither veteran is hitting much early on, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t still likely trade pieces… It’s not quite clear whether Atlanta will end up looking to move these moderately priced veterans, but both are swinging the bat well and could be useful pieces in the right situation.”7

It becomes more impersonal with those participating in fantasy leagues:

“In life, it’s always nice to get a deal and in fantasy, that can come in the form of trading pieces that have been performing beyond and below expectations… I’d even trade for Wil Myers because you can probably get an extra piece back with him with how hot Zimmerman’s been… Some pieces I would trade him for include Ryan Braun, Xander Bogaerts, and Jonathan Villar.”8

Those who are employees or stakeholders in a firm should consider how they’d feel if they were referred to as “pieces of the company.”

 

1 – “Backlog” meant the biggest log in the fire during colonial times. Today, it means a reserve or a pile of work you still need to plow through.”

“ Cell used to mean jail! Or a tiny part of your body…” said Amy Richards.
Today, of course, it’s also what you call your phone,”
from “These Everyday Words Used To Have Completely Different Meanings,” http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/26/words-that-have-changed-meaning_n_4847343.html, 2/26/2014.

2 – “The first published reference in the OED [Oxford English Dictionary] is from an 1866 book on cricket: “A ‘screw’ ball, which in slow bowling would describe the arc of a circle from the pitch to the wicket, becomes in fast bowling a sharp angle.” – from “Screwball etymologies,” by Patricia T. O’Conner and Stewart Kellerman, https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2009/01/screwball-etymologies.html, 1/29/2009.

–“This term originated in the early 1800s in the card game of whist (forerunner of contract bridge), where itrefers to the taking of all thirteen tricks. It later was extended to bridge and various sports, where it has different meanings: in baseball, a homerun hit with runners on all the bases, resulting in four runs for the team; in tennis, winning all four national championships in a single calendar year; in golf, winning all four major championships. In the 1990s the term was used for four related proposals presented on a ballot at once.”
From http://www.dictionary.com/browse/grand-slam

4 – “Cricket originated in England in the 1300s and became a mainstream sport four hundred years later… A match is divided into innings. During an innings, one team bats while the other team bowls and fields.”  From http://www.learn-cricket.com/eng/basics1.php

5 – “The sacrifice fly was adopted as an official rule in 1954, at which point it was distinguished from the sacrifice bunt. Before 1954, Major League Baseball went back and forth as to whether a sacrifice fly should be counted statistically. In the years that it was counted (1908-31 and ’39), it was grouped together with the sacrifice bunt as simply a “sacrifice.”  From http://m.mlb.com/glossary/standard-stats/sacrifice-fly

6 – “An April 20, 1905 Chicago Tribune article stated:  ‘[Ducky] Holmes tried to “squeeze” in the run which would have won the game with a bunt, but it went foul.’”
“The first use of the term “squeeze play” can be found in the Chicago Tribune five days later when an article stated:  ‘[New York Highlanders] manager [Clark] Griffith says he has a new one called the “squeeze play,” which is working wonders.’”  From https://sports.stackexchange.com/questions/4593/why-is-a-squeeze-bunt-referred-to-as-such

7 – “Top 30 Trade Deadline Candidates For 2017,” by Jeff Todd, https://www.mlbtraderumors.com/2017/05/top-30-trade-deadline-candidates-for-2017.html, 5/19/2017.

8 – “7 Players to Trade Now (Fantasy Baseball),” by Clinton Ho, https://www.fantasypros.com/2017/05/7-players-to-trade-now-may-2017/, 5/12/2017.

Why is it So Difficult to Pronounce “Queso” Correctly?

Featured

American English has had an influx of foreign words as much as our nation has had immigrants.  After years of common use, we can easily stop becoming aware of their origins.  Words such as restaurant and entree (French), delicatessen [often shortened to “deli”] and kindergarten (German)1 , vodka (Russian), as well as fiasco and prima donna (Italian)2 fit into our daily conversations smoothly.

With the increase of those with Hispanic heritage, many Spanish words have become prevalent in our conversations.  Sometimes the words are used even when an English equivalent exists.  This brings us to “queso” or cheese.  A recent fast food television commercial  used the Spanish word throughout rather than its English equivalent.

Fine, many ads do that.  But why is the word pronounced “KAY-so”  instead of “KEH-so”?  In the first place, the long “a” is practically unique to the English language.  Secondly, the correct “eh” sound for the Spanish “e” is already familiar to us Americans.  For example, we have “impressive (“im-PREHS-sihv”), beneficial  (beh-neh-FISH-al), etc.

The closest to a long “a” sound in Spanish comes from words with the “ei” diphthong3 such as in “beisbol” (meaning baseball).

While we’re on the subject, the common unit of currency in several nations, the “peso,” is pronounced “PEH-so”, not “PAY-so.”  Of course, Spanish words aren’t the only ones with foreign origins which are mispronounced when they are easily said correctly.  Perhaps these will be addressed in a future article.

 

1 – “German loanwords in English,” http://www.englisch-hilfen.de/en/words/loanwords.htm

2https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_words_of_Italian_origin

3 – “A diphthong… also known as a gliding vowel, is a combination of two adjacent vowel soundswithin the same syllable,” from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diphthong

Atheist is Suing Against “In God We Trust” on Currency — Perhaps We Simply Don’t Deserve to Use It

Featured

A California atheist, Michael Newdow, will be in a federal court in Cincinnati arguing that the presence of the words “In God We Trust” on U.S. currency violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 by infringing on his religious freedom.1,2  He’s ignoring the prominence of religious belief in our republic since its beginnings.  As George Washington said in his farewell address:

“Of all the dispositions and habits, which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports… Let it simply be asked, Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths, which are the instruments of investigation in Courts of Justice?  And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion.  Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”3

The courts will continue to ponder this thorny issue of how to allow expressions religious belief in our public lives without violating constitutional rights.

Putting that aside, a review of where our U.S. culture is headed strongly suggests that using the motto “In God We Trust” is giving ourselves more credit than we deserve.  Oh sure, we made slavery illegal in this country in the 19th century – a mere eight centuries after “both Saint Wulfstan and Saint Anselm successfully campaigned to remove the last vestiges of slavery in Christendom” 4 (unfortunately, it resurfaced later in more “enlightened” times).  And we started allowing women to vote in 1920, or twenty-seven years after New Zealand did the same and we were also later than ten other countries.5

But, we have had legalized murder of the unborn for 44 years resulting in about 59 million victims6 not counting the physical risks and emotional scars suffered by the mothers.And our latest creation, where we think  the state can redefine the institution of marriage (something not created by the state in he first place) and toss Natural Law out the window with same-sex “marriage.”

These are strange ways to prove we believe “In God We Trust.”

 

 

1 – “Does God have a place on money?, by Chris Graves, The Cincinnati Enquirer, 6/18/2017.

2https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/house-bill/1308

3https://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/WashingtonFarewell.html

4 – “Bearing False Witness,” by Rodney Stark, Templeton Press; West Conshohocken, PA, 2016.

5 – “First 15 Countries To Grant Women’s Suffrage, http://www.worldatlas.com/articles/first-15-countries-to-grant-women-s-suffrage.html

6 – http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

7 – “In a series of 1,182 abortions which occurred under closely regulated hospital conditions, 27 percent of the patients acquired post-abortion infection lasting 3 days or longer… Researchers have reported that 3 to 5 percent of aborted women are left inadvertently sterile as a result of the operation’s latent morbidity… Other countries which have legalized abortion have seen the same dramatic increase in ectopic pregnancies…

“Within 8 weeks after their abortions, 55% expressed guilt, 44% complained of nervous disorders, 36% had experienced sleep disturbances, 31% had regrets about their decision, and 11% had been prescribed psychotropic medicine by their family doctor… Thirty to fifty percent of aborted women report experiencing sexual dysfunctions, of both short and long duration, beginning immediately after their abortions. These problems may include one or more of the following: loss of pleasure from intercourse, increased pain, an aversion to sex and/or males in general, or the development of a promiscuous life-style.”  From The After Effects of Abortion,” http://www.abortionfacts.com/reardon/the-after-effects-of-abortion

Time to Send Sgt. Saunders to Congress!

Featured

Those of us born in the first half of the “Baby Boomer” generation will remember the television weekly series, “Combat!”  It was set in World War II France as the Americans fought the Germans.  Like most programs of that era, short snippets from an episode were used in brief promotions during the week.

The one which stands out featured a night battle scene where Sergeant Saunders (played by Vic Morrow) was giving instructions to an overwhelmed soldier, both covered in mud and sweat.  As the sergeant finished his orders, the soldier said, “I’ll try.”

Saunders sharp comeback was, “Don’t try, you DO IT!”  

Fast forward to 2017, where a two-plus year Republican majority in both houses of Congress has had several years to plan a strategy to deliver us from Obamacare.  The two leaders, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI), seem to be rolling out more versions of doomed legislation with their apparent concern being that they can say they tried rather than they were relentless in the critical pursuit of victory.

The threats of the Axis powers then and Obamacare now are similar in their impact on daily life.  Had Germany, Italy and Japan been victorious, our freedoms that are guaranteed (not given) by the Constitution would have been scuttled.  Allow the ironically named Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to continue much longer and the free enterprise medical world crashes in the U.S. when too many insurers pull out of markets and middle-America is smothered by premiums covering many more than just their own families.  Thus, the original intent of our previous President will be realized as a frantic majority will plead for “single-payer health care” (also known as socialized medicine) where big government decides what health care is given to whom.  This will complete the liberals’ process of trivializing human life to a commodity to be managed like crops and minerals – the same philosophy of the Axis leaders.

To Mr. McConnell, Mr. Ryan and the rest of the Republican controlled Congress:

“Don’t try to fix the damage caused by Obamacare, YOU DO IT!”

India Wants to Tackle Climate Change with the Risk of Increased Nuclear Power?

Featured

A few days after President Trump announced that the U.S. would be withdrawing from the Paris agreement on climate change, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi made a state visit to France where he emphasized India’s continued commitment to the 2015 accord by saying “we will work and walk together with others to leave a gift for future generations.”1

The article continues to describe India’s desire to make its “Made in India” campaign realized partially through its development of nuclear power.  The nation is behind in its ability to produce nuclear power as it is still recovering from the 32-year ban the world placed on India prohibiting it from buying nuclear fuel and technology for civilian purposes.  The ban was initiated as a result of its testing a nuclear weapon in 1974.

Putting all of the political reasons and climate change theories aside, there should be one monumental question overriding everything in this issue:  Why is a densely populated country like India willing to gamble with a potentially cataclysmic accident?  Or has the world forgotten Chernobyl?

The  Distressing  Data  from  Chernobyl

April 26, 1986 Chernobyl:  The nuclear power disaster killed 30 workers at the time of the explosion or those who died within months due to radiation exposure.  The World Health Organization projects 9,000 total deaths as a result of this calamity if it parallels the results of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in 1945.  Greenpeace suggests it could go as high as 90,000.  Three hundred fifty thousand people were impacted by the initial evacuation and resettlement.About 1,000 square miles continue to be restricted areas.3  High levels of radiation are expected to make the area uninhabitable anywhere from 180 to 320 years.  Birth defects in Belarus and Ukraine near Chernobyl have been significantly higher.Cleanup of the site is scheduled for 2065.5

If  This  Happened  in  India

The nuclear power plant in Hazira is running at about 20% capacity.1  It is not India’s biggest plant, but let’s supposed a ramped up Hazira has a Chernobyl misfortune.

The city of Hazira is only 65 square miles, so we need to look at its Surat district within the state of Gujarat to compare for population density.  This district is 4,418 square kilometers in size or roughly 1,700 square miles (or close enough to use for similarity).  Its population density is 1,376 per square kilometer6  or about 3,564 people per square mile.

If this plant were to contaminate a Chernobyl-sized area of 1,000 square miles, at least 3-1/2 million people (approx. the combined populations of Chicago and San Francisco)7 would be displaced in addition to the thousands of deaths and life-changing impacts on many more in surrounding areas.  Is nuclear power really the best option for India’s in its attempt to show its resolve in addressing climate change?

 

1 – “India’s Nuclear Industry Needs a Jolt,” edited by Cristina Lindblad, Bloomberg Businessweek, 6/12-18/2017.

2 – “Chernobyl: 30 Years Later, By The Numbers,” by the Associated Press, https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2016-04-25/a-look-at-the-1986-chernobyl-nuclear-disaster-in-numbers, 4/25/2016.

3 –  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Exclusion_Zone

4 – “Area around Chernobyl remains uninhabitable 25 years later,” by Doug Saunders, The Globe and Mail,https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/area-around-chernobyl-remains-uninhabitable-25-years-later/article4266317/, published 3/15/2011, last updated 8/23/2012.

5https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_Nuclear_Power_Plant

6https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surat_district

7 – July 1, 2014 estimated populations. https://www.infoplease.com/us/us-cities/top-50-cities-us-population-and-rank

Suddenly, Democrats are Worried About People Losing Their Lives?

Featured

In response to the recently released Senate version of Obamacare replacement, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said:

“These cuts are blood money,” Warren said on the Senate floor. “People will die.”  More specifically, Warren added that “Senate Republicans are paying for tax cuts for the wealthy with American lives.” 1

She was a member of the Congress which implemented Obamacare – the plan which increased premiums to unfathomable heights (married couple with no children at home in Ohio with moderate coverage and high deductibles pays $1,700 per month).  The plan has absurd requirements causing insurers to leave many counties and states, thus decreasing competition (and we know what that does to prices).  This is the plan which Rep. Nancy Pelosi famously said that we would have to pass it in order to learn what’s in it, and we have regretted the result.

Sen. Warren is all up in arms about the proposed health plan which might force Congress to move public health insurance assistance from the backs of average Americans to a sensible federal plan where the burden is distributed fairly.  (This does not mean going to socialized medicine, the “single payer” program which Obamacare had in mind after it deliberately destroyed our private insurance system, a goal well on its way to realization.)

All of this outrage from a member of the party which promotes the killing of babies (59 million victims since Roe v. Wade)2   and a disciple of President Obama who, as a senator, would not vote against the horrific practice of late term abortion.

We can’t take her or the rest of the hypocritical Democrats seriously.

 

1 – “Elizabeth Warren on McConnell Bill: ‘These Cuts are Blood Money… People Will Die,’” by Tony Lee, http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/22/elizabeth-warren-blood-money-people-will-die/

2http://www.christianliferesources.com/article/u-s-abortion-statistics-by-year-1973-current-1042

Democrats: Don’t Wring Your Hands About Anticipated Federal Budget Cuts, but Donate As Non-Liberals Do

Featured

Lead  In

My wife and I recently attended an info-dinner given by a nationally known financial planning company for invited clients.  Near the end of the evening, one of the attendees at our table repeatedly mentioned how improper it was for those us attending a special dinner we didn’t have to pay for when so many in the U.S. and the world were struggling to survive.  To comfort him, several of us agreed with his assertion that the world contained enough wealth to sustain the entire population, but that the problem was how to make it equitable.

He continued to wring his hands verbally about how those of us at the table, living in excess, were part the problem.  I commented that it would be a great help if our federal government would stop pushing religious groups out the adoption business, hospitals and schools because they did not subscribe to the new political correctness being enforced.  These organizations not only have done good work for centuries, but do it more economically than big government can.

His continued restrained jabs at our supposed lack of concern for the less fortunate changed our responses.  A couple of us described how we and relatives were assisting disadvantaged people through contacts in our country and the world in charitable projects to alleviate poverty.  These efforts included not just significant financial assistance, considering our modest means, but actual labor to help those in need.

Unfortunately, he was not mollified by any of this.  Finally, to my surprise, my otherwise silent wife asked him what he was doing to help others since he seemed so passionate about this subject.  After some typical liberal avoidance of the issue, he said he was promoting awareness.  But what was he actually doing to be part of the solution?  In the absence of anything specific, it was clear that he was for big government to solve these inequities.  This idea was cemented with his question after I reminded him that the success of getting the colonies to agree to a federal constitution was contingent on the assurance that states’ rights would still exist.  He then asked me how much our nation’s population had increased since then.  I correctly stated that it went from three million to 320 million.  His implication was that greater size required great government intervention.

Subsidiarity,  not  Big  Brother

The Left loves concentration of power at the top ostensibly because those of us at the lower levels are incapable.  History proves the error of this strategy because:

“… Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative.  The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity [emphasis retained], according to which ‘a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help co-ordinate its activity within the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good’… The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism.  It sets limits for state intervention… In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, neither the state nor any larger society should substitute itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and intermediary bodies… The family must be helped and defended by appropriate social measures.  Where families cannot fulfill their responsibilities, other social bodies have the duty of helping them and supporting the institution of the family.  Following the principle of subsidiarity, larger communities should take care not to usurp the family’s prerogatives or interfere in its life.” 1,2

How  Does  This  Relate  to  the  New  Federal  Budget?

President Trump’s federal budget proposal is expected to be released this coming Tuesday (May 23).  Included in it will be some budget cuts as the federal deficit begins to be addressed.  The safest bet is that there will be considerable howling, especially from Democrats, as a result of some decreases in funding of some social programs.

Subsidiarity teaches that this is not a crisis or necessarily inappropriate.  Much has been and should be done at the state and local level – and this includes us average citizens, not just “the government.”

Going back to the discussion at the financial planning dinner, what states’ residents are doing the most to make the world a better place through their own initiative?  According to recent data, these states were the most charitable based on income tax filing deductions (as a percentage of income) and would not reflect aid to family members and friends in need:

  • Utah 6.6%
  • Mississippi 5.0%
  • Alabama 4.8%
  • Tennessee 4,5%
  • Georgia 4.2%
  • South Carolina 4.1%
  • Idaho 4.0%
  • Oklahoma 3.9%
  • Arkansas 3.9%
  • North Carolina 3.6%

Liberal states aren’t present in this list.  Adding  to the Left’s reputation for wanting the federal government take all of the responsibility, New Hampshire was the lowest and Maine and Vermont were among the lowest.While some may believe that this is because conservatives are simply wealthier or more religious (at least true on the second part), the point is that for the 2012 election, “The top 17 states for rate of giving all went for Romney.” 4

The take away from this:  Liberals, with their willingness to spend others’ money instead of their own, may not complain about budget cuts until they match the generosity of their supposedly less informed non-liberal acquaintances.

 

1 – Taken from paragraphs 1883, 1885, 1894 and 2209 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

2 – A word about “the common good.”  It is not about majority rule or what helps the most people, but “By common good is to be understood ‘the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily.’  The common good concerns the life of all… The common good consists of three essential elements:  respect for and promotion of the fundamental rights of the person; prosperity, or the development of the spiritual and temporal goods of society; the peace and security of the group and of its members.”  Ibid, from paragraphs 1906 and 1925.

3 – “Report:  Which states give the most to charity?  The ones with church-goers,” by Lindsey Bever, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/10/06/report-which-states-give-the-most-to-charity-the-ones-with-church-goers/?utm_term=.d192b18507a9, 10/6/2014.

4 – “Who’s More Generous, Liberals or Conservatives,” by John Grgurich, The Fiscal Times, http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2014/10/17/Who-s-More-Generous-Liberals-or-Conservatives, 10/17/2014.

It’s Unfortunate that Many “Universities” are Digressing to “Particularities”

Featured

Universities have been in existence for many centuries, although a precise starting date is not known.

“It was, after all, in the High Middle Ages that the university came into existence… The precise origins of the very first universities are lost in obscurity, though the picture becomes ever clearer as we move into the thirteenth century.  We cannot give exact dates for the appearance of universities at Paris and Bologna, Oxford and Cambridge, since they evolved over a period of time…”1

The original purpose of the university is “the creation of prepared minds.” True, over the last century, we have seen much commercialization of higher education in the form of investment into research for the business and manufacturing worlds.  In addition, the idea that colleges are to prepare students for more lucrative employment has somehow become the majority opinion.

All of that aside, an inherent mission of the university remains that it is to be an arena where a multitude of ideas can discussed and debated.  The concept comes from “the Latin words universitas and universitatis (which) are generally thought of as the source of the word university.

These words are derived from universus universeum / universa, meaning universe or universal.”3

 The intrinsic purpose of the university was maintained in the 1960’s despite near anarchy occurring on some campuses when “progressive” ideas ranging from the validity of the Viet Nam War to sexual mores to questioning our form of government aggressively demanded to be heard.  While many opposed the progressives, it was appropriate that these differences of opinion were allowed to be debated.

Now, after seven centuries of purposeful existence, the “university” is threatened with extinction.  Since the 1960’s, a majority of U.S. universities have adopted the “progressive” social and political philosophies.  However, in this new climate they have abandoned the fundamental purpose of the university by not allowing “conservatives” to speak on many campuses.  Excuses for limiting the exchange of ideas include charges of not representing the university’s core values4 and false accusations of “hate speech” compelling the universities to say they cannot guarantee safety of the speaker or audience because of the expectation of violent protests.

These institutions of higher learning are abdicating their responsibility to “create prepared minds” via civilized discussion of opposing thoughts.  They are ceasing to be universal in the testing of ideas.

An antonym for universal is “particular”.Consequently, institutions that “disinvited” conservative speakers last year such as Princeton University and American University should henceforth be known as Princeton Particularity and American Particularity.5

 

1 – “The Catholic Church and the Creation of the University,” by Thomas E. Woods Jr., http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/education/catholic-contributions/the-catholic-church-and-the-creation-of-the-university.html, 2005.

2 – “The Purpose of Higher Education:  To Create Prepared Minds, “ by Andres Fortino, https://evolllution.com/opinions/the-purpose-of-higher-education-to-create-prepared-minds/, 6/26/2012.

3http://english-ingles.com/en/etymology-of-university/

4 – “Dis-invited: 4 Conservatives Not Welcome To Speak On College Campuses,” by Arissa D (Future Female Leaders cabinet member and a student at Yale University, http://futurefemaleleader.com/disinvited-conservatives-not-welcome/, 4/16/2017.

5http://englishthesaurus.net/antonym/universal

“America First” is a Smart Negotiation Tool, Not Selfish or an Isolationist Policy

Featured

Strange, that liberals condone the killing of the most innocent human beings and the legitimizing of same-sex “marriage”, but freak out when President Trump says:  “America First.”

Three quick points:

A) Trump’s putting our nation’s interests first is what all nations’ leaders should do. Trump’s first responsibility is to the U.S., not Germany, Russia or Iran.  In the same way, Angela Merkel is primarily responsible to the German people, not to the E.U., China or Syria.

B) Secondly, “America First” is not a descendant of Hitler’s metastasized version of nationalism. That has already been addressed in https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/trumps-patriotism-is-nothing-like-hitlers-concept-of-nationalism/.

C) Finally, “America First” is simply a solid negotiation strategy — something we haven’t seen from the Oval Office in quite a few years. Disagree?  Then check out the infamous Obama-Kerry deal with Iran.

Whom  Should  We  Trust  to  Represent  Us  With  Other  Nations?

When one is negotiating, the wise individual begins with a position which allows some losses through compromise without losing key “wants.”

It’s no different from selling a house or a car.  One doesn’t open with his “must have” price, but begins above that mark so that he has room to negotiate downward and maintain his “must have” price in the end.

What is surprising is that so many fear our nation’s negotiation future in the hands of President Trump who wrote, “The Art of the Deal.”  In it, he said:

“I don’t hold it against people that they have opposed me.”1

“My style of deal-making is quite simple and straightforward. I aim very high, and then I just keep pushing and pushing and pushing to get what I’m after. Sometimes I settle for less than I sought, but in most cases I still end up with what I want.”

He’s determined and sticks to the issues without allowing personalities to sidetrack him.

And yet, many felt more comfortable with his predecessor who wrote these two quotes from “Dreams of My Father” and other statements.

“Churches won’t work with you, though, just out of the goodness of their hearts.  They’ll talk a good game-a sermon on Sunday, maybe, or a special offering for the homeless.  But if push comes to show, they won’t really move unless you can show them how it’ll help them pay their heating bill.”3

“I had given her a reassuring smile and patted her hand and told her not to worry, I wouldn’t do anything stupid.  It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned:  People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves.”4

“Because what we are confident about is that when people look and see that they can get high-quality, affordable health care for less than their cell phone bill, they’re going to sign up.” [Good thing our phone bills aren’t that high or we’d all need subsidies.]

“During his presidential campaign and subsequent battle over a health care law, Mr. Obama quieted crowds with the story of his mother’s fight with her insurer over whether her cancer was a pre-existing condition that disqualified her from coverage…. But in “A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama’s Mother,” author Janny Scott quotes from correspondence from the president’s mother to assert that the 1995 dispute concerned a Cigna disability insurance policy and that her actual health insurer had apparently reimbursed most of her medical expenses without argument.” 6

Conclusion

Obama had difficulty being honest with issues confined to our homeland – no wonder he did a poor job abroad.  Trump, on the other hand, vows to look out for the needs of our entire nation.  From his style, neither our allies nor our adversaries will have to decipher what he’s up to.  In this way, we will have a chance at reasonable international agreements.  Obama won the presidency in 2008 on a promise of change.  Little did his fooled supporters realize that the beneficial change he spoke of was still eight years away!

 

1http://www.bankrate.com/finance/politics/clues-to-trump-presidency-from-the-art-of-the-deal-4.aspx

2 – “A paragraph from ‘The Art of the Deal’ gives insight about a Trump administration,” by Jacob Pramuk, http://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/01/a-paragraph-from-the-art-of-the-deal-gives-insight-about-a-trump-administration.html, 12/1/2016.

3 – “Dreams from My Father Quotes,” https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/86032-dreams-from-my-father?page=2

4 – “Dreams from My Father Quotes,” https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/86032-dreams-from-my-father?page=3

5 – “Top 10 Quotes From Bill Clinton and President Obama Chat At CGI,” by Dan Munro, http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2013/09/27/top-10-quotes-from-bill-clinton-and-president-obama-chat-at-cgi/#f7e13213860f, 9/27/2013.

6 – “Book Challenges Obama on Mother’s Deathbed Fight,” by Kevin Sack, http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/us/politics/14mother.html, 7/13/2011.

Women Are “Hurting and Fearful” of Trump? — What About Babies’ Anxiety Toward “Pro-Choice”?

Featured

Reactions to the defeat of the Left’s darling, Hillary Clinton, are becoming borderline psychotic.Today, the day after Trump’s inauguration, many thousands are protesting in the streets of Washington D.C. because women are “hurting and fearful” of him according to a Fox News report.

True, the new President’s public behavior toward women has been less than gentlemanly in numerous instances over the years.  Such words and actions were unjustifiably commonplace for generations including the early Baby Boomer years.  Could it be that they anticipate Trump would be a greater threat to women in the White House than fellow 1946-born President Clinton and his abuse of women while in office?

Unlikely.  From outward appearances, the Trumps’ marriage is a faithful one, not born out of political expediency.  It is this writer’s opinion that if there were infidelity, Melania would not stand for it and cover it up as others have said Hillary Clinton did for her husband.2, 3

The concern for having Trump in the White House is unreasonable.  What IS reasonable, would be the unborn’s justified fear of the “Pro-Choice” crowd, led by the Clintons, who support of legalized murder via Roe v. Wade.  Chemical death and/or dismemberment are the ultimate abuse.  Protecting those who hide behind the shield of a Supreme court decision as flawed as the Dred Scott decision4, is the reality that none of the targeted victims will ever be able to have their own protest march for the nation to see.  That is something to be upset about.

 

 

1 – “Psychotic disorders are a group of serious illnesses that affect the mind. They make it hard for someone to think clearly, make good judgments, respond emotionally, communicate effectively, understand reality, and behave appropriately.

“When symptoms are severe, people with psychotic disorders have trouble staying in touch with reality and often are unable to handle daily life. But even severe psychotic disorders usually can be treated.”  http://www.webmd.com/schizophrenia/guide/mental-health-psychotic-disorders#1

2 – “Here’s The Story On The Bill Clinton Rape Allegation,” by Jonathan Cohn and Ryan Grim, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-clinton-broaddrick_us_57fae930e4b0e655eab54dee, 10/16/2016.

3 – “A Brief History Of Juanita Broaddrick, The Woman Accusing Bill Clinton Of Rape,” by Eydar Peralta, http://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-juanita-broaddrick-the-woman-accusing-bill-clinton-of-rape, 10/9/2016.

4 – “In March 1857, in one of the most controversial events preceding the American Civil War (1861-65), the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford. The case had been brought before the court by Dred Scott, a slave who had lived with his owner in a free state before returning to the slave state of Missouri.  Scott argued that his time spent in these locations entitled him to emancipation.  In his decision, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, a staunch supporter of slavery, disagreed: The court found that no black, free or slave, could claim U.S. citizenship, and therefore blacks were unable to petition the court for their freedom.  The Dred Scott decision incensed abolitionists and heightened North-South tensions, which would erupt in war just three years later.”  http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/dred-scott-case

Trump’s Patriotism is Nothing Like Hitler’s Concept of Nationalism

Featured

The Left, which justifies baby-killing and the legitimization of disordered behaviors, continues to wring its hands over President Trump’s vision of “America First.” They relentlessly scream a warning that our new President is promoting Hitler’s nationalism which led to millions of deaths worldwide.

Once again, they are showing their lack of knowledge of history — an unfortunate product of the “progressive’s” educational strategy.  But how did Hitler really feel about nationalism/ patriotism?

In Hitler’s conception of the Nation, the Ethnie is the German Volk: ‘the emotive force of which is inadequately conveyed by translation as ‘culture’, ‘force’ or ‘race’.’ The core of the volk was the Aryan nuclei that represented the pure breed of the German people… The word is repeated throughout “Mein Kampf” and his early speeches, it is the core of his nationalist discourse especially within his book “Mein Kampf”, where his view is of a rigid closed ethnic nation formed around an ethnic core, in order to unite the nation against internal and external threats.”1

In Trumps inaugural speech today, he said:

“And through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other.  When you open your mind to patriotism, there is — no –room – for — prejudice.”

That’s not Hitler.  Get an education, liberals.  (Fortunately for you, your chances of that will be better with this administration’s promotion of school choice — something Democratic leadership opposes vehemently.)

 

 

1 – “Adolf Hitler’s Account of the ‘Nation’ and ‘Nationalism’,” by John Cai Benjamin Weaver, http://www.e-ir.info/2011/05/16/adolf-hitlers-account-of-the-%E2%80%98nation%E2%80%99-and-%E2%80%98nationalism%E2%80%99/, 5/16/2011.

The Ill-Advised Blending of the Sexes, including Gender-Neutral Names

Featured

For a number of years, an increasing disdain for the wonderful differences between men and women has led to a number of inventions ranging from unisex clothing to gender-neutral names (which have increased by 60% in the last ten years1).  In most cases, the blurring of the sexes is not a conscious challenge to God’s wisdom in creating two genders. It is, nevertheless, surprising in that celebrating the differences between men and women has been has been the healthy norm historically.

Why  Not  One  Blended  Gender?

But society’s changes seem to be asking this:  “Why not move toward making ourselves androgynous2 beings instead of having the two genders?

A Jewish insight understands a need for two genders:  “The answer is that in order to maximize giving, the recipient must be different from the giver.  If the two are identical, giving can occur, but it is limited.  One would give based on his or her own needs, since the receiver would have the exact same needs.  To truly be a giver, the person must take into account what the receiver needs and not only what the giver wants.  By giving to someone with different needs, a person is trained to think and give on terms other than his or her own.”3

Summarized from a Christian source:  “’Being man’ or ‘being woman’ is a reality which is good and willed by God.”4

Trends  Making  it  More  Difficult  to  Distinguish  Between  Male  and  Female

Thus, there seems to be no reason to oppose the manifestation of two distinct genders unless one has an agenda.  Unfortunately, they exist.

It can arise from a resignation as a result of society’s faults:  “Strange as it sounds, this simply states what religious rhetoric assumes; that the men form the legitimate body of the community, while women are allowed to participate only when they assimilate themselves to men.”5

In some cases, it springs from a dislike of marriage as the Communism has:  “The Party did all it could to push women into industry.  The bourgeois family as a social unit was to be made obsolete .”6

It can simply come from a clothes designer who has no concern for the ultimate well-being of those who are unsure of their “gender identity” but profits from it under the guise of a desire to prevent the stifling of artistic imagination.7

“This book will train you to think … like a guy.  Because dating has always been a guy’s world, until now.”8

Or it can originate from a trend with no logical purpose:  “Gender neutral makeup is on the rise. Brands like Enter Pronoun are leading the unisex cosmetics category with their selection of concealers, bronzers and eye liners.9

Reasons  Given  for  Blurring  Gender  Distinction

“…masculine names are often associated with success, for instance, which might explain why parents historically chose androgynous names for girls.”10

“Additionally, a study from Clemson University showed that women with more traditionally male names made more successful lawyers and judges than women with more feminine names.”11

“SE Hinton (Susan Eloise), DC Fontana (Dorothy Catherine), PN Elrod (Patricia Nead) and KA Applegate, to name but a few, have all ditched their first names to improve their chances of success in genres dominated by male writers.”12

“You see, I’ve learned that you can’t land a man by reading all those female-empowerment books or women’s magazines.  In fact, you have to avoid those all together.  The way to land a guy is to think, act, and react … like a guy.
“Have you ever seen a man get all goo-goo gaga over a baby in a grocery store line? No!… Have you ever been three dates into a relationship and had a guy tell you his real desire in life is to quit his job and be a stay at home dad? Absolutely not!”8

“Because I felt that being a woman was an obstacle, I wanted to become gender-neutral.  It became my way of tricking the system.” 13

“Millennials are an open-minded and accepting group, and they don’t want their children to feel pressured to conform to stereotypes that might be restrictive.”1

Some  Unintended,  But  Very  Real  Negative  Consequences

To reiterate, most who have joined the gender-neutral parade aren’t intending to challenge the natural complementary design of men and women.  However, the absence of bad intentions cannot insulate us against the inevitable consequences of attempting to redefine the inherent natures of the genders.

Dating:

Psychologist  Dr. John Gray, first renowned for his book, “Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus,” wrote follow ups including the book, “Mars and Venus on a Date.”  In this one, he included the developing practice that many men and women reverse roles in dating.  These men are under the false impression that women should be pleasing them instead of the other way around.

As he wrote:  “A man hungers for the opportunity to make a woman happy.  Her happiness is his happiness… In relating to her, whatever will make her happiest makes him happy.  If he detects that her mission is to please him, he will also focus on how she can please him… If she wants to pursue him, he will happily sit back and passively receive what she wants to give… Whenever a woman pursues a man more than he is pursuing her, he will pursue her less.  Why should he risk failure when she is happy to pursue him?  Automatically, he will relax more and become more passive about the relationship.  Instead of thinking what she may want, he begins thinking more about what he wants.  This turnaround is very confusing for a woman because her assertive approach is successful in the working world but backfires on a date. “14

Negative effects of a “non-traditional” family environment:

An environment which teaches sexual norms different from Natural Law accelerates the incidences of disordered behavior.  Father Mitch Pacwa, S.J. noted this a couple of years ago on EWTN radio. Homosexuals comprise about 2.5% of the U.S. population.  However, children of same-sex parents have a 25% rate of homosexuality.  Thus, environment can be a much more powerful force than genetics.

With the increased popularity of gender-neutral concepts, should we be surprised that we also have an increase in gender-confused individuals?

Exacerbating the situation are those who deny the human track record that most adolescents will outgrow these feelings on their own or with moderate intervention.15  Sadly, states and cities have passed ordinances prohibiting any counseling for those experiencing disordered emotions.16, 17

 Children’s names:

Ironically, there’s a comical side to the unintended consequences of gender-neutral trends when it comes to naming children.  It has been the tradition for a multitude of generations to name children with names from recent ancestors, saints or names which had special meaning.

The current trend encourages applying traditional boys’ names to girl children — which have meanings the parents probably would have avoided had they done some research. Examples:

Addison (son of Addy), Campbell (crooked mouth), Carson (son of Carr), Drew (manly), Finley (fair-haired warrior) 18

Dana (from Denmark or fertility goddess), Madison (son of Matthew or possibly son of “Maddy” [Maud]) 19

Bailey (bailiff), Cameron (crooked nose), Dylan (great tide, Welsh god Dylan was son of Arianrhod), Emerson (son of Emery), Kelly (warrior woman), Logan (little hollow), Mackenzie ([Gaelic] son of Coinneach), McKenna ([Gaelic] son of Cionaodh), Monroe (from the mouth of the Roe), Remy (oarsman), Ryan (little king), Whitney (white island) 20

Charlie (free man), Paige (page to a lord) 21

Andi (brave, manly), Hayley (from the hay meadow), Parker (forest ranger), Quincy (born fifth), Torey (from the craggy hills) 22

Kennedy (helmeted chief) 23  

Brinley (hill or mound, from the Welsh “Bryn”), Bristol (place at the bridge), Harlow (dweller in a rocky hill area), Sloan (little raider) 24

CONCLUSION

Without a doubt, men have historically had disproportionate advantages over women in some aspects of life. However, the only effective way to remedy this is through a better awareness of the dignity of ALL humans.  Attacking the problem of disrespect solely with a treatment of the superficial aspects of life has only created new problems.

Take the case of the “unfairness” that women are at greater risk of “difficulties” (i.e. pregnancy) because of sex.

The secular humanistic solution was not to increase the cooperation between men and women and a mutual understanding of the reproductive cycle in order to be prudently open to life.25  Rather, it decided to develop chemical and mechanical means to block conception so that women could be more like men in their approach to on-demand sex.

The result?  As Pope Paul VI predicted in his encyclical Humanae Vitae almost fifty years ago:

“Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.” 26

In addition, we see birth control leading to increase in some female cancers and a decrease in some.27  Want to gamble?

Lastly, the significant decrease of commitment on the part of men toward women has resulted in many more of babies being born out of wedlock — creating the dysfunctional families which devastate society far more than guns can.

The lesson is that re-engineering the natural world is not going to achieve social and economic fairness with the sexes.   Rather, we need to use our supposed superior intelligence to solve the root problems directly with honest communication and leave the natural order of things to the Creator.

 

 

 1 – “Unisex baby names are nothing new, but they are officially the hottest trend of 2016.

“To prove this, Nameberry combed through U.S. Social Security data and found that gender-neutral monikers have increased by 88 per cent in the past 30 years — in the past decade alone, unisex names have risen by 60 per cent.”  From “Baby Names 2016: The Most Popular Unisex Names Revealed,” by Isabelle Khoo, http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/08/22/unisex-baby-names-2016_n_11652540.html, 8/22/2016.

2 – “1. Biology Having both female and male characteristics; hermaphroditic.

  1. Being neither distinguishably masculine nor feminine, as in dress, appearance, or behavior.

(From http://www.thefreedictionary.com/androgynous

3 – “Men & Women:  Jewish View of Gender Differences,” by Rebbetzin Tziporah Heller, http://www.aish.com/ci/w/48955181.html

4 – From paragraph 369 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

5 – A quote from Elaine Pagels in her book “The Gnostic Gospels,” (1979; New York: Vintage Books, 1989) as listed in “The Da Vinci Hoax, by Carl E. Olson and Sandra Miesel, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 2004.

6 – Quote of Bella Dodd (1904-1969) who was an “open [Communist] Party leader taken from page 44 of “Takedown,” or how the left has sabotaged family and marriage, by Paul Kengor Ph.D., WND Books; Washington, D.C., 2015.

7 – “I’ve never personally designed anything with the intention of catering only to those who self-identify within a set gender binary.  But as a handmade designer who still sells on Etsy, I’ve noticed there’s no option for posting a skirt or dress or even a body chain that isn’t gendered.  Checking that box makes me feel as though I am imposing limits on my designs and those who want to wear them, which I definitely don’t support. “  From “7 Gender Non Conformist & Gender Neutral Clothing Brands To Support Right Now,” by Alysse Dalessandro, https://www.bustle.com/articles/100668-7-gender-non-conformist-gender-neutral-clothing-brands-to-support-right-now, 8/31/2015.

8 – “Dating game: Women should act more like men,” From an interview with Giuliana DePandi, http://www.today.com/health/dating-game-women-should-act-more-men-wbna14450869, 8/21/2006.

9 – “Does ‘Dressing Like a Man’ Lead to Greater Success?,” by Anna Akbari, https://www.dailyworth.com/posts/3021-rethinking-gender-and-fashion-in-the-workplace/2, 10/16/2014.

10 – “What’s In a Name?,” by Sam Kean, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/28/magazine/28wwln-idealab-t.html, 10/28/2007.

11 – “6 Ways to Pick a Baby Name That Will Make Your Child A success,” by Gabrielle Karol, https://www.learnvest.com/2012/06/6-ways-to-pick-a-baby-name-that-will-make-your-child-a-success/, 6/15/2012.

12 – “Why are female authors still writing under gender-neutral initials?,” http://www.irishexaminer.com/examviral/real-life/why-are-female-authors-still-writing-under-gender-neutral-initials-317458.html, 3/10/2015.

13 – Quote from Heloise Letissier in the 10/17/2016 issue of Time magazine.

14 – Excerpts from pages 43, 178 and 254 of “Mars and Venus on a Date,” by John Gray, PhD, HarperCollins Publishers; New York, NY, 1997.

15 – “Gender identity disorder generally begin [sic] to manifest between the ages of two and four, in which a child displays a preference for the clothing and typical activities of the opposite sex and also prefer playmates of the opposite sex… Most children outgrow gender identity disorder with time and the influence of their parents and peers. Adolescents with gender identity disorder are prone to low self-esteem, social isolation, and distress, and are especially vulnerable to depression and suicide… Both male and female transsexuals may elect to alter their primary and secondary sexual characteristics by undergoing surgery to make their genitals as much like those of the opposite sex as possible… The operation itself is accompanied by hormone treatments that aid in acquiring the secondary sex characteristics of the desired sex. While a number of individuals have gone on to lead happy, productive lives following sex-change operations, others fail to make the transition and continue to suffer from gender identity disorder.”  From “Gender Identity Disorder,” http://psychology.jrank.org/pages/274/Gender-Identity-Disorder.html

16 – [New Jersey]  “A person who is licensed to provide professional counseling under Title 45 of the Revised Statutes, including, but not limited to, a psychiatrist, licensed practicing psychologist, certified social worker, licensed clinical social worker, licensed social worker, licensed marriage and family therapist, certified psychoanalyst, or a person who performs counseling as part of the person’s professional training for any of these professions, shall not engage in sexual orientation change efforts with a person under 18 years of age.”  “New Jersey bans conversion therapy,” by Cristan Williams, http://transadvocate.com/new-jersey-bans-trans-conversion-therapy_n_10039.htm. 8/21/2013

17 – “Today, the Cincinnati City Council became the first city to ban the dangerous and discredited practice of conversion therapy. The historic ordinance imposes a $200 a day fine on anyone practicing conversion therapy on LGBTQ youth.”  “Cincinnati Becomes First City to Ban Conversion Therapy,” by Hayley Miller, http://www.hrc.org/blog/cincinnati-becomes-first-city-to-ban-conversion-therapy, 12/9/2015.

18 – http://www.babynamewizard.com/baby-name/girl/

19 – https://en.wikipedia.org

20 – http://www.behindthename.com,

21 – http://nameberry.com

22 – http://www.sheknows.com/baby-names/name/

23 – http://www.babycenter.com/baby-names-kennedy-5415.htm

24 – http://www.ohbabynames.com

25 – “With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.”

From Section 10 of Humanae Vitae, given by Pope Paul VI on July 25, 1968.

26 – From Section 17, Ibid.

27 – “Birth Control & Cancer: Which Methods Raise, Lower Risk,” by Kelli Miller, http://www.cancer.org/cancer/news/features/birth-control-cancer-which-methods-raise-lower-risk, 1/21/2016.

Cincinnati Metro Buses: Raise Inadequate Fares Before Asking to Increase City Earnings Tax

Featured

Using reasoning that would make any Democrat proud,  the headline for the November 17, 2016 issue of The Kentucky Enquirer  read “Region’s Transit Agency Longingly Eyes Tax Levy.”  Cincinnati’s bus system has a “$109.1 million budget (which) came with a cry for help from the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority (SORTA), which cast its 2017 budget as a stripped-down, stop-gap effort that illustrates the need for a tax hike on next year’s ballot.”1  

The stop-gap budget to address next year’s projected shortfall of $1.3 million included the deferring of capital expenses for a bus fleet which has sixty-three vehicles past their 12-year useful life.

The article described SORTA’s plight coming as a result of “changes in where people live and work.”  Ridership has dropped along with fare revenue.  Therefore, they are suggesting that something must be done with the city’s earning tax even though that is where about half of the system’s revenue comes from?

Just a moment.  Only one-third of the budget comes from fares.  While the article did not mention it, it’s safe to assume that advertising provides the rest of SORTA’s revenue.

So, why is the city’s earning tax providing more for more of the transit budget than fares do?  Perhaps we could start with the fact that fares haven’t been raised in seven years!

But, could it be that fares are exorbitant?   Below is a chart of fares from SORTA’s site:

– $1.75 Within City of Cincinnati (Zone 1)
– $2.65 Hamilton County, outside City limits, plus Rt. 23X (Zone 2)
– $3.00 Harrison, Ohio (52X)
– $3.50 Butler County (Zone 4)
– $3.75 Clermont County (Rts. 28, 29X, 82X)
– $4.25 Warren County (Zone 5, Rts. 71X, 71)
– $0.50 cents Rt. 85 Riverfront parking shuttle
– $0.85 when using a TANK [Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky] monthly pass or transfer (boarding at Government Square only)

The answer is a resounding “no” to the possibility of exorbitant fares, especially in view of the 2016 IRS allowance for mileage is 54 cents for business mile, 19 cents for medical or moving purposes and 14 cents when deducting in the service of charitable organizations. For example, the distance between Cincinnati and Harrison is approximately twenty-three miles.2  At 54 cents per mile, a fare of $12.42 would be a break-even proposition for riders.

Raising fares would be a very reasonable starting point.  SORTA should curb its “longing look” at the unfair solution of a tax increase until it raises fares some to put more of the responsibilty on those who actually use the system.

 

1 – From the previously mentioned article by Jeremy Fugleberg.

2https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=distance+between+Cincinnati+and+Harrison%2C+Ohio

Coping With Election Losses: Most Conservatives Turn to God and Prayer, Many Liberals Turn to the Streets

Featured

This presidential campaign season was clearly the most unusual our nation has ever seen.  But its uniqueness did not end when the election was over.  After a stunning defeat, liberals went to the streets to demonstrate, often not peacefully, when the younger ones weren’t looking for “safe places” to hide in universities because a Democrat would not be in office for the first time since they were in grade school.

Please don’t be misled.  Tuesday, November 5, 2012 was one of the top five disappointing days of my now eleven presidential elections.  Persons of faith knew that the infamous “phone and pen” would bring more attacks on all freedoms, especially religious.  So, what did we do?  We turned to the one who is ultimately in charge, despite all human attempts to destroy His plans.  We continued our prayers to God and promised to redouble our efforts to try to live in His will, regardless of the outcomes in our lifetimes.

However when they suffer defeat, many liberals feel an especially strong leaning toward despair as their hope is in man, as the data in the footnote shows.1   Man is not the ultimate power in determining his destiny.  Many may disdain religious faith and Natural Law as being crutches for the weak by saying, “And it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them…”2 or attempting to justify same-sex “marriage” as being modern justice in place of timeless values.

It not only doesn’t work, but it does not bring the peace needed to deal with stinging adversity and achieve constructive change.  Thus, we have the violent demonstrations against Trump’s election.   So, who are the real hate mongers?

1 – “In a poll about American’s attitudes toward religious freedom, Republicans, and especially conservatives, are standout churchgoers. For Republicans, 46 percent said they “regularly attend,” Democrats 23 percent. Just a quarter of Republicans, 24 percent, never attend or refused to answer the question compared to 46 percent of Democrats.”

“And when separated by ideology, only 18 percent of liberals said they regularly attend church and 62 percent said they never go. For conservatives, 41 percent regularly attend and 34 percent never go.”

While the article adds, “But among the nation, belief in God remains high, even among those unaffiliated with any church,” the true priorities are displayed by actions, not just lip service.

From “Church poll:  Just 18% of liberals regularly attend, 62% never,” by Paul Bedard, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/church-poll-just-18-of-liberals-regularly-attend-62-never/article/2569673, 8/6/2015.

2 – “Obama : ‘They cling to guns or religion,’” http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2008/april/obama-they-cling-to-guns-or-religion.html, 4/13/2008.

Constitution + “Subsidiarity” + Parental Rights = Strike Three for Federal Dept. of Education

Featured

It’s time we recognize the three strikes which have always existed against having the federal Dept. of Education and to push for its elimination.

The Constitution

“Roger Pilon, constitutional scholar has said: ‘From beginning to end the [Constitution] never mentioned the word ‘education.’”1

 “Why then was the Department of Education created? President Jimmy Carter, during whose watch the new department came into being, had promised the department to the National Education Association. Contemporary editorials in both the New York Times and the Washington Post acknowledged that the creation of the department was mainly in response to pressure from the NEA. According to Rep. Benjamin Rosenthal (DN.Y.), Congress went along with the plan out of ‘not wanting to embarrass the president.’ Also, many members of Congress had made promises to educators in their home districts to support the new department.”2

 “Subsidiarity”

This concept states that decisions should always be made at the lowest possible level, as described by:

“Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative.  The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which ‘a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to co-ordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.”3

 (To clarify the often misrepresented “common good”:
“The common good consists of three essential elements: respect for and promotion of the fundamental rights of the person; prosperity, or the development of the spiritual and temporal goods of society; the peace and security of the group and of its members.”4)

Parents’  Rights  with  Regard  to  Educating  Their  Children

“Parents are the principal and first educators of their children… ‘The role of parents in education is of such importance that it is almost impossible to provide an adequate substitute.’… Parents should teach their children to subordinate the ‘material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones.’… The state may not legitimately usurp the initiative of the spouses, who have the primary responsibility for the procreation and education of their children.”5

Bishop Fulton J. Sheen: “It is a great fallacy for parents to believe that the education of their children depends on the school.  The school is not the primary educator, but the secondary; its authority to teach the children is delegated by the parents, the right inherent in the father and the mother.  Nor is the school ever a substitute for the parents.”6

Conclusion:  This is no justification for a federal department of education.  Just because this mistake is almost forty years old is not a reason for its continuation.  Decisions involving education must be kept at the state and local level so that parents’ can keep a close watch of developments as is their prerogative.  When this occurs, we don’t have to deal with intrusions like Common Core – which was not developed by the states as it claims to have been.  (See the 5-part series on Common Core published by The Ohio Conservative Review in March 2015.)

Nor will school districts which are located in areas holding true to timeless values and proven science have to defend themselves against:  “The U.S. Department of Education will tell school districts Friday that federal law requires them to allow students to use restrooms and locker rooms ‘consistent with their gender identity.’”7

These edicts are made despite:  “Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a ‘mental disorder’ that merits treatment, that sex change is ‘biologically impossible,’ and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder… he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically… Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”8

The net result is: education must be kept at the state and local levels to allow decision-making by those closest to its effects, local parents and educators.  Federal control takes away accountability and has shown itself to be prone to enforcing social engineering without opposition.

 

 

1 – “Common Core: Slingshot to Progress or Spider Web? Part 5 of 5 [What slingshot? More spiders here than at the old Munsters’ house],” by Tony Rubio, http://ohioconservativereview.com/2015/03/21/common-core-slingshot-to-progress-or-spider-web-part-5-of-5-what-slingshot-more-spiders-here-than-at-the-old-munsters-house/, 3/21/2015.

2 – ”Cato Handbook for Congress, Policy Recommendations for the 108th Congress,” by the Cato Institute, http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-handbook-policymakers/2003/9/hb108-28.pdf

3 – Part of paragraph 1883 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

4 – Paragraph 1925, Ibid.

5 – Excerpts from paragraphs 1653, 2221, 2223 and 2372, Ibid.

6 – The Quotable Fulton Sheen,” edited by George J. Marlin, Richard P. Rabatin and John L. Swan, Doubleday, New York, 1989.  This particular quote was taken from “Thoughts for Daily Living, Garden City, New York: Garden City, 1955.

7 – “Schools must allow transgender bathrooms, Department of Education says,” by Gregory Korte, http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/12/feds-schools-transgender-bathrooms-letter-title-ix/84311104/, 5/13/2016.

8 – “Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’,” by Michael W. Chapman, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change, 6/2/2015.

Liberals Should Be in Favor of Sanctuary Cities for the Innocent Unborn

Featured

The mayors of two sanctuary cities, Chicago and San Francisco, have spoken recently about continuing to defy federal law when Trump takes office.

Rahm Emanuel of Chicago: “Now, administrations may change, but our values and principles as it relates to inclusion does not.” and Ed Lee of San Francisco: “Being a sanctuary city, for me, is the DNA of San Francisco.”1,2

Granted, it becomes a matter of compassion and practicality to even consider trying to deport all “illegals.”  HOWEVER, these cities create an indefensible morality of their own when they also fail to detain undocumenteds with criminal records:

“In a recent column published in the Omaha World-Herald, Michelle Root called on the Nebraska legislature to bar sanctuary city policies that allowed a drunk illegal alien driver to kill her 21-year old daughter, Sarah, on January 31.
Prosecutors reported that the 19-year-old was charged with motor vehicular homicide, but was released on just a $5,000 bond – and then quickly disappeared.”3

And it’s not a recent phenomenon (12 years ago):

“In Los Angeles, for example, dozens of members of a ruthless Salvadoran prison gang have sneaked back into town after having been deported for such crimes as murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and drug trafficking. Police officers know who they are and know that their mere presence in the country is a felony. Yet should a cop arrest an illegal gangbanger for felonious reentry, it is he who will be treated as a criminal, for violating the LAPD’s rule against enforcing immigration law.
The LAPD’s ban on immigration enforcement mirrors bans in immigrant-saturated cities around the country, from New York and Chicago to San Diego, Austin, and Houston. These ‘sanctuary policies’ generally prohibit city employees, including the cops, from reporting immigration violations to federal authorities.”4

—  With all of this “compassion” in opposition to federal laws which protect the innocent, the next natural step would be for these rogue cities to stop the killing of unborn babies who have not broken any laws!… You’re right.  No chance of that in this upside-down culture.

 
1 – “Mayor says Chicago will ‘always be a sanctuary city’ in face of deportation threats,” by http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/15/mayor-says-chicago-will-always-be-sanctuary-city-in-face-deportation-threats.html, 11/15/2016.

2 – “Mayor Lee: SF will remain sanctuary city despite Trump presidency,” by Michael Barba, http://www.sfexaminer.com/mayor-lee-sf-will-remain-sanctuary-city-despite-trump-presidency/, 11/10/2016.

3 – “Illegal aliens in sanctuary cities getting away with murder,” by Chad Groening, http://www.onenewsnow.com/national-security/2016/11/10/illegal-aliens-in-sanctuary-cities-getting-away-with-murder, 11/10/2016.4 – “The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave,” http://www.city-journal.org/html/illegal-alien-crime-wave-12492.html, winter 2004.

4 – “The Illegal-Alien Crime Wave,” http://www.city-journal.org/html/illegal-alien-crime-wave-12492.html, winter 2004.

If You Are Opposed to the Electoral College, Then You Must Also be Against Having the Senate

Featured

Hillary Clinton’s supporters are pushing for the abolition of the electoral college after she became the fourth candidate to win the popular vote, but lose the electoral college.  (The other elections were in 1876, 1888 and 2000.1 ) They say it would be justice for a democracy.

First of all, the United States is not a pure democracy where all eligible voters would vote personally on all legislative matters.  We are a constitutional republic.  We elect people to represent us in the decisions at the federal, state and local levels.

Our founding fathers created an ingenious legislature consisting of a Senate and House of Representatives.  Why two sections of Congress?  Because they understood the need to respect each state and they didn’t want the largest states dominating the smallest ones. They wanted to limit the impact of inevitable factions within our nation.  Consequently, for a law to be enacted it must pass both houses:  one which is based on population (House) and one which gives each state two representatives regardless of its population (Senate).  When the states agreed to be connected into one nation, it was with the understanding that their autonomy would not disappear — something the Democrats who push for bigger and bigger federal government seem to have forgotten.

If the electoral college were to be abolished, presidential elections would be relegated to “ten pockets of population” as Larry Arnn, president of Hillsdale College, described today on Fox News.  It would make those areas all-important and render the rest of the nation irrelevant when it came to campaigning.  Without the electoral college, we would have had twenty states deciding for the other thirty in this election.  Our founding fathers had a wise idea.

 

1 – “Presidents Winning Without Popular Vote,”  http://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/presidents-winning-without-popular-vote/

2 – “By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease.  Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires.  But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life, because it imparts to fire its destructive agency.

The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise.  As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed.  As long as the connection subsists between his reason and his self-love, his opinions and his passions will have a reciprocal influence on each other; and the former will be objects to which the latter will attach themselves.  The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests.  The protection of these faculties is the first object of government.  From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately results; and from the influence of these on the sentiments and views of the respective proprietors, ensues a division of the society into different interests and parties.”

Part of Federalist paper #10, http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/documents/1786-1800/the-federalist-papers/the-federalist-10.php

According to Progressives I am Racist, “Backward” and “Deplorable” Because, as a Catholic, I …

Featured

  1.  Am pro-life and know that all lives matter :“Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense… (The Church) makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society… The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation… These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do represent a concession made by society and the state…” 1Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Philadelphia: ““Black lives matter because all lives matter — beginning with the poor and marginalized, but including the men and women of all races who put their lives on the line to protect the whole community.”2

  2. Want immigration policies which join compassion and common sense:

    “The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin…Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption.  Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.” 3“Family‐based Immigration Reform:  It currently takes years for family members to be reunited through the family‐based legal immigration system. This leads to family breakdown and, in some cases, illegal immigration. Changes in family‐based immigration should be made to increase the number of family visas available and reduce family reunification waiting times.”4Pope Benedict XVI:  “Every state has the right to regulate migration and to enact policies dictated by the general requirements of the common good, albeit always in safeguarding respect for the dignity of each human person.”5

     

  3. Understand that marriage did not come from the state; therefore, cannot be defined by the state:

    “The parties to a marriage covenant are a baptized man and woman , free to contract marriage, who freely express their consent…”“Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.  They are contrary to natural law… Under no circumstances can they be approved… The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.  This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.  They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity… Homosexual persons are called to chastity…”6
  4. Believe that the government should only do for us what we cannot do for ourselves:

    “Excessive intervention by the state can threaten personal freedom and initiative.  The teaching of the Church has elaborated the principle of subsidiarity, according to which ‘a community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order… The principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism.  It sets limits for state intervention.”7“In effect, the federal government has underwritten massive irresponsibility on the part of low-income fathers. They don’t need to act responsibly because the federal government has woven together a massive financial assistance system for single mothers with kids. The result is that multiple generations of low-income Americans have now grown up in neighborhoods almost entirely bereft of a responsible male presence… In fact, spending on these programs has exploded over the past three decades. Ron Haskins of the Brookings Institution recently testified that spending on the ten largest federal programs for the poor increased from $126 billion in 1980 to $626 billion in 2011. That’s a $500 billion jump in spending, in real terms (after controlling for inflation). The idea that the entirety of this massive run-up in outlays is off-limits and should not be subject to budgetary scrutiny defies common sense.”8

  5. Know that freedom of religion does not mean that the practice of faith is to be held hostage inside church walls:

    “This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits…”
    “Furthermore, society has the right to defend itself against possible abuses committed on the pretext of freedom of religion. It is the special duty of government to provide this protection. However, government is not to act in an arbitrary fashion or in an unfair spirit of partisanship. Its action is to be controlled by juridical norms which are in conformity with the objective moral order…”
    “Religious communities also have the right not to be hindered in their public teaching and witness to their faith, whether by the spoken or by the written word…”9


Bishop Fulton J. Sheen: “If by ‘interference in politics’ is meant the interference by the clergy in the political realm of the State, the Church is unalterably opposed to it, for the Church teaches that the State is supreme in the temporal order.  But when politics ceases to be politics and begins to be a religion, when it claims supremacy over the soul of man, when it reduces him to a grape for the sake of the wine of Moloch, when it denied both the freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, when it competes with religion on its own ground, the immortal soul that is destined for God, then religion protests.  And when it does, its protest is not against politics but against a counter religion that is anti-religious.”10

6.  Understand that contraceptives, in vitro fertilization and human cloning are contrary to the dignity of human life because they relegate human reproduction to mere animal breeding: 

Contraception
“The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood.  Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).11

“Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection… The right and lawful ordering of birth demands, first of all, that spouses fully recognize and value the true blessings of family life and that they acquire complete mastery over themselves and their emotions.  For if with the aid of reason and of free will they are to control their natural drives, there can be no doubt at all of the need for self-denial.  Only then will the expression of love, essential to married life, conform to right order. This is especially clear in the practice of periodic continence.  Self-discipline of this kind is a shining witness to the chastity of husband and wife and, far from being a hindrance to their love of one another, transforms it by giving it a more truly human character.”12

In Vitro Fertilization

“It is quite legitimate, indeed praiseworthy, to try to find ways to overcome infertility. The problem causes great pain and anguish for many married couples.  Since children are a wonderful gift of marriage, it is a good thing to try to overcome the obstacles which prevent children from being conceived and born… But the Bible tells us there are limits to acceptable methods for conceiving a child.  Recall the story of Noah’s unmarried daughters who tried to get their father drunk so that they might have children by him! Obviously not any means can be used to achieve pregnancy… Obviously, IVF eliminates the marriage act as the means of achieving pregnancy, instead of helping it achieve this natural end.  The new life is not engendered through an act of love between husband and wife, but by a laboratory procedure performed by doctors or technicians.  Husband and wife are merely sources for the “raw materials” of egg and sperm, which are later manipulated by a technician to cause the sperm to fertilize the egg.  Not infrequently, “donor” eggs or sperm are used.  This means that the genetic father or mother of the child could well be someone from outside the marriage. .. But even if the egg and sperm come from husband and wife, serious moral problems arise.  Invariably several embryos are brought into existence; only those which show the greatest promise of growing to term are implanted in the womb.  The others are simply discarded or used for experiments.  This is a terrible offense against human life.  While a little baby may ultimately be born because of this procedure, other lives are usually snuffed out in the process… Never are they to be used as a means to an end, not even to satisfy the deepest wishes of an infertile couple.  Husbands and wives “make love,” they do not “make babies.” They give expression to their love for one another, and a child may or may not be engendered by that act of love.  The marital act is not a manufacturing process, and children are not products.”13

Cloning

“There are a number of reasons why someone would try to engender a new human life through cloning. None would be morally legitimate.  For example, a couple may want to use a cell from a dying child to clone another baby as a way of perpetuating the life of the first child.  Obviously, this would not be a continuation of the dying child, but the bringing into being of a new child.  The dying child would become the “progenitor” of a new life without having agreed to it; the new child would not be treated as a unique individual with his or her own identity, but as an extension of another person.

A man or woman might also want to have a baby without getting married or involving a parent of the opposite sex.  Some homosexual people have said that cloning would be a perfect way to have children, because they would not have to marry someone of the opposite sex.  This would be terribly unfair to the child, depriving him or her of a natural father and mother… Most disturbing of all, some researchers want to use cloning to create human beings solely for experimentation and destruction.  They propose to supply genetically matched tissues for treating various diseases by making human embryos from patients’ body cells, then dissecting these developing embryos for their “spare parts.”13

7.  The first responsibility of educating children goes to the parents.  The parents allow the state to educate their children, not vice versa. Therefore, education policies should be made at the state and local level, not federal:

“Parents are the principal and first educators of their children… ‘The role of parents in education is of such importance that it is almost impossible to provide an adequate substitute.’… Parents should teach their children to subordinate the ‘material and instinctual dimensions to interior and spiritual ones.’… The state may not legitimately usurp the initiative of the spouses, who have the primary responsibility for the procreation and education of their children.” 14


“In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, neither the state nor any larger society should substitute itself for the initiative and responsibility of individuals and intermediary bodies.”15

“Government, in consequence, must acknowledge the right of parents to make a genuinely free choice of schools and of other means of education, and the use of this freedom of choice is not to be made a reason for imposing unjust burdens on parents, whether directly or indirectly. Besides, the right of parents are violated, if their children are forced to attend lessons or instructions which are not in agreement with their religious beliefs, or if a single system of education, from which all religious formation is excluded, is imposed upon all.”16

 — Given this, the problem is not with Catholicism, but with the group more accurately called “regressive.”

(emphases in the above quotes were retained from the originals, not added)

1 – Excerpts from paragraphs 2272 and 2273 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

2 – “USCCB president says violence calls for ‘moment of national reflection’,” by Catholic News Service, http://iobserve.org/2016/07/08/usccb-president-says-violence-calls-for-moment-of-national-reflection/. 7/8/2016.

3 – Excerpt from paragraph 2241, Ibid.

4 – “Catholic Church’s Position on Immigration Reform,” Migration and Refugees Services/ Office of Migration Policy and Public Affairs of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/churchteachingonimmigrationreform.cfm, August 2013.

5 – “Immigration:  A Principled Catholic Approach Avoids Emotionalism,” by Samuel Gregg, http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/immigration-a-principled-catholic-approach-avoids-emotionalism, 7/25/2014.

6 – Excerpts from paragraph 1625 and 2357-2359 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

7 – Excerpts from paragraphs 1883 and 1885, Ibid.

8 – “Are Catholics required to support a continually expanding welfare state?,” by Carl E. Olson, http://www.catholicworldreport.com/Blog/1341/are_catholics_required_to_support_a_continually_expanding_welfare_state.aspx, 5/11/2012.

9 – Excerpts from Sections 2, 4 and 7 of “Dignitatis Humanae” (Of Human Dignity) encyclical by Pope Paul VI, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html, 12/7/1965.

10 – “The Quotable Fulton Sheen,” edited by George J. Marlin, Richard P. Rabatin and John L. Swan, Doubleday, New York, 1989.  Quote was found in “Characters of the Passion, New York.  P.J. Kenedy and Sons, 1946.

11 – Paragraph 2399 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

12 – From sections 17 and 21 of “Humanae Vitae” (Of Human Life) encyclical by Pope Paul VI, http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html, 7/25/1968.

13 – “Begotten Not Made:  A Catholic View of Reproductive Technology,” by John M. Haas, PhD, S.T.L., http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/reproductive-technology/begotten-not-made-a-catholic-view-of-reproductive-technology.cfm

14 – Excerpts from paragraphs 1653, 2221, 2223 and 2372 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

15 – Paragraphs 1894, Ibid.

16 – Excerpt from Section 5 of “Dignitatis Humanae” (Of Human Dignity) encyclical by Pope Paul VI, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651207_dignitatis-humanae_en.html, 12/7/1965.

 

 

Trump’s Victory: Tears and Fears from the Left?

Featured

A news commentator mentioned yesterday that a college dormitory had contacted him and described how they were in tears when Trump’s win became evident.  He was also told that many experienced fear as a result of the Trump’s victory.

Tears of sadness are understandable when one’s candidate loses. People of faith shed their share after the previous two general elections.  However, the presence of fear is interesting.

Are they afraid that “sanctuary cities” will be eliminated, thus making all of our lives safer?  Or that undocumented foreigners will be deported if they commit a serious crime, as law specifies – as it should?

Perhaps they are concerned that the Hyde Amendment will be retained which will prevent taxpayers from being forced to pay for the murder of unborn babies?

Do they fear that existing laws which make it illegal for parents to get help for their children suffering from gender identity will be rescinded?  (No matter that psychologists say that a majority of these children outgrow of this. 1)

What about our borders?  Do the liberals fear policies which will make less likely that terrorists or drugs will enter the U.S.?

It could be that the plans to replace Obamacare are scary for those who want it to proceed to its natural goal of socialized medicine. 2

Or, maybe they are worried that Trump will fix the atrocious agreement we have with Iran. It’s OK to say that Catholics need to change their backward values 3, but we don’t want to offend any Islamic nations.  They would retaliate whereas we don’t have to worry about any Christian group because they are kept in their place in the U.S.4

Fear a Trump presidency?  You can get some help through the (Non-)Affordable Care Act.

 

 

1 – “Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a ‘mental disorder’ that merits treatment, that sex change is ‘biologically impossible,’ and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder… he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically… Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”
From “Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’,” by Michael W. Chapman, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change, 6/2/2015.

2 – “Coloradans to vote on ‘single payer’ health insurance proposal,” by Joe St. George, http://kdvr.com/2016/08/05/colorado-to-vote-on-single-payer-health-insurance-proposal/, updated 8/5/2016.

3 – “Podesta… seems to say that Catholicism, especially in this conservative form, is nothing more than a set of misunderstood ancient beliefs that are mere window dressing for high society types on the Right to justify their ‘backwards’ views on marriage, the family, abortion, contraception, etc.”  By Nate Madden and Joe Koss, https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/10/hey-catholics-this-is-what-team-hillary-really-thinks-of-you

4 – “Hillary: ‘Deep-seated … religious beliefs’ have to be changed for abortion,” by Ed Morrissey, http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/hillary-deep-seated-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-for-abortion/, 4/24/2015.

Major Burden is Not on Trump to Mend Relations with Republicans in Congress

Featured

Trump won without the full support normally given to a party leader in a presidential election. The Republican party needs to be unified.  As President, he will naturally be the leader of that effort. However, the non-Trump Republicans bear the burden of making peace with the winner they rejected.

Trump’s message last night shows he is approaching this healing with a conciliatory spirit:

“For those who have chosen not to support me in the past – of which there were a few people (crowd laughter), I am reaching out to you for your guidance and your help so that we can work together and unify our great country.” 

The responsibility now rests on the non-supporters to set aside destructive pride and focus on fixing the nation as they have been charged to do so by their constituents.

 

No Practicing Catholic Will be Fooled by Hillary Clinton’s Claim She “Has Spent Her Life Fighting for Children”1

Featured

One of the current television ads promoting Hillary Clinton for President has her saying that she will make sure every child “has a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential.”

But, can she really expect us to believe that when she also proclaimed on January, 10, 2016:

“First of all, I will always defend Planned Parenthood, and I will say consistently and proudly, Planned Parenthood should be funded, supported, and appreciated, not undermined, misrepresented, and demonized. I believe we need to protect access to safe and legal abortion, not just in principle, but in practice.”2

We can start by recognizing the absurdity of her claim that abortions can be “safe” when 50% of the patients end up dead.  To Hillary:  How can a child realize his/ her potential if killed before birth?  Another thing, you mention is “God-given potential.”  At least you seem to understand the origins of life.  However, how can you rationalize the taking of an innocent life when only the creator of life, God, has the authority to do so?

The right to life is paramount.  “The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation… 3

Hillary Clinton’s opponent, Donald Trump, is far from ideal in proposals and character.  His ungentlemanly comments about women must be rejected outright.  (Although, it is surprising that the culture which accepts contraception and its resulting dehumanizing of women should be so holier-than-thou on this subject.  See footnote #4).  Fortunately, despite his overly assertive personality, he has enough humility to defend human life in addition to freedom of religion and other key positions which Clinton abandons.

Without this foundational attitude toward life, all other policy proposals are mere attempts to win votes and cannot be taken seriously.  Therefore, despite what data may come out of tomorrow’s election, we can be sure that few who support Hillary Clinton are practicing Catholics.

 

1 – From https://www.hillaryclinton.com/feed/hillary-clinton-has-spent-her-life-fighting-for-children-here-are-8-ways-shes-changed-their-lives/

2 – “3 Things You Need to Know About Hillary Clinton’s Record on Abortion,” by Frank Camp, http://www.dailywire.com/news/10024/3-things-you-need-know-about-hillary-clintons-frank-cam

3 – Excerpt from paragraph 2273 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

4https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2013/02/03/the-pill-has-increased-women-being-treated-as-sex-objects/

Electing Hillary Over “Dangerous Donald” Would Be As Detrimental as Chamberlain’s Fateful Appeasement of Hitler

Featured

For those with a passing knowledge of history, it is clear that despite society’s claim to be advancing, a disturbing amount of history’s blunders have a way of repeating themselves. A parallel potential is available in our upcoming election amid the haunting memories of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s doomed appeasement of Hitler seventy-eight years ago.

Some  of  Hillary’s  Criticisms  of  Donald  Trump

He Depresses National Pride:  Hillary Clinton cannot refute Donald Trump’s assessment of the negative impact  the Democrats have had on the economic and social health of our nation over the last fifty years.  So, she fabricates that Trump is trying to depress people as her campaign chairman John Podesta said: “Tonight, Donald Trump painted a dark picture of an America in decline.”1  She added last night in Cincinnati, “He has a dark and divisive vision for America that could tear our country apart.”2  Hillary sees herself as the beacon of hope and national unity to counter this.

She also takes issue with Trump’s “Make America Great Again” slogan by declaring, “America is already is great. But we are great because we are good, and we will respect each other.”3
[That’s true except for the unborn, when religious freedom clashes with the pagan morals of secular world, etc.  But that’s for another article.]

The “1%” is Our Enemy:  Despite the large fees and other concessions she has received from speaking to the world of Wall Street and others (see footnote #4), she claims to be on the side of the little guy in the financial world.  Hillary Clinton pretends solidarity with the average American by declaring that our economy requires the “toppling” of the top 1% of earners because their real income (including hers as she likes to ignore) has risen dramatically unlike the rest of the stagnant economy.5 

Give  Hillary  What  She  Wants  and  We’ll  Be  Safe:    Her biggest push is that Trump is a threat to world peace.  She feels he should not be trusted with the codes to our nuclear arsenal and, “He’s not just unprepared — he’s temperamentally unfit to hold an office that requires knowledge, stability and immense responsibility… We cannot put the safety of our children and grandchildren in Donald Trump’s hands. We cannot let him roll the dice with America… I will leave it to the psychiatrists to explain his attraction to tyrants… You know, there’s no risk of people losing their lives if you blow up a golf-course deal, but it doesn’t work like that in world affairs.”6

In other words, give Hillary what she wants – the presidency – and the world will be stable and safer with the threat of major war eliminated.

What  Does  This  Have  to  do  With  the  1930’s?

After World War I, the victorious Allies (of which the U.S. was a part of) wanted to ensure that the “war to end all wars” would never be repeated.  Consequently, the penalties on the Axis powers (of which Germany was a member) were significant.

Restoring national pride and establishing a common enemy:  Unfortunately, the severity of the surrender terms made it likely that a leader would rise to reinstate the Germans sense of national pride which had been severely bruised.  Thus, it produced Adolph Hitler who attained the title of chancellor in 1933 and began his quest for multinational dominance.  Needing a target to rally his people further, he blamed the Jews for Germany’s economic woes.  At that time, the Jewish people which were about 0.75 per cent of the German population.7

In effect, Hitler made the Jews the “One Per Cent” villains of his time.  Wall Street anyone?

Hitler’s Ego and Plan for Domination  Cause  Great  Concern:  Hitler began his quest for territory by cleverly pulling off an annexation of Austria through political pressure, then with troops.8  After that, he decided to look elsewhere to add natural resources to his control.  He turned to the Sudetenland.  It had become part of Czechoslovakia as a result of the World War I surrender agreement.  Of its three million people, a high percentage was Germans.  The conditions were ripe for trouble as a result of “the German nationalist, anti-Czech, anti-Semitic propaganda disseminated by the Sudeten German (or Nazi) Party during the mid-1930s.”9

Background  of  the  Road  to  Appeasement,  Simply:  Give  Hitler  What  He  Wanted  and  We’d  Be  Safe

Therefore, “starting in 1938, the Nazi propaganda machine fabricated false stories of the three million ethnic Germans being oppressed in Czechoslovakia, and demanded to gain control of these lands.”  Hitler decided, “”It is my unalterable decision to smash Czechoslovakia by military action in the near future.”  But this would be more difficult as Czechoslovakia counted Great Britain, France and the Soviet Union as friends.

Because Hitler was aware of much appeasement sentiment among the leaders of Great Britain and France, he proceeded with pressure.  In September 1938, “France, for example, went as far as demanding Czechoslovakia to cede the territory to Germany, otherwise France would not honor the mutual protection treaty that they had previously signed.”  Here comes British leader Neville Chamberlain who convinced Hitler that a multi-national power convention be held to settle this.

Hitler got his way in that two Czech representatives were allowed in the building of the convention, but only in an adjacent room and were not permitted to take part.  According to Wilhelm Keitel, [French leader Edouard] Daladier was adamant in doing what it takes to avoid war, saying “[w]e won’t tolerate war over this, the Czechs will just have to give way. We will simply have to force them to the cession.” The four decided the fate for Czechoslovakia by granting Germany Sudetenland.10

It  Didn’t  Work  Then  and  It  Won’t  Now

History shows how badly appeasement works.  The concentration camps had been in existence for six years11 already when, twelve months later, Germany invaded Poland and the worst world war began.

If we choose Hillary over Donald because of the fear he would shatter a fragile world peace, what are our chances for a better life?

Health  Insurance:  Let’s see, with Hillary we know we’ll have an acceleration of the health industry debacle known as Obamacare.  It must be remembered that the poorly named “Affordable Health Care Act” was never the end game of Obama and the Left to begin with.  The ultimate goal was a “single payer system” which means socialized medicine.

How can we believe this?  Look at Colorado.  The financial disaster caused by Obamacare (and which the President and his chief architect knew all along) has resulted in huge losses for insurance companies.  Since pride discourages legislators from going back and replacing this feel-good idea, we have:

Amendment 69 would establish Colorado Care, a single-payer government-run health insurer that would be the first of its kind in the country… Under the plan, private health insurance would likely cease to exist in the state.  Instead a 21-member elected board would administer the coverage on behalf of the government.”

“It would cost more than $30 billion and it would be paid for with a 6.6 percent increase in employers’ payroll taxes and a 3.3 percent increase in employees’ payroll taxes.”12

So is this bad?  This is total government  control over one-sixth of the entire economy and the imposed priorities regarding what “health care” choices will be required.  It includes abortion, contraceptives and abortifacients, gender “reassignment” (which ultimately does not solve the emotional problems causing the individual’s turmoil 13, 14) and human/ animal hybrid research (already in progress 15).  It also forces citizens to pay for these morally reprehensible items and implements the rationing of medical services only for those deemed useful enough for society to receive them.  In other words, a true war on human life from conception onward.

By the way, Hillary defends abortion all the way up to birth.  This legal form of murder has accounted for more than 55 million deaths in the U.S., or about six times the number of Jews and Russian prisoners killed by Hitler.16

Freedom  of  Religion:  We need to be reminded that Hillary has said

“…deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.” 17

Enough said.

Peace  in  the  World:  There are many others serious concerns about the impact of an H. R. Clinton presidency, but this one must be addressed because it was mentioned in this article’s title!  She paints the picture of Trump as one who is out-of-control and likely to blow up the world one way or another.  Perhaps she doesn’t recognize what being assertive is – something the current administration is unfamiliar with (“red line” in the sand for Syria, caving in to Iran’s wants by not using the strength we had during the negotiations then giving them ransom money later, promising to help Ukraine and under-delivering 18, etc.).  Regarding Hillary herself, there’s the inaction on Ambassador Stevens’ multiple requests for security in Benghazi then doing nothing as the four were killed while directives kept changing regarding our military’s attire which might upset the lawless nation.

Hillary Clinton’s proposals include irresponsible immigration from terrorist nations which will bring the war to our doorstep.  With her Democratic platform in place, we will be able to choose between more frequent attacks overseas or at home.  If that isn’t enough, there’s control of 20% of our uranium ending up in Russia’s hands while money from the Canadian company owners flowed to the Clinton Foundation. 19

Knowing all of this, why would we pull a Chamberlain and elect Hillary Clinton because she is trying to scare us into ignoring the real dangers she poses?

1 – “Clinton: Trump ‘painted a dark picture of America’,” by Ben Kamisar, http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/288834-clinton-trump-painted-a-dark-picture-of-america, 7/22/2016.

2 – “Hillary Clinton Hints of Civil War, Nuclear War if Donald Trump is Elected,” by Charlie Spiering, http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/11/01/hillary-clinton-hints-of-civil-war-nuclear-war-if-donald-trump-is-elected/, 11/1/2016.

3 – “Clinton blasts Trump: ‘We are great because we are good’,” by Dan Mangan, http://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/09/clinton-blasts-trump-we-are-great-because-we-are-good.html, 10/9/2016.

4 – “The speech in 2013 was one of three Clinton made on behalf of Goldman Sachs. According to public records, Clinton gave 92 speeches between 2013 and 2015. Her standard fee is $225,000, and she collected $21.6 million dollars in just under two years. Clinton made 8 speeches to big banks, netting $1.8 million, according to a CNN analysis… According to the memo, Clinton requires travel by private jet, and even specifies that she prefers a Gulfstream 450 or larger. Her staff requires first class and business class tickets. And two members of her staff require up to three days on site to prepare, with all local – “with up to three separate rooms attached.”  From “The truth about Hillary Clinton’s Wall Street speeches,” by Drew Griffin, David Fitzpatrick and Curt Devine, http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/20/news/economy/hillary-clinton-goldman-sachs/, 4/20/2016.

– ”Hillary Clinton called for ‘toppling’ the 1%,” by Colin Campbell, http://www.businessinsider.com/report-hillary-clinton-called-for-toppling-the-1-2015-4, 4/21/2015.

6 – “Hillary Clinton’s evisceration of Donald Trump,” by Stephen Collinson and Dan Merica, http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/02/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-foreign-policy-speech/, 6/3/2016.

7 – “Germany:  Jewish Population in 1933,” https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005276

8 – http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/germany-annexes-austria

9 – https://www.britannica.com/place/Sudetenland

10 – “Munich Conference and the Annexation of Sudetenland,” by C. Peter Chen, http://ww2db.com/battle_spec.php?battle_id=87

11 – “CONCENTRATION CAMPS, 1933–1939,” https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005263

12 – “Coloradans to vote on ‘single payer’ health insurance proposal,” by Joe St. George, http://kdvr.com/2016/08/05/colorado-to-vote-on-single-payer-health-insurance-proposal/, updated 8/5/2016.

13 – “Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a ‘mental disorder’ that merits treatment, that sex change is ‘biologically impossible,’ and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder… he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically… Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”
From “Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;’ Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’,” by Michael W. Chapman, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/michael-w-chapman/johns-hopkins-psychiatrist-transgender-mental-disorder-sex-change, 6/2/2015.


14 – “And so at Hopkins we stopped doing sex-reassignment surgery, since producing a “satisfied” but still troubled patient seemed an inadequate reason for surgically amputating normal organs.”

“It now appears that our long-ago decision was a wise one. A 2011 study at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden produced the most illuminating results yet regarding the transgendered, evidence that should give advocates pause. The long-term study—up to 30 years—followed 324 people who had sex-reassignment surgery. The study revealed that beginning about 10 years after having the surgery, the transgendered began to experience increasing mental difficulties. Most shockingly, their suicide mortality rose almost 20-fold above the comparable nontransgender population. This disturbing result has as yet no explanation but probably reflects the growing sense of isolation reported by the aging transgendered after surgery. The high suicide rate certainly challenges the surgery prescription.” From “Transgender Surgery Isn’t the Solution,” by Dr. Paul McHugh, http://www.wsj.com/articles/paul-mchugh-transgender-surgery-isnt-the-solution-1402615120, updated 5/13/2016.

15 – “NIH Plans To Lift Ban On Research Funds For Part-Human, Part-Animal Embryos,” by Rob Stein, http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2016/08/04/488387729/nih-plans-to-lift-ban-on-research-funds-for-part-human-part-animal-embryos, 8/4/2016.

16 – “The Holocaust death toll,” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1481975/The-Holocaust-death-toll.html, 1/26/2005.

17 — “Hillary: ‘Deep-seated … religious beliefs’ have to be changed for abortion,” by Ed Morrissey, http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/hillary-deep-seated-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-for-abortion/, 4/24/2015.

18 – “U.S. Hasn’t Kept Ukraine Aid Promises,” by Josh Rogin, https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-02-05/u-s-hasn-t-kept-ukraine-aid-promises, 2/5/2015.

19 – “At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family… Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife,Hillary Rodham Clinton…”

“As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million… And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock…”

“Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown.´ —  [note:  Why?  Weren’t the receipts sent to the Government Accounting Office like all good Secretary of States do?]  From “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal,” by Jo Becker and Mike McIntire, http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html, 4/23/2015,

Forget Conservatives’ Alleged Phobias, Hillary — Rather, You Need to Reclaim a Healthy Fear of God

Featured

Hillary Clinton and her Democratic followers like to claim that those who disagree with them as suffering from phobias.  For those who want to be careful about allowing people from Islamic terrorist strongholds to immigrate at will, the charge of “Islamophobia” is levied.  If a Christian does not accept revisionist morality called “marriage equality” and accept that two men or two women can marry, he is suddenly a “homophobic.”  Besides being a stupid term, because it actually means an unreasonable fear of humans, it falsely wishes to say that such a person is fearful of homosexuals.

“Fear mongering” is also thrown at Donald Trump because he has the audacity to accurately explain the current dreadful condition of our nation.

With all of this talk of fear from the Left, it’s sad that the perpetrators of these false claims have lost their fear of God along the way.  In case any of them reads this, here is a summary on their actions which should cause them to pause and reconsider their possibilities on their judgment day.

Thou  shall  not  bear  false  witness  against  thy  neighbor:  In simple terms, this Commandment refers to lying.  The Left should feel at home with this otherwise they wouldn’t join Hillary in continuing to label their adversaries as having psychological disorders (re: “phobias”).

So does the President they elected.  He said that there was “not a smidgen of corruption” with regard to the IRS unwarranted investigations of conservatives and that with Obamacare, “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan.”  We know how these comments were exposed to be deliberately false.

Hillary has had a field day with her false statements to the FBI in her email case which endangered national security.  Although FBI Director James Comey admitted in a Congressional inquiry that several of her key statements were lies, she keeps claiming publically that the FBI did not find any of her statements to be false.  But this should be expected from someone who ignored ambassador Stevens’ request for more security then made up the story that the murderous Benghazi attack was incited by a video in order to prevent Obama from losing more votes in the 2012 election.

Thou  shall  not  Steal:  “The Clinton Foundation spent less than 6 percent of its budget on charitable grants in 2014, according to documents the organization filed with the Internal Service (IRS) in 2015.”1  That speaks for itself.

Hillary also wants the wealthy to pay their “fair share.”  She plans to target those making more than $250,000 annually.  In 2014, those making that amount represented 2.7% of all tax filings and they paid 51.6% of taxes paid.2  Also, “The top 1% of households — defined as bringing in more than $730,000 a year — would see their tax burden go up by more than $78,000 on average, according to an analysis of  Clinton’s original tax plan from the Policy Center.”3

We can call these socialist plans a “redistribution of wealth,” but that’s only to disguise what it is:  stealing.  It may be surprising to many, but socialism is itself contrary to Christian beliefs.4

Thou shall not kill:  As of the start of this year, we have killed 58-1/2 million babies via abortion in the U.S. since the Supreme Court determined this was a “privacy” issue instead of murder in 1973.Regardless of the rationalizations calling it “women’s reproductive health” or “choice,” it has been understood to be murder since the earliest days of Christianity.For Hillary Clinton to support late term abortions is even more appalling.

Thou  shall  not  commit  adultery:  Getting the current drama out of the way first, Donald Trump’s deplorable disrespect for women in his words and alleged actions is certainly deplorable.  It’s irrelevant that some could be considered “locker room talk.”  However, it is surprising to hear Hillary speak so indignantly of him when she covered up and vilified those women with whom her husband was adulterous over the years including his time as President.7,8

Hillary Clinton is among a growing number of  proponents who believe in “marriage equality.”  This euphemism is for same-sex “marriage.”  While those afflicted with homosexual tendencies must be treated with love and respect, this charity does not extend itself to enabling disordered behavior.  Ancient traditions are not necessarily irrelevant and such is the situation with marriage.  This institution goes back to the earliest days of Judeo-Christian tradition and cannot be changed by humans as we did not create it.  Any attempt to include disordered behavior is seriously wrong.9,10

IN CONCLUSION, a healthy fear of God would do more to fix our nation than falsely accusing Donald Trump of being a fear-monger.

 

1 – In addition, “The tax records, which were filed with the IRS in November of 2015, show that the Clinton Foundation spent far more on overhead expenses like travel ($7.9 million) than it did on charitable grants in 2014. The group also spent more on rent and office supplies (a total of $6.6 million) than it did on charitable grants.”  From “Clinton Foundation Spent Less Than 6 Percent On Charitable Grants In 2014,” by Sean Davis, http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/16/clinton-foundation-spent-6-percent-charitable-grants-2014/, 9/16/2016.

2 – “From “High-income Americans pay most income taxes, but enough to be “fair’?” by Drew Desilver, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-americans-pay-most-income-taxes-but-enough-to-be-fair/, 4/13/2016.

3 – “Here’s how much Hillary Clinton’s tax plan would hit the rich,” by Jeanne Sahadi, http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/11/pf/taxes/hillary-clinton-taxes/, 8/11/2016.

4 – Part of Section 15 of Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical Rerum Novarum, published May 15, 1891, http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum.html

5 – “58,586,256 Abortions in America Since Roe v. Wade in 1973,” by Steven Ertelt, http://www.lifenews.com/2016/01/14/58586256-abortions-in-america-since-roe-v-wade-in-1973/, 1/14/2016.

6 – “Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.  This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable.  Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:  You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish…”
Part of paragraph 2271 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing November 2013.
Note:  the “You shall not kill…” comes from the Didache, Tertullian and other Christian writings.

7 – “Enabler or family defender? How Hillary Clinton responded to husband’s accusers,” by Shawn Boburg, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/enabler-or-family-defender-how-hillary-clinton-responded-to-husbands-accusers/2016/09/28/58dad5d4-6fb1-11e6-8533-6b0b0ded0253_story.html, 9/28/2016.

8 – “Bill’s sex-assault victim lashes out over Hillary’s terrorizing,” by Jerome R. Corsi, http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/bills-sex-assault-victim-lashes-out-over-hillarys-terrorizing/, 5/13/2016.

9 – “’K’maase Eretz Mitzrayim asher yeshavtem ba lo sa’asu – like the practice of the land of Egypt in which you dwelled do not do’ (Vayikra 18:3)”

“This verse prohibits the most immoral forms of behavior – idolatry, incest, adultery, bloodshed, male and female homosexual activity and bestiality[1]. The prohibition against male homosexual behavior is repeated in Vayikra 18:22. Prohibited homosexual activity includes any non-platonic physical contact; even yichud (seclusion) with someone of the same gender is forbidden for homosexually active individuals[2]…”

“Homosexual behavior is absolutely prohibited and constitutes an abomination[5]. Discreet, unconditionally halachically committed Jews who do not practice homosexuality but feel same sex attraction (ssa) should be sympathetically and wholeheartedly supported.  They can be wonderful Jews, fully deserving of our love, respect, and support. They should be encouraged to seek professional guidance.  Moreover, in an uninfected Torah society, appropriate sympathy for discreetshomrei Torah u’mitzvos who experience but do not act upon ssa is clearly distinguished from brazen public identification of their yetzer hara for forbidden behavior.  In a pure Torah society people would recognize that every individual neshama is given its own unique constellation of challenges and some of these challenges consist of feeling an impulse to forbidden behavior.  But every individual neshama also possesses the resilience and strength to triumph over its challenges[6]…”

Talmud Torah allows us to absorb the divine Weltanschauung. Inevitably, with respect to homosexuality, Talmud Torah will place us at odds with political correctness and the temper of the times. Nevertheless, we must be honest with ourselves, and with Hakadosh Baruch Hu, regardless of political correctness, considerations or consequences.

[1] The Sifra (Vayikra 138:5), cited by Rashi ad loc. refers to the atrocities of Eretz Mitzrayim as being the most corrupt of all nations. The Sifra (138:7) further provides the list of activities in which the Mitzriyim engaged. See also Rambam Hilchos Isurei Biah 21:8.

[2] Rambam Hilchos Isurei Biah 21:1,2; 22:1,2. See also Shulchan Aruch Even HoEzer 24

[5]Vayikra 18:22

[6] In the present forum we are not discussing the halachic category of shotim.

Taken from http://torahweb.org/torah/special/2010/homosexuality.html#_ednref5

10 – “…Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravityA, tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.  They are contrary to the natural law… Under no circumstances can they be approved… The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.  This inclination, which id objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.  They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity.  Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided… Homosexual persons are called to chastity.”

References can be found in Genesis 19:1-29, Romans 1:24-27, 1 Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:10

Sections of paragraphs 2357-2359 come from of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing November 2013.

Hillary Clinton’s “Freedom of Worship” Cripples Freedom of Religion

Featured

For years, Hillary Clinton and her adversary turned accomplice with regard to religion, Barack Obama, have been attempting a slight of hand which will stifle the religious freedom our nation was founded on.  Their use of “freedom of worship” with impunity is part of their agenda to eliminate opposition to their plans.1

By restricting the freedom of religion to the tightly confined space of the four walls of religious buildings, it ceases to be truly free.  Hillary Clinton even went so far as to use this position to promote the legal form of murder known as abortion:

“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth, and laws don’t count for much if they’re not enforced. Rights have to exist in practice — not just on paper.  Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will.  And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”2

Thus, it is not surprising to hear members of her campaign staff agreeing with a supporter, John Halpin, a staffer at the Clinton allied Center for American Progress, who said of Catholics: “They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy…”  Clinton spokesperson Jennifer Palmieri added, “I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals.”3

This may not hurt her in the election as only 31% of Democrats attend weekly church services.  This number falls to 23% of white Democrats.

Regardless, restricting religious practices to houses of worship is a contradiction to the very nature of religion.  Hillary and most of her fellow Democrats may not believe the war against terrorism is a religious war at its roots.  However, her attempts to hold Christian religions hostage will not be as badly misinterpreted.

 

1 – “However, both the President and his Secretary of State have now replaced “freedom of religion” with “freedom of worship” too many times to seem inadvertent.”  From “Why ‘Freedom of Worship’ Is Not Enough,” by Ashley E. Samelson, https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2010/02/why-ldquofreedom-of-worshiprdquo-is-not-enough, 2/22/2010.

2 – “Hillary: ‘Deep-seated … religious beliefs’ have to be changed for abortion,” by Ed Morrissey, http://hotair.com/archives/2015/04/24/hillary-deep-seated-religious-beliefs-have-to-be-changed-for-abortion/, 4/24/2015.

3 – “Hillary Clinton Campaign Spokeswoman Mocks Catholics, Calling Catholic Faith ‘Severely Backwards’” by Steven Ertelt, http://www.lifenews.com/2016/10/12/hillary-clinton-campaign-spokeswoman-mocks-catholics-calling-catholic-faith-severely-backwards/, 10/12/2016.

4 – “Preaching to The Choir: How Church Attendance Divides the Parties,” by Ronald Brownstein, http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/04/preaching-to-the-choir-how-church-attendance-divides-the-parties/431928/, 4/6/2015.

Great News! Hillary Clinton Said She’d Pay for It

Featured

In last night’s final presidential debate, both candidates were asked how their economic plans would be better for the country when viewed in light of the dangerously high federal debt we have.  Hillary Clinton challenged Donald Trump’s plans by citing sources which said his would add much more to the debt.  She added that with her plan, “I will pay for it.”

Outstanding!  She’s a true patriot who is willing to sacrifice her wealth for the good of the nation.  My only concern is:  will she have to sell the million dollar “retreat” home she and her husband bought for their daughter Chelsea and son-in-law recently?

Or perhaps, Hillary meant that in her plan, others would cover the cost of all of these programs.  She also said it would be those making more than $250,000. Great idea.  After all, this 2.7% of taxpayers are only paying just over ½ of the total income taxes paid.

Wealthy pay more in taxes than poor

(From “High-income Americans pay most income taxes, but enough to be “fair’?” by Drew Desilver, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/04/13/high-income-americans-pay-most-income-taxes-but-enough-to-be-fair/, 4/13/2016.)

Regarding the $250,000+ group, from the same source: “Their average tax rate (total taxes paid divided by cumulative AGI) was 25.7%. By contrast, people with incomes of less than $50,000 accounted for 62.3% of all individual returns filed, but they paid just 5.7% of total taxes. Their average tax rate was 4.3%.”

— BESIDES, we wouldn’t want the Clintons to be the only ones giving up anything as they climb out of being “broke.”2

 

1 – “Clintons shell out $1.16 million to buy house next door in Chappaqua,” by Jennifer Gould, http://nypost.com/2016/09/22/clintons-shell-out-1-16m-to-buy-house-next-door-in-chappaqua/, 9/22/2016.

2 – “The Clintons say they left the White House in debt. Wait, what?,”  by Philip Bump, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/06/09/the-clintons-left-the-white-house-in-debt-wait-what/, 6/9/2014.

“And this is what the Clinton’s wealth looked like for the first four years after they left office in early 2001.”

wealth2

“We considered three things: what the Clintons reported as income on their taxes, what they reported as assets in Hillary Clinton’s mandated disclosures, and what was listed as being owed. The disclosures only give broad boundaries for the value of the assets owned, so the true value of their assets lies somewhere within the dark-red bar.”

“So, yes, it is technically true the Clintons left office in debt. But, a year later, the couple’s assets had soared. And, as was reported at the time, the Clintons’ debt was entirely gone by the end of 2004 — well before Hillary Clinton left the Senate and well before she left her position as secretary of state. Nor was that income entirely from speaking fees; Clinton’s memoir Living History earned the couple a great deal of income, including $2.8 million reported in her 2001 financial disclosure.”

Don’t Waste Your Time With “The Tribunal” if Understanding the Catholic Annulment Process is Your Goal

Featured

Many aspects of the Catholic faith are criticized simply because they are misunderstood.  The annulment process is one that mystifies even quite a few who say they are Catholic.

What  is  an  Annulment?

An annulment is not a “Catholic divorce.”  A divorce breaks a civil contract, which can be broken by humans.  A marriage between two baptized Christians is a covenant between them and God – something humans cannot break.  “Until death do you part” applies to all Christians despite attempts to create man-made exceptions over the last five centuries.

A “declaration of nullity” by the Catholic Church simply means that all of the necessary conditions for a sacramental union were not present at the time of the wedding vows.1  This statement does not in any way change the legitimacy status of the children.2

The  Movie’s  Theme

The story involves a previously married Protestant man (Joseph) who wishes to marry a Catholic woman who has never been married (Emily).  Since “until death do you part” clearly applies here, they can only be married in the Church if his first marriage did not exist sacramentally.  Otherwise, he is still married in the eyes of God.  The tribunal must determine whether any spiritual, psychological or physical impediments to marriage existed at the time those vows were taken.  So, how well did the movie portray the process?

Critique

  • The setting: It was a “court” arrangement where the petitioner and respondent3 were present along with the advocate and defender of the bond.In many dioceses, the petitioner, respondent and witnesses only have to submit written testimonies to the tribunal and are not required to make personal appearances.  There was a small disclaimer in the movie’s credits at the end, but it would have been far more effective if it had been mentioned verbally at the beginning.  Small point, and not critical.
  • Prevailing action: What brings this movie down to a “not recommended” rating is that it spent an inordinate amount of time showing a PG-13 version of Emily and her battles with temptations of fornication with the two men involved, sometimes successful sometimes not.  Her level of holiness has absolutely no bearing on the marriage being reviewed.

The director could argue that he wanted to show the reason for Tony’s emotional tug-           of-war resulting from his helping a rival to possibly marry his beloved.  But this                     could have been accomplished with a simple monologue from him explaining his                   moral dilemma.  Filling the movie with her activities was essentially for a soap opera             effect – not at all helpful or appropriate when attempting to explain the annulment               process.

  • Joseph’s irrelevant promises to be a good husband: Near the end, Joseph expressed his fervent intentions to be a loyal and attentive husband.  That’s all well and good, but the tribunal is not assessing his suitability to be a husband again, but to determine whether his first marriage was sacramental and, therefore, exists to the exclusion of another wife.
  • Emily’s feelings and maturity:  Also near the end, she made a case for herself before the tribunal that she possessed the necessary character traits to be a good wife.  Wonderful, but this has nothing to do with the validity of a marriage she was not involved with.  Incidentally, neither Joseph’s nor Emily’s personal evaluation of their current state of maturity and resolve would have been included in any written responses for either forms of the tribunal process.
  • Defender of the bond: He was given the opportunity to display an eruption of anger certainly not typical of people in this process.  The director must have wanted Hollywood more than accuracy.
  • Starting the engagement relationship with deliberate deception: Before the decision of the tribunal was known, Tony offered Joseph the engagement ring he had bought for Emily some time ago.  After he convinced Joseph to accept it, they agreed that if Emily were to ask how he obtained that ring, Joseph was to say he bought it on the internet.  He probably shouldn’t have used the ring in the first place and then he violated the trust that must exist between husband and wife by lying about its origins.  This is funny only to the secular crowd which views life as a sitcom.
  • Proceeding down the aisle with Saturday Night Live irreverence: The lack of respect for marriage continued to the end of the movie when Tony and Emily’s best friend, Amana, were seen going down the aisle together in the wedding procession.  They were giggling and having a great time as they made only slightly veiled comments about hooking up later.

Movies which inform a misguided society about Catholic beliefs and practices are needed.  Unfortunately, “The Tribunal” does much more damage than good.  Reading about annulments on the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ site or the Catechism of the Catechism would be a much better choice.

1 – “’Annulment’ is an unfortunate word that is sometimes used to refer to a Catholic ‘declaration of nullity.’ Actually, nothing is made null through the process. Rather, a Church tribunal (a Catholic Church court) declares that a marriage thought to be valid according to Church law actually fell short of at least one of the essential elements required for a binding union.”

“For a Catholic marriage to be valid, it is required that: (1) the spouses are free to marry; (2) they are capable of giving their consent to marry; (3) they freely exchange their consent; (4) in consenting to marry, they have the intention to marry for life, to be faithful to one another and be open to children; (5) they intend the good of each other; and (6) their consent is given in the presence of two witnesses and before a properly authorized Church minister. Exceptions to the last requirement must be approved by Church authority.”  http://www.foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/church-teachings/annulments/

2 – “A declaration of nullity has no effect on the legitimacy of children who were born of the union following the wedding day, since the child’s mother and father were presumed to be married at the time that the child was born. Parental obligations remain after a marriage may be declared null.”  http://www.foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/church-teachings/annulments/

3 – “The person who is asking for the declaration of nullity – the petitioner – submits written testimony about the marriage and a list of persons who are familiar with the marriage. These people must be willing to answer questions about the spouses and the marriage. If the other spouse did not co-sign the petition, the tribunal will contact that spouse – the respondent – who has a right to be involved. In some cases the respondent does not wish to become involved; the case can still move forward.”  http://www.foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/church-teachings/annulments/

4 – “Each party may also appoint a Church advocate to represent him or her before the tribunal. A representative for the Church, called the defender of the bond, will argue for the validity of the marriage.”  http://www.foryourmarriage.org/catholic-marriage/church-teachings/annulments/

The Weather Channel’s Misleading Spin on Trump’s Reference to Solyndra

Featured

Politics is in the air….. and on the air everywhere.  Looking to check on the latest long range forecast today, I came across Carl Parker of the Weather Channel discussing the economics of the federal government promoting renewable energy.  This must have been in response to last night’s debate when Donald Trump replied to Hillary Clinton’s comments on how the federal government needs to continue its push for renewable energy.  Trump answered with the financial debacle of when our government gave funds to assist in a solar panel start-up.  While he did not mention Solyndra specifically, he reminded the audience of the $500 million the failed start-up cost taxpayers a few years ago.1

Mr. Parker countered that federal expenditures have amounted to $34.2 billion for all renewable energy sources.  He pointed out that defaults have amounted to a very low 2.28%.  He added that revenue from all of these projects has put the federal government in the black by $30 million.

The tone in which it was presented and the tendency of many viewers to hear data without scrutiny made it sound as though this has been a good thing for us citizens.

But is it really?  Earning $30 million on $34.2 billion over several years amounts to a total return of just under 0.9%…. How many civilian companies, not to mention financial firms, would have a chance of staying in business with that rate of return over just one year?  Perhaps as the Republicans have suggested for a long time:  when it comes to advancing new technologies, leave it to the entrepreneurs and don’t allow the government to try to pick winners.

 

1 – “Why the Solyndra mistake is still important to remember,”  by Katie Fehrenbacher, http://fortune.com/2015/08/27/remember-solyndra-mistake/, 8/27/2015.

Is Trump Correct — Putin a “Stronger” Leader than Obama?

Featured

Poor Democrats.  They hang on to every word spoken by Donald Trump hoping to catch something they can exploit.  A recent episode involved Trump saying they Vladimir Putin has been a stronger leader in Russia than Barack Obama has been in the United States.  Trump also said that he doesn’t like the Russian form of government.1  Nevertheless, the Democrats are ignoring that last comment and staunchly maintain that Putin was being complimented by Trump as they rush to defend the “savior” of our nation.2

But we’ll go along with the Democrats, disregard the important qualifier and stick to analyzing the “stronger” part.

Yes,  Putin  Does  Get  His  Way

When it comes to national leaders, “strong” implies getting what you want.  Putin has pushed his weight around by withholding important natural gas to several countries.3  He has also acquired the Crimea unjustly and is taking advantage of Obama’s unwillingness to enforce the infamous “red line in the sand” in Syria by doing whatever he feels like.4

Score one for Trump.

….  But  So  Did  Obama  with  “Obamacare”

So, has Obama been denied at home? Sadly, very rarely.

He was able to have “Obamacare” approved by Congress even though its chief proponents admittedly didn’t know much about it.5  This legislation controls the health industry which is 1/6 of our entire economy!6  That qualifies as a major impact.  Sorry, one point against Trump.

Oh, by the way, since Obama got his way on this one, insurance companies are losing money and pulling out of many states.7  Premiums  are skyrocketing even though the President said they would decrease.  Many are losing their doctors and even insurance coverage — something the President promised would not happen.8

Obama has been very strong in this issue… The trouble is, it has also made our nation weaker with regard to insurance and health care. Hmm, looks like being a strong leader can be very detrimental.

Pushed  Common  Core  with  Misleading  Origins  and  Purpose

With his administration’s support, Common Core has made intrusions into many states education under the guise of being “developed by the teachers and the states” when it wasn’t.9  It also claims to raise education standards when it’s really a disguised opportunity for social engineering.10

Yes, Obama has a strong administration whose apparent goal is for a less informed electorate which means a more impressionable and vulnerable citizenry.

We have been warned about this.

“Convinced that the people are the only safe depositories of their own liberty, and that they are not safe unless enlightened to a certain degree, I have looked on our present state of liberty as a short-lived possession unless the mass of the people could be informed to a certain degree.” –Thomas Jefferson to Littleton Waller Tazewell, 1805.”11

Sure, Obama is stronger, but it makes our future weaker. Trump missed this one, too, but we don’t gain from it.

Then  There’s  the  Benghazi  Lie  Many  Believed

The President, along with Hillary Clinton’s cooperation, made enough people believe the lie that  Benghazi was a result of a video.  This helped to protect his thinning lead in the 2012 election by covering up his faulty assertion that he was defeating terrorism.  Yes, a very strong-willed leader who makes it more dangerous for U.S. citizens abroad.  This is a good thing, Democrats?

Federal  Debt  Driven  to  Perilous  Heights

Obama called George W. Bush unpatriotic for the $4.3 trillion increase in the federal debt during his two terms — yet Obama has pushed the debt $9 trillion12 and his adoring supporters say he’s doing a fine job as President.  Obama’s not just strong, he’s stiff-arming our entire country into insolvency!

Other  Examples  of  Obaminations

We can skip the disgraceful fact that Obama likes to deny that there are: problems with the Veterans Administration, examples of unethical behavior toward conservatives by the IRS, racist motivations in the agenda of Black Lives Matter, etc. etc. which prove that Trump was wrong.

Obama is a strong leader who is taking our nation to even new lows.

Hillary’s  Stiff-Arming  is  Legendary,  Too

We should not despair.  If elected, Hillary Clinton will continue the same “strong leader” philosophy.  She has a long track record to prove this. Highlights include stiff-arming those women who accused her President husband of improprieties to the background.13

She was instrumental in securing the 2012 election for her political rival Obama via the Benghazi travesty.

Approximately 55% of her non-governmental visitors to the State Department were Clinton foundation contributors.14  That’s knowing how to take care of personal business with national impact.

Of course, her crowning achievement is the maneuvering she and husband Bill pulled off to make FBI Director James Comey petrified of indicting her.  And we can’t forget Hillary Clinton’s influence  with Attorney General Loretta Young who arbitrarily decided not to follow the advice of three FBI groups to investigate her further.  Obama and Ms. Clinton are seriously strong.

Putin  Doesn’t  Have  the  Patent  on  Strong-Armed  Leadership… Unfortunately

It’s now obvious that “strong” does not always mean “good” just as “change” doesn’t always mean “improvement.”

Vladimir Putin and his Soviet ancestors (excluding the respectable Mikhail Gorbachev) might actually consider it a compliment being associated with those two.

 

 

1 – “Mike Pence defends Donald Trump comments on Vladimir Putin: ‘inarguable’,” by Tal Kopan, http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/mike-pence-on-donald-trump-vladimir-putin/, 9/9/2016.

2 – “In the pre-recorded program that was broadcast Sunday night on BET, Foxx urges the audience to ‘first of all, give an honor to God — and our Lord and savior, Barack Obama!’”
“The audience responds with cheers as Foxx shouts the president’s name again and urges them to ‘stand up.’  From “Jamie Foxx takes heat for calling Obama ‘our Lord and Savior’” by Isaac Brekken, http://www.cbsnews.com/news/jamie-foxx-takes-heat-for-calling-obama-our-lord-and-savior/, 11/27/2012.

3 – “Concern about a European energy crisis stems from the disputebetween Russia and Ukraine over Crimea and eastern Ukraine. This prompted Moscow to halt gas supplies to Ukraine in June and talks to settle the dispute have since broken down…”

“Reports claim Russian gas deliveries to Poland dropped by 45 per cent on Wednesday, the third day of decreases.”

“Russia has this week, by threatening to reduce exports to the EU, to prevent ‘reverse flows’ to Ukraine, meaning Ukraine may be forced to siphon off gas flowing through the country to European destinations. Against this backdrop, analysts fear Russia could halt all supplies to and through the Ukraine as in 2006 and 2009…”

“Finland is the next most at-risk because it gets all of its gas from Russia and has no other supply options, while Poland, Turkey and Bulgaria are the next most exposed, according to a new report from Cologne University’s Institute of Energy Economics.”

From “Fear over Russian gas switch-off sees EU states stockpile supplies,” by Tom Bawden, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/fear-over-russian-gas-switch-off-sees-eu-states-stockpile-supplies-9727466.html, 9/11/2014.

4 – “Former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta on Tuesday said President Obama damaged U.S. credibility, when he decided not to take military action against Syrian leader Bashar Assad, despite drawing a ‘red line’ against the use of chemical weapons.”

From “Panetta: Obama’s ‘red line’ on Syria damaged US credibility,” by Justin Sink, http://thehill.com/policy/international/219984-panetta-obamas-red-line-on-syria-damaged-us-credibility, 10/7/2014.

5 – “Pelosi adds: ‘But we have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it, away from the fog of controversy.’”
From “Texas GOP says Speaker Nancy Pelosi said people will know contents of terrible health-care plan after it passes,” by W. Gardner Selby, http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2010/mar/15/republican-party-texas/texas-gop-says-speaker-nancy-pelosi-said-people-wi/, 3/15/2010.

6 – “The increase will bump up the health share of the economy from 17.5 percent in 2014…”
From “Health Care Expenditures Heading Toward 20 Percent of Economy,” by Caitlin Owens, https://morningconsult.com/2016/07/13/health-care-expenditures-heading-toward-20-percent-economy/, 7/13/2016.

7 – “On Monday evening, Aetna, one of the nation’s largest insurers, announced it is pulling out of the Obamacare insurance exchanges in 11 of the 15 states it currently operates.  According to Business Insider, Aetna ‘determined that the nearly $300 million in pretax loss it was sustaining on an annual basis was not worth the business.’ Which is an understatement, to put it mildly.”

“Two other top-five insurers already announced plans to pull out of Obamacare earlier this year.  In July, Humana said that next year it ‘will only offer individual plans in 156 counties in 11 states, down from 1,351 counties across 19 states this year.’  And the CEO of the nation’s largest insurer, United Healthcare, announced in April ‘we will remain in only a handful of states.’  United Healthcare had previously said that it lost $475 million last year on its policies in the Obamacare exchanges.”  From “After $300 Million Loss, Another Major Insurer Pulls Out Of Obamacare,” by Mark Hemingway, http://www.weeklystandard.com/after-300-million-loss-another-major-insurer-pulls-out-of-obamacare/article/2003852, 8/16/2016.

8 – “’If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,’ President Barack Obama said — many times — of his landmark new law.”

“But the promise was impossible to keep.”
“So this fall, as cancellation letters were going out to approximately 4 million Americans, the public realized Obama’s breezy assurances were wrong.”
From “Lie of the Year: ‘If you like your health care plan, you can keep it’,” by Angie Drobnic Holan, http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/, 12/12/2013.

9 – “Common Core claims that “The federal government was NOT involved in the development of the standards.”  Technically, yes, but that’s a half-truth to be discussed later in this section. Nevertheless, the CCSS also did not come from the states as implied.

According to Diane Ravitch, former assistant U.S. secretary of education under presidents George H. W. Bush and Clinton:

“They were developed by an organization called Achieve and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. There was minimal public engagement in the development of Common Core.  Their creation was neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the states.”

 From “Common Core: Slingshot to Progress or Spider Web? Part 2 of 5 [Creation of the Standards and Comparison with those of the States],”  by Tony Rubio and posted by the Ohio Conservative Review, http://ohioconservativereview.com/2015/03/17/common-core-slingshot-to-progress-or-spider-web-part-2-of-5-creation-of-the-standards-and-comparison-with-those-of-the-states/, 3/17/2015.

10 – “Finally, the gravity of the CCSS movement is described by an Arizona teacher (Brad McQueen, 5th grade) who was asked by his state’s board of education to participate in CCSS review in Chicago of the ELA standards. It’s what could be called a modern day version of “thought-crime” — a mere thirty years after Orwell’s book.

“‘My turning point came when in answer to questions I had about a student writing sample, my Common Core handler blurted out, “We don’t ever care what the kids’ opinions are. If they write what they think or put forth their opinion then they will fail the test.””

“‘I have always taught my students to think for themselves. They are to study multiple views on a given topic, then take their own position and support it with evidence. “That is the old way of writing, “my Common Core handler sighed. “We want students to repeat the opinions of the ‘experts’ that we expose them to on the test. This is the ‘new’ way of writing with the Common Core.’”

“‘I discovered later that this was not just some irritated, rogue Common Core handler, rather this was a philosophy I heard repeated again and again. I pointed out that this was not the way that teachers teach in the classroom. She retorted that, “We expect that when the test comes out the teachers in the classroom will imitate the skills emphasized on the test (teach to the test) and employ this new way of writing and thinking.’”This was a complete kick in the stomach moment for me.’”

“The Left’s agenda is coming through loud and clear.”

From “Common Core: Slingshot to Progress or Spider Web? Part 4 of 5 [The probability of a national curriculum and a not-so-hidden agenda],” by Tony Rubio, posted 3/21/2015 on the Ohio Conservative Review, http://ohioconservativereview.com/2015/03/21/common-core-slingshot-to-progress-or-spider-web-part-4-of-5-the-probability-of-a-national-curriculum-and-a-not-so-hidden-agenda/

11http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Politics/thomasjefferson/jeff1350.htm

12 – https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/jeremiah-was-criticized-for-speaking-truth-of-bad-state-of-affairs-trump-knows-how-he-felt/

13 – “’90s Scandals Threaten to Erode Hillary Clinton’s Strength With Women,” by Amy Chozick, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/21/us/politics/90s-scandals-threaten-to-erode-hillary-clintons-strength-with-women.html?_r=0, 1/20/2016.

14 – “Hillary camp launches desperate ‘cherry-picking’ defense after her calendars reveal Clinton Foundation donors got face-time when she was secretary of state, “ by David Martosko, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3756447/Hillary-camp-launches-desperate-cherry-picking-defense-calendars-reveal-Clinton-Foundation-donors-got-face-time-secretary-state.html, 8/24/2016.

“Catholic” VP Candidate Kaine Doesn’t Understand Church’s Doctrine on Marriage, the Book of Genesis and Pope’s Statement

Featured

In his desire to remain relevant in a capricious society, Tim Kaine said the Catholic Church may one day allow same-sex “marriages.”

“Kaine, who attends a primarily African-American Catholic parish in Richmond, Virginia, acknowledged that his “’unconditional support for marriage equality is at odds with the current doctrine of the church I still attend.’…”

The Democratic VP candidate, a self- proclaimed Catholic, not only approves of such impossible unions, but he doesn’t understand the basics of his faith as evidenced by:

“’But I think that’s going to change, too,’ he said to applause, invoking both the Bible and Pope Francis as reasons why he thinks the church could alter its doctrine on marriage.”1

But  Church  Doctrine  Can’t  Change

But, Mr. Kaine, doctrine is in unchangeable.  Practices may change over the years, but doctrine is permanent.

For example, the doctrine of Jesus’ “hypostatic union”2 of the divine and human has always been true despite the Arian heresy (arising around AD 300) which “was willing to grant Out Lord every kind of honor and majesty just short of the full nature of the Godhead… He was granted, one might say (paradoxically), all the divine attributes – except divinity.”3

Also, the Church knows that Jesus is present body, soul and divinity in the Eucharist4 starting with the Last Supper and no Christian revolution can change that reality.5

Doctrine is in unchangeable.6

The same goes for marriage.  That it can only be between one man and one woman goes back to its very beginning.  It was not invented by humans and thus cannot be redefined by humans.

Kaine  Forgets  About  the  Reality  of  Sin  as  well  as  the  Definition  of  a  Family

” ‘I think it’s going to change because my church also teaches me about a creator in the first chapter of Genesis who surveys the entire world including mankind and said it is very good, it is very good,’ he said.”1

Yes, God saw that His creation was good.  Then, two human beings threw a wrench into this wonderful situation by introducing sin into the world.  Some sins are “disordered behavior”7 and homosexual acts are in this category.  God’s creation is good, but some human actions are not.

Like most errors, Kaine took a verse from Genesis out of context in order  to justify his acceptance of same-sex “marriage” plus the way he came to that conclusion: “‘My three children helped me see the issue of marriage equality as what it was really about, treating every family equally under the law,’ he said.1

He summarized with: “‘To that I want to add, who am I to challenge God for the beautiful diversity of the human family?’ Kaine asked. ‘I think we’re supposed to celebrate it, not challenge it.’“1

The family, a very nice sentiment.  However, to suggest that we can invent a family headed by two homosexual men or women is flawed because the “arrangements of two men or two women are incapable of such witness and present motherhood and fatherhood as disposable.”  [ For the complete answer to the question of single parents vs. two homosexual heads of household, see footnote 8]

Kaine,  Like  Many  Others,  Takes  “Who  am  I  to  judge?”  Out  of  Context

He concluded his argument for same-sex marriage by saying, “Pope Francis famously said, ‘Who am I to judge? ‘ Kaine continued, referencing the pope’s 2013 comment when asked about gay priests in the church.”

One would expect the secular new media to take comments from a religious leader out of context, but a self-proclaimed Catholic like Tim Kaine?

Here’s a good summary of the issue: “When the Pope said, ‘Who am I to Judge’, he was not talking about a situation where an active and unrepentant homosexual was the subject of discussion. In the Pope’s own words, he was talking about a person who had, ‘experienced a conversion’, has gone to confession and ‘seeks the Lord’… “

“When they cannot take one of his statements out of context and when they cannot twist their interpretation to somehow support progressivism, they ignore it completely. This is why you do not see major news outlets reporting that Pope Francis calls on Catholics to defend marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman….”

“You will not see the NBC Nightly News reporting the Pope’s recent speeches and homilies in the Philippines, such as:

‘The family is also threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life.’9

Case closed.

Conclusion

This much can be said about Tim Kaine.  If he were to be elected Vice-President, there is no doubt he could continue the error-riddled legacy of the current pseudo-Catholic in that same office, Joe Biden.

If Kaine believes the Church will someday change the definition of marriage, he needs to be prepared for an endless wait!

 

 

 1 – “VP Candidate Tim Kaine Says Catholic Church Will Accept Marriage Equality,” from “Bondings 2.0” reposting a newwaysministryblog, https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/29908851/posts/38582

2 – “The union in one person, or hypostasis, of the divine and human natures. Jesus Christ is both God and man in virtue of the hypostatic union, a mystery of faith in the strict sense… Although he is God and man, he is not two but one Christ. And he is one, not because his divinity was changed into flesh, but because His humanity was assumed to God. He is one, not at all because of a mingling of substances, but because he is one person…”  From New Catholic Encyclopedia, copyright 2003, http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3407705521/hypostatic-union.html

3 – “The Great Heresies,” by Hilaire Belloc, TAN Books and Publishers, Inc.; Rockford, Illinois, republished in 1991 (first published in 1938 by Sheed and Ward, London).

 4 –“The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist.  Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.”  Paragraph 1377 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November , 2013.

5 – “It was above all on ‘the first day of the week,’ Sunday, the day of Jesus resurrection, that the Christians met ‘to break bread.’From that time on down to our own day the celebration of the Eucharist has been continued so that today we encounter it everywhere in the Church with the same fundamental structure.  It remains the center of the Church’s life.”  Paragraph 1343, Ibid.  A – Acts 20:7.

6 – “In catechesis, ‘Christ, the Incarnate Word and Son of God,…is taught – everything else is taught with reference to him – and it is Christ alone who teaches – anyone else teaches to the extent that he is Christ’s spokeman, enabling Christ to teach with his lips… Every catechist should be able to apply to himself the mysterious words of Christ: ‘My teaching is not mine, bu his who sent me.’”  Paragraph 427, Ibid.

7 – “… Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravityB, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’C  They are contrary to the natural law… Under no circumstances can they be approved.”  Sections of Paragraph 2357, Ibid.

8 – “What about single parents? These families lack a father or a mother, just like households headed by two men or two women.
A child is meant to be raised by his or her own, married father and mother. But there are times when, due to family tragedies or other unfortunate circumstances, this ideal cannot be realized. The Church acknowledges the difficulties faced by single parents and seeks to support them in their often heroic response to meet the needs of their children. There is a big difference, however, between dealing with the unintended reality of single parenthood and approving the formation of “alternative families” that deliberately deprive a child of a father or a mother, such as arrangements headed by two men or two women. Undesired single parenthood can still witness to the importance of sexual difference by acknowledging the challenges faced by single parents and their children due to the lack of a father or mother. In contrast, arrangements of two men or two women are incapable of such witness and present motherhood and fatherhood as disposable. These arrangements of themselves contradict the conjugal and generative reality of marriage and are never acceptable. Children deserve to have their need for a father and a mother respected and protected in law.”  http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/promotion-and-defense-of-marriage/frequently-asked-questions-on-defense-of-marriage.cfm

9 – “Did You Hear What Pope Francis Said?” by Bob Sullivan, http://bsullivan.org/did-you-hear-what-pope-francis-said/

Same-Sex “Marriage,” Civil Rights for African-Americans, Abortion and Slavery

Featured

This title is a lead-in to discussing the “up is down and down is up” positions of U.S. liberals.  Given an opportunity to evaluate these, the Left would undoubtedly assert that three of the four are acceptable and desirable.

Yet in Judeo-Christian reality, the reverse is true. Three out of four are strongly unacceptable.

The first difficulty with the liberal position is the fallacy that “marriage equality” for the homosexual community is equivalent to racial civil rights.  Being African-American is not disordered behavior.  It is one of several genetic expressions of the human race — everyone of whom has inalienable rights.

The disordered condition of homosexuality1, whether innate or acquired2,3, requires the same compassion as due every other human situation.4  However, marriage is not an inalienable/ civil right and it cannot be viewed as equivalent to the racial civil rights cause.5  There is no justification that it be extended to everyone by civil jurisdictions who have no authority over the definition of this non-secular institution.6

At least most U.S. citizens agree that slavery is despicable.  For some reason, however, the evil of abortion is not as readily recognized as similarly heinous.  Perhaps it’s because the fallible Supreme Court erred seriously erred in deciding that the killing of the most vulnerable human beings was legal.  The era of convenience ushered in by the 1973 decision is so contrary to Judeo-Christian beliefs that it defies logic.7

Given the reversed vision of the Left, why should we trust them to issues like national security, honest elections, the federal debt, religious freedom and wages?

With their inclinations, they are likely to want unvetted immigration from terrorist hot spots, to declare that photo ID’s are more important for boarding a plane or buying alcohol than for voting, to think we can spend ourselves out of economic stagnation without slowing our economy further8, to prosecute those who believe marriage is between one man and one woman and believe that a federal minimum wage is appropriate even though the cost of living in the least expensive state is 38% less than in the most.9

Wouldn’t this be an insane world if the current generation of liberals had their way?

 

1 – “Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman.  In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion.  Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament.”  Paragraph 2360 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition; Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

2 – “Being homosexual is only partly due to gay gene, research finds,” by Sarah Knapton, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10637532/Being-homosexual-is-only-partly-due-to-gay-gene-research-finds.html, 2/13/2014.

3 – “Homosexuality is learned behavior,” by Manin Brown, http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-755425, 2/29/2012.

 4 – “The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.  This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.  They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.  Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”  Paragraph 2358 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition; Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.

5 – “But to examine this question further – while a civil right is meant to guarantee equality in particular points of law, that is only one half of the picture.  There is an old saying that goes back to Plato – equality for equals, inequality for unequals. In other words, when a right is applied equally to everyone in a given class, it is because it presupposes there are no essential distinctions within that class that would preclude the right from being equally applied.  To take an example the same-sex crowd always brings up, this is why the old Jim Crow laws against interracial marriage were struck down as civil rights violations.  It was recognized that men were men, and women were women; race is not intrinsic to sexuality, therefore there is no compelling distinction between the races that would preclude them from freely entering into the married state.  Essentially, the overturning of the old prohibitions on interracial marriage supports traditional marriage because the law recognized that any man can marry any woman.  Therefore the racist Jim Crow marriage laws were true instances of civil inequality because they were proposing distinctions in the application of rights which were in fact irrelevant; any man is capable of entering into marriage with any woman, and the right for any man to enter into the married state with any woman could not be infringed…”

“… Any person can enter into the married state, but not under any circumstances they may choose. The question is not one of civil rights but of the definition of marriage, which is what homosexual activists contest. Since gender difference and sexual intercourse is intrinsic to understanding the institution of marriage, it is no discrimination of civil rights to say that the married state cannot be conferred on those whose relationships do not involve sexual intercourse.”  From “Homosexual Marriage is not a Civil Right,” http://www.unamsanctamcatholicam.com/social-teaching/moral-issues/93-social-teaching/moral-issues/445-homosexual-marriage-is-not-a-civil-right.html

6 – “’The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage.’A  The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator.  Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes.  These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity,B some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures.  ‘The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life.’”

A ,B– From the papal encyclical, “Gaudium at spes,” (“Joy and Hope”) section 48 paragraph 1 and section 47 paragraph 2 respectively, published 12/7/1965.

(Paragraph 1603 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition; Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November 2013.)

7 – “Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception.  From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life… Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion.  This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable… The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation…” Excerpts from Paragraphs 2270, 2271 and 2271, Ibid.

8https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/08/31/jeremiah-was-criticized-for-speaking-truth-of-bad-state-of-affairs-trump-knows-how-he-felt/

9https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/why-a-national-15-hour-minimum-wage-makes-no-sense/

Jeremiah Was Criticized for Speaking Truth of Bad State of Affairs — Trump Knows How He Felt

Featured

Two weeks ago, the 20th Sunday in ordinary time for the Catholic liturgical year, the first half of the first reading was taken from Jeremiah 38:4-6 as follows:

In those days, the princes said to the king:
“Jeremiah ought to be put to death;
he is demoralizing the soldiers who are left in this city,
and all the people, by speaking such things to them;
he is not interested in the welfare of our people,
but in their ruin.”
King Zedekiah answered: “He is in your power”;
for the king could do nothing with them.
And so they took Jeremiah
and threw him into the cistern of Prince Malchiah,
which was in the quarters of the guard,
letting him down with ropes.
There was no water in the cistern, only mud,
and Jeremiah sank into the mud.1

The rest of the reading included the part of how the king was approached and he relented to having Jeremiah pulled from the cistern.  The reason Jeremiah acquired so many enemies was what he said:

“Thus says the LORD: He who remains in this city shall die by sword, or famine, or pestilence; but he who goes out to the Chaldeans shall live; his life shall be spared him as booty, and he shall live.  Thus says the LORD: This city shall certainly be handed over to the army of the king of Babylon; he shall capture it.”2

CLAIMS  of  TRUMP’S  DETRACTORS

Jeremiah’s was not being sentenced for lying, but for telling the truth of their dire situation which many did not want to hear.  This is the same response Donald trump is receiving, with examples such as:

  • Tony Fratto, a former top Republican official in the administration of George W Bush, said the speech was the “darkest, most negative acceptance speech of a major party” that he had heard in his lifetime.3

 

  • Bloombergwent even further: “Donald Trump completed his hostile takeover of the Republican Party on Thursday with one of the most ominous speeches of his campaignshowing his already dystopian view of America has darkened considerably since he first announced his campaign.3
  • “Tonight, Donald Trump painted a dark picture of an America in decline. And his answer – more fear, more division, more anger, more hate — was yet another reminder that he is temperamentally unfit and totally unqualified to be President of the United States,” campaign chairman John Podesta said in a statement shortly after Trump wrapped his lengthy address.3

 

  • “Donald Trump gambled that Americans share his vision of a nation teetering on oblivion, casting himself as a renegade outsider who is the last, best hope to stand up to a discredited and depleted establishment.”4

But  the  Facts  ARE  Dismal

Let’s examine some of our nation’s problems to see if Trump is exaggerating that if we don’t change our ways, dire consequences will be ours.

A)  FEDERAL  DEBT:  At the end of the fiscal year 2000-2001 (9/30/2000), the federal debt was not quite $5.7 trillion dollars.  As George W. Bush took office four months later, we’ll consider this to be his starting point.  By 9/30/2008, or four months before he left office, the debt had grown to $10.0 trillion.Senator Obama, running for President, said this increase was “unpatriotic.”6

Interesting, as of 9/30/2015, the debt was $18.1 trillion4 and as has passed $19 trillion this year – even with some of the lowest interest rates ever.  As a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, it’s even scarier:

Federal Debet as % of GDP7

Political battles aside, here is the true outlook: “Assuming that the economy was operating at its full potential, the researchers estimated the sustainable upper limit of the debt-to-GDP ratio is around 93 percent. ‘A higher debt to GDP ratio is unsustainable and will drive the economy into a succession of lower growth periods accompanied by increased unemployment,’ they concluded.”8

So, Trump isn’t exaggerating here.

B)  WORKER PARTICIPATION RATE:  Although the unemployment rate has been cut in half since Obama took office, it has been known for a long time that this statistic means little as the demographics of our nation have changed since this number started being calculated.  When originally instituted, the unemployment rate was fairly accurate as the unemployed generally continued looking for jobs.  As the decades passed, this is no longer the case.

 The U.S. had a worker participation rate reached a low of 62.4% last September before rebounding slightly, and that was the lowest since 1977.  Retirements cannot account for a significant part of this.9

 Looks like Trump is painting an accurate picture here.

C)  HOME OWNERSHIP:  “High levels of student loan debt, tight mortgage underwriting standards and overheating home prices are all contributing to very low homeownership rates among the nation’s youngest workers.  Homeownership among those aged 25-34 today is nearly 10 percentage points lower than it was a decade ago… Some of this is a long-term shift toward marrying and having children later in life. Some of this is that the recovery has been slow among young adults.”10

 Undue pessimism by Trump?  No.

D)  CHILDREN in  SINGLE-PARENT  FAMILIES:  Crucial point to be made first.  The initial reaction to “children born out of wedlock” should be one of thanks for the parent(s) having chosen life.  Then the second thought  is that the breakdown of the family, the basic unit of a civilized society, is accelerating.  As the data shows:

 Since 1970, out-of-wedlock birth rates have soared. In 1965, 24 percent of black infants and 3.1 percent of white infants were born to single mothers. By 1990 the rates had risen to 64 percent for black infants, 18 percent for whites.”11

Here is more recent data:

Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women12

But, why should this be a concern?

“The family is the original cell of social life.  It is the natural society in which husband and wife are called to give themselves in love and in the gift of life.  Authority, stability, and a life of relationships within the family constitute the foundations for freedom, security, and fraternity within society… The importance of the family for the life and well-being of society entails a particular responsibility for society to support and strengthen marriage and the family.13

 BUT  MUCH  FEDERAL  ASSISTANCE  DISCOURAGES  FORMING  of  FAMILIES

“The marriage penalties that are embedded in welfare programs can be particularly severe if a woman on public assistance weds a man who is employed in a low-paying job. As a FamilyScholars.org report puts it: ‘When a couple’s income nears the limits prescribed by Medicaid, a few extra dollars in income cause thousands of dollars in benefits to be lost.  What all of this means is that the two most important routes out of poverty—marriage and work—are heavily taxed under the current U.S. system.’”

“William Galston, who served in the ’90s as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs, estimated that the welfare system, with its economic disincentives to marriage, was responsible for at least 15% to 20% of the family disintegration in the United States. Libertarian scholar Charles Murray has placed the figure at somewhere around 50%.”14

 Has Trump been unnecessarily negative here?  No way.

E)  MILITARY PREPAREDNESS:

“Top Army and Marine Corps generals warned lawmakers their combat readiness is ebbing and expressed concern they would be unable to fight and win another war in the midst of budget cuts, two wars and heightened global threats…”

“Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said the Army can meet regional combatant command requirements and do counterterrorism and counterinsurgency missions. But the four-star had “grave concerns” that fighting a “higher-end” foe, such as China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, risks failure…”

“When we talk about risk, we’re talking about great-power war with one or two countries: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.”“We can collectively roll the dice and say those days will never come and that’s a course of action; that is not a course of action I would advise,” Milley said. “There is a high level of risk associated with those contingencies right now…”

“According to a committee aide, [Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas] Thornberry is mulling further action on the issue and sees it as linked to maintenance and training shortfalls. ‘The combination of war fighters who aren’t trained and equipment that doesn’t work is a perfect storm,’ the aide said.”15

No, Donald Trump is not being overly negative, just reminding us of things those accountable don’t want the voters to believe.

 

1http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/081416.cfm

2 – Jeremiah 38:2-3.  From The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, Kansas, 2005.

3 – “Trump Accused Of “Apocalyptic” Fearmongering In Speech Promising “Security And Prosperity,” by Tyler Durden, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-22/trump-accused-apocalyptic-fearmongering-speech-promising-security-and-prosperity, 7/22/2016.

4 – “Trump Paints Dark Portrait of Fading Nation Only He Can Save,” by Justin Sink, John McCormick and Mark Niquette, http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-21/trump-goes-on-cruz-control-with-speech-that-could-transform-race, 7/21/2016.

5 – Data from https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

6 – “The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”  From “Flashback: Obama Talks ‘Unpatriotic’ Debt In 2008, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/13/flashback_obama_talks_unpatriotic_debt_in_2008.html

7 – ”Only Yesterday – How the Federal Debt Went From $1 Trillion To $18 Trillion In 33 Years,” by David Stockman, http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/only-yesterday-how-the-federal-debt-went-from-1-trillion-to-18-trillion-in-33-years/, 12/5/2014.

8 – From “The Morning After America’s Debt Binge,” by Ronald Bailey, http://reason.com/archives/2013/10/11/the-morning-after-americas-debt-binge, 10/11/2013.

9 – “Record 94,708,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Drops in May,”  by Susan Jones, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/record-94708000-americans-not-labor-force-participation-rate-drops, 6/3/2016.

10 – Homeownership near its lowest in history,” by Diana Olick, , http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/28/homeownership-near-its-lowest-in-history.html, 4/28/2016.

11 – “An Analysis of Out-Of-Wedlock Births in the United States,” by George A. Akerlof and Janet L. Yellen, https://www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/, 8/1/1996.

12http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=births-to-unmarried-women

13 – Parts of paragraphs 2207 and 2210 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November 2013.

14 – “How the Liberal Welfare State Destroyed Black America,” by John Perazzo, http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262726/how-liberal-welfare-state-destroyed-black-america-john-perazzo, 5/6/2016.

15 – “Generals Worry Army, Marines Unready For A New War,” by Joe Gould, http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2016/03/16/army-marines-readiness-war-congress/81876210/, 3/16/2016.

“Progressives” Act as if Bigotry/ Racism are the Worst Sins —- No, It’s Pride

Featured

Bigotry and racism are despicable, without a doubt.  They have caused much suffering in human history.  But despite what the Left and its media followers imply, it’s not mankind’s greatest flaw.  In fact, it’s not even one of seven capital vices (a/k/a “the seven deadly sins”).1

The biggest stumbling block to holiness is pride.2  It’s pride which gives humans the idea they can decide which of the unborn live, and which shall die — and call it “choice.”

This character defect is the one which suggests Natural Law can be shoved aside and calls the invention “marriage equality.”

It’s pride which causes the Democrats to claim they know what’s best for the inner cities in general and education everywhere despite decades of their failure and resulting despair for their victims.

What incites those in power to circumvent rules and laws, but not expect to receive the same consequences which others of lesser rank are held accountable for?  Answer: pride.

Without going on and on, it wasn’t racism which bounced one of Saul Alinsky’s heroes, Lucifer, from heaven.  It was pride.3

…This leads to a disturbing question: why does Hillary Clinton admire Saul Alinsky? [see footnote #4]

 

 1 – “Though people often speak of the ‘seven deadly sins,’ the more accurate description is ‘seven capital vices.’  A vice is not the same as a sin; rather, it is a habit that inclines us to sin.  Usually a vice is the result of repeated sinful actions of a particular kind, so that a truly ‘vicious’ cycle appears:  Sin leads to a habit, which in turn leads to more sins.”

“The word ‘capital’ comes from the Latin term for ‘head.’  A capital vice is thus ‘head,’ or chief, among other vices in the sense that it leads to others.  Though Scripture contains no explicit reference to seven particular vices as ‘capital,’ we find numerous biblical warnings against these seven: pride, envy, sloth, lust, greed, gluttony, and anger.  The Wisdom Books especially – Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, Wisdom, and Sirach – address them repeatedly.”  From “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, Kansas, 2005.

2 – “For pride is the reservoir of sin,

A source which runs over with vice;

Because of it God sends unheard-of afflictions,

And brings men to utter ruin.”

(Sirach 10:13, Ibid.)

3 – “Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgement to the very first radical: from all our legends, mythology, and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins – or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom – Lucifer.   —  Saul Alinsky   From “Rules for radicals,” Vintage Books, New York, copyright 1971; October 1989 printing.

4 – “It was July 1971, and Hillary Rodham was interning in the law offices of communist rabble-rousers Robert Treuhaft and his British-born wife Jessica ‘Decca’ Mitford, the one-time muckraking journalist. Treuhaft and Mitford had married in 1943, several years after Mitford’s previous husband died fighting for the Soviet Comintern in the Spanish Civil War.  They eventually moved to San Francisco and lived near Saul Alinsky.  Both Treuhaft and Mitford had joined Communist Party USA, and for many years were denied passports and investigated by government officials.”

“Yes, this was Hillary’s big internship — working for two notorious Bay Area communists. Her father must have been appalled.  Saul Alinsky, a self-described democratic socialist who proudly admitted working with communists, must have been pleased.  (‘Anybody who tells you he was active in progressive causes and never worked with the Reds is a goddamn liar,’ Alinsky once said.)”

“And so, on July 8, 1971, Clinton reached out to the aging Alinsky in a letter she marked ‘Personal’ and sent via airmail adorned by two stamps with the face of Franklin Roosevelt.  ‘Dear Saul,’ she began warmly, on a first-name basis. ‘When is that new book coming out — or has it come and I somehow missed the fulfillment of Revelation?’”

“The new book of Revelation that Hillary was excited about was Rules for Radicals.  Hillary told Alinsky that she had just had her ‘one-thousandth conversation about Reveille’ (his other classic) and ‘need some new material to throw at people.’”  She was hopeful that Rules for Radicals would be providing that material”

“…And further, we must add that Alinsky’s influence was not only on the current Democratic nominee.  He impacted the previous nominee as well.  As noted, a young man named Barack Obama would read and teach Alinsky’s tactics during his community-organizing days in Chicago — Saul’s haunting grounds.”

“Alinsky’s influence on the Democratic Party today is so pronounced that his son, David, boasted eight years ago that the ‘Democratic campaign in 2008… is a fine tribute to Saul Alinsky.’  He beamed: ‘the Democratic National Convention had all the elements of the perfectly organized event, Saul Alinsky style.’”

“The 2016 Democratic National Convention likewise will owe something to Saul Alinsky.  Hillary and crew may not give an open acknowledgment to Lucifer, but they ought to give an admiring nod to the lingering presence of Saul Alinsky.”  From “The Hillary-Alinsky-Lucifer Connection,” by Paul Kengor, http://spectator.org/the-hillary-alinsky-lucifer-connection/, 7/16/2016.

Assisted Suicide for Adults and Children & Islamic Adult and Child Suicide Bombers

Featured

The recent bombing at a Turkish wedding which killed 54, brought the horror of Islamic children suicide bombers to our attention again.  While the age of the perpetrator is still under investigation, it reminded us of the fact that Islamic minors are indeed being trained for this.1

We are naturally appalled at a practice which deliberately teaches children that such heinous actions are good.

But how much morally superior are we westerners?  Belgium, Canada, Colombia, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and Switzerland in addition to the states of Montana, Oregon, Vermont, Washington and, most recently, California permit assisted suicide.2,3  The Netherlands and Belgium even allow assisted suicide for teenagers who are vulnerable to the natural emotional upheavals of that age group.4  So, instead of protecting them and helping them through their sensitive years, these jurisdictions indirectly encourage them to kill themselves with laws saying that this is a good option.

When it comes to the safety of minors, the promoters of young assisted suicide are just as reprehensible as jihadists who indoctrinate children to kill themselves and others.  The intrinsic evil of suicide is the same regardless of the age group; only the number of victims varies.

 

 

 1 – “The boy looked scared and younger than 16 when Iraqi police grabbed him on the street in the northern city of Kirkuk.  Pulling off his shirt, they found a two-kilogram bomb strapped to his skinny frame.”

“That was last Sunday.  Less than a day earlier, Turkey was less fortunate: a teenage bomber detonated his suicide vest among dancing guests at a Turkish wedding party, officials say, killing 51 people, nearly half of them children themselves…”

“In Afghanistan, the Taliban has long used children.  One 14-year-old bomber on a bicycle hit the Kabul NATO base in 2012 killing six people; two years later a teenager blew himself up at French cultural center in the Afghan capital…”

“Hisham al-Hashimi, an analyst and author who advises the Iraqi government on Islamic State, says militants this year had reactivated their Heaven’s Youth Brigade, in reaction to the group’s battlefield losses in Iraq and Syria.”

“’Teenagers are easier to recruit for suicide missions, especially in moments of suffering or despair having lost loved ones,’ he said. ‘They also attract less attention and less suspicion than male adults.’”

From “Child Suicide-Bombings Increasingly Used in Militant Attacks,” by Patrick Markey, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/child-suicide-bombings_us_57bb87aae4b00d9c3a19a62f, 8/22/2016.

2 – “Canada joins handful of countries, U.S. states in allowing assisted suicide,” http://www.reuters.com/article/us-canada-euthanasia-jurisdictions-factb-idUSKBN0LA26Z20150206, 2/6/2015.

3 – “California’s Physician-Assisted Suicide Law Goes Into Effect,” by Melanie Hunter, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/californias-physician-assisted-suicide-law-goes-effect, 6/9/2016.

4 – “ In the Netherlands, a competent patient between the ages of 16 and 18 may request euthanasia or assisted suicide. The parent or guardian does not have a veto, but must be consulted. Competent patients aged between 12 and 16 may also qualify, but only if their parent or guardian consents.”

“ In Belgium, a competent patient under the age of 18 may request euthanasia with parental consent. Additional scrutiny of the child’s competence is required, and suffering based on a psychiatric disorder is excluded.”
From “Assisted dying: What does the law in different countries say?” by Penney Lewis, Professor of Law, King’s College London, http://www.bbc.com/news/world-34445715, 10/6/2015.

“Burkini” Ban Accomplishes Nothing Positive

Featured

There are many things a nation can do to protect its culture, but France’s ban on the burkini (full-body bathing suit) only adds to a perceived image of bigotry and does nothing to help the plight of Muslim women.

Lionnel Luca, the mayor of Villeneuve-Loubet:  “In France, one does not come to the beach dressed to display one’s religious convictions, especially as they are false convictions that the religion does not demand.”1

To quote the famous duo of Perry Mason and Hamilton Burger in the 1950’s and ‘60’s television series, “Perry Mason”:  “This is incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial.”  While some in the West may view this garment as another example of Islam’s “enslavement of women,”2  there are many other Islamic traditional mistreatments of women far more deserving of our concern.

The ban on burkinis says something else about common western attitudes.  It’s not enough that today’s hedonistic society wants no restraint on immodesty, now they have to stretch to complaining about excessive modesty?

OK, if an ISIS sympathizer uses this bathing suit to hide weapons used in an attack, then some sort of security measures may need to be put into place.  Until then, worry about real dangers like Euro open borders, homegrown terrorists, “honor” killings, etc.

 

 1 – “France PM backs burkini bans as three more towns consider outlawing garments,” by Samuel Osborne and Alexandra Sims, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/french-pm-backs-burkini-bans-as-three-more-towns-consider-outlawing-garments-a7195136.html, 8/17/2016.

2 – “France’s Prime Minister [Manuel Valls] has backed the banning of burkini swimsuits, saying they are not compatible with French values and are based on the ‘enslavement of women’.” He also said he was not in favor of a national law on this subject of burkinis. Ibid.

Trump is Correct — Time to Peacefully Change the D.C. “Regime”

Featured

In his speech in the Milwaukee area last night, Donald Trump reviewed how the “Washington Establishment” (including both major political parties) has become wealthy at the expense of the poor and middle classes over the last five decades.  The effects of this greed are especially evident in the inner cities where crime is up, education is down and opportunity is almost non-existent after billions have been spent.  Trump took umbrage at the Democrats who have been able to assume they have the African American votes in their back pockets despite generations of keeping them dependent and with lessening hope for a better future.  He said:

 “I’m fighting, all of us across the nation are fighting, for peaceful regime change in our own country. The media-donor political complex that’s bled this country dry has to be replaced with a new government of, by and for the people.”1

Regime?

Of course, the MSNBC was immediately indignant at the use of “regime” to describe the Obama/Clinton years we have endured.  Granted, when we Baby Boomers were growing up, such a word would have been considered absurd.  But we are now in absurd times.

Some  of  Our  Third  World  Blues

Stepping back for a moment, how would we describe a third world country run by a party who has taken the votes of its impoverished minority for fifty years without improving its lot one iota?  And, in fact, their lots have worsened.

What would we say about these countries when the party in power gets its leaders off the hook when, as Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA 10th district and member of the Judiciary Committee) said, one of them lies in front of a Congressional oversight committee several times–  yet “lesser” people commit lesser crimes and are given more severe consequences?

How would we describe a ruler who bypasses his country’s constitution with numerous swipes of his executive pen and then criticizes the opposition party when it sues him— the only means it has to obtain justice?

Yes, our constitutional republic has suffered from what is essentially a regime for eight years.  Why should we choose more of the same in November with Hillary Clinton?

1 – “Trump: I’m Fighting for ‘Peaceful Regime Change’ of the ‘Media-Donor Political Complex,” by Ian Schwartz, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2016/08/16/trump_im_fighting_for_peaceful_regime_change_of_the_media-donor_political_complex.html, 8/16/2016.

From Woodhull to H.Clinton: Sadly, “Progressives” Haven’t Improved

Featured

While Hillary Clinton has become the first woman to win a major party’s nomination for President, she is not the first to run as a party’s nominee for this office.  Licking County, Ohio native Victoria Woodhull, was the nominee of the Equal Rights Party in 1872.  Among her other accomplishments, she was the first female stockbroker and the first woman to address a Congressional committee.  As a progressive, she promoted free love, less rigid divorce laws, socialism and spiritualism1.2

Let’s compare her with Hillary Clinton, a progressive woman presidential candidate 144 years later.  Clinton is known for promoting the killing the unborn and the legalizing disordered behavior through same-sex “marriage”(free love), less rigid border security to the point of endangering the nation, redistribution of wealth (socialism) and had “séance conversations” with Eleanor Roosevelt and Mohandas Gandhi3 (spiritualism).

Sadly, her list of agenda items includes pushing for a national minimum wage which is actually works against economic equality4, doing whatever it takes to preserve a Democratic victory (lies about Benghazi to uphold Obama’s false claim about putting terrorism on the run), erasing more emails as part of an investigation than Nixon had tapes erased, smearing the credibility of the women sexually harassed by her President husband, etc.

“Progressive”?  No, this philosophy is regressive.

 

1 – “Spiritualism, in religion, a movement based on the belief that departed souls can interact with the living. Spiritualists sought to make contact with the dead, usually through the assistance of a medium, a person believed to have the ability to contact spirits directly. Some mediums worked while in a trancelike state, and some claimed to be the catalyst for various paranormal physical phenomena (including the materializing or moving of objects) through which the spirits announced their presence.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/spiritualism-religion

2 – “Ohio woman was nominated in 1872,” by Maria DeVito, Cincinnati Enquirer, 7/29/2016.

3 – “Author Bob Woodward reported in the 1990’s that Hillary Clinton held ‘séance’ conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt and Gandhi in the White House. Bill Clinton also joked about the incident in 2012, during the dedication of Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park in New York.

‘As all of you famously learned when I served as president, my wife, now the secretary of state, was known to commune with Eleanor on a regular basis,’ he joked during his speech.”, from “Hillary Clinton: ‘I believe in Spirits’” by Charlie Spiering, http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/04/18/hillary-clinton-believe-spirits/, 4/18/2016.

4https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2016/04/25/why-a-national-15-hour-minimum-wage-makes-no-sense/

 

Parallel: Overlooking a Candidate’s Stand on Abortion or Concentration Camps

Featured

“Litmus test” issues have been denigrated by the press for so long that most citizens are reluctant to suggest that some legitimate ones exist.

There is one foundational right without which all other rights cannot emanate.  It is one which the Supreme Court tied itself in knots in 1973 using bizarre logic regarding privacy to take away the Right to Life and legalize abortion.

Without protecting life at its very beginning, every other cause is irrelevant.

“It is impossible to further the common good without acknowledging and defending the right to life, upon which all the other inalienable rights of individuals are founded and from which they develop.” –Pope John Paul II, The Gospel of Life1

A certain way to raise a liberal’s ire is to say a particular judge should not be considered for the Supreme Court unless he/ she is pro-life.  They would rail against such a “litmus test.”

But suppose a candidate for Congress was asked for an opinion about the concentration camps in Germany during World War II.  What would the Left say if that individual passed on that by saying those killing camps were the business of the Germans and we should not have taken a stance at that time because their legal system allowed it?  Would the secular news channels have enough hours in a broadcasting day to declare that this candidate was unqualified?

Both the right to life and concentration camp issues are legitimate “litmus tests.”  It defies logic that only the second one is acceptable.  The only conclusion which can be drawn is that, to most “progressives”, all lives are not created equal.

 

1http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/abortion/living-the-gospel-of-life.cfm

 

Ensuring Trump’s Defeat Will Not Guarantee Republican Party’s Resurgence in 2020

Featured

As Chris Stirewalt reminded on Fox News last night, there are a handful of influential Republicans who believe having Trump “getting a kick in the pants” would destroy the populist arm of the party and lead to a Republican comeback.  He said they are most likely using the example of 1964 when Goldwater’s defeat led to a power reorganization within the party culminated with Nixon’s victory four years later.

BUT  THIS  YEAR  IS  NOT  LIKE  1964

The U.S. and the world of 1964 are not similar to 2016. Back then, the no-win Viet Nam situation virtually assured the Presidential winner of ’64 would not repeat in ’68 — Or why did Johnson shock the world when he announced he would not run in March of ’68?

Secondly, the future of the Supreme Court was not hanging on a precipice as it is now.  Few appointments were expected of the Presidential winner of ’64.  (Thurgood Marshall became Johnson’s only confirmed appointment.)  The Court was already liberal.  However, 1968’s presidential winner, Nixon, eventually made four Court appointments.  They changed its composition from two conservative, five liberal and two moderate to five conservative and four liberal (with the help of one justice, Byron White going from slightly liberal to slightly conservative according to the study). This ratio has remained intact ever since, even with a change in some of the Court’s members and Justice Kennedy’s increasing tendency to be more liberal since this study was done.

Graph_of_Bailey_Scores_of_Supreme_Court_Justices_1950-2011

1 – Source data from Michael A. Bailey, Georgetown University, June 2012 as posted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices

Looking  at  2016  Plus  Four  Years

Several appointments will likely be required of this election’s winner. The Court’s current 4-4 ratio with one vacancy will definitely change in the next presidential term.  Once the new Court’s personality is established, it will remain unchanged for many years as it will be an even younger Court.

So, if some Republicans get their wish of a Trump defeat, the nation will not benefit EVEN IF they are able to limit a Hillary Administration to a single term. (Only two incumbents running for re-election have been defeated since Herbert Hoover.  Gerald Ford is not included as he was not elected to the position of Vice President, but was appointed and confirmed.)  The damage to the Supreme Court and the nation will already be entrenched before the 2020 election.  Recapturing the White House in that election will mean much less than winning this year’s as far as the safety of our Constitution is concerned.

To the Republican Establishment:  is it REALLY worth being led by pride to derail Donald Trump’s campaign?  Granted, Trump is not the most stellar Republican candidate in many years.  He is still more qualified than Hillary Clinton and her baggage of deceit.  If the Congress remains in Republican control and he chooses a wise Cabinet, things will work out for the civilization we need to protect.  If not, imagine what damage will occur in what will be essentially a  third and possible fourth Obama terms.

 

 

BLM Wants Reparations — Irish Americans Are Deserving, too

Featured

The Black Lives Matter, officially the Movement for Black Lives, released its platform of six demands this week.  Number two on the list is “reparations for past and continuing harms.”1

The U.S. fight for civil rights has been going on as a result of slavery which began on North America’s soil centuries ago.  Progress was realized in the 1960’s with various laws, but racial discrimination has not been eradicated, from both sides.

Obscured in the on-going strife is the fact black Americans have been not the only group poorly treated during our nation’s history.  The common misunderstanding is so pervasive to the point that most U.S. citizens would think “race” when the word discrimination is mentioned.  Women might be a second response, but most likely a distant second.

Irish Iberian

(see Footnote 2 for text and credit)

Time for a history refresher.  Irish immigrants were very poorly treated for generations after their initial influx as a result of the potato famine in the 1840’s.  Examples:

  • “They were forced to live in cellars and shanties, partly because of poverty but also because they were considered bad for the neighborhood…they were unfamiliar with plumbing and running water. These living conditions bred sickness and early death. It was estimated that 80% of all infants born to Irish immigrants in New York City died. Their brogue and dress provoked ridicule; their poverty and illiteracy provoked scorn.”4

  • “They became chamber maids, cooks, and the caretakers of children. Early Americans disdained this type of work, fit only for servants, the common sentiment being, “Let Negroes be servants, and if not Negroes, let Irishmen fill their place… The Blacks hated the Irish and it appeared to be a mutual feeling. They were the first to call the Irish ‘white nigger.'”4
  • “The Know-Nothing Party- a political party in the late 19th century—developed with “native” Americans who hated the immigrant influx particularly the Irish.”5
  • “Employers would place signs with NINA scrawled across the front. NINA spelled out is No Irish Need Apply, this would often be seen next to the No Dogs Allowed signs.”5
  • “The Irish were ostracized from American society for many things besides just being newcomers. The Irish were ostracized for being Catholic.  Many Protestants and ‘native’ Americans were distrustful of a religion that was, as they viewed it, highly irregular with its beads, meditative prayers to Jesus’ mother, oils, saints and statues.  The Irish were also categorized as angry, alcoholic beings – (the term ‘don’t get your Irish up’, stemmed from a stereotypical belief in the volatile Irish temper) who drank all the time in saloons and had regular bar brawls and parties filled with revelry and debauchery.”5
  • Even though early major league had Irish players, around the turn of the 20th century,” the large numbers of Irish fans misled the public into believing that the Irish dominated the game.”  The same book printed this:6

 

Baseball and No Irish need apply

Despite the cruel treatment, the Irish kept moving forward:

“The Irish were unique among immigrants… In New York City, during the Civil War, they rioted against the draft lottery after the first drawing showed most of the names were Irish.  For three days the city was terrorized by Irish mobs and only after an appeal for peace by Archbishop Hughes did it end.  In Pennsylvania they formed a secret organization called the Molly Maguires to fight mine owners who brutalized the miners and their families. They ambushed mine bosses, beat, and even killed them in their homes.  The Irish used brutal methods to fight brutal oppression.  They loved America and gladly fought in her wars… The days of ‘No Irish Need Apply’ passed. St.Patrick day paraded [sic] replaced violent confrontations…Through poverty and subhuman living conditions, the Irish tenaciously clung to each other.  With their ingenuity for organization, they were able to gain power and acceptance.  In 1850 at the crest of the Potato Famine immigration, Orestes Brownson, a celebrated convert to Catholicism, stated: ‘Out of these narrow lanes, dirty streets, damp cellars, and suffocating garrets, will come forth some of the noblest sons of our country, whom she will delight to own and honor.’  In little more than a century his prophecy rang true.  Irish-Americans had moved from the position of the despised to the oval office.”4

Our American history has its proud moments, but we also need to remember those groups who were not always treated properly.  Let’s not allow the tunnel-vision of political correctness to narrow our sense of fairness.

 

1 – “Black Lives Matter Releases Policy Agenda,” by Trymaine Lee, http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/black-lives-matter-releases-policy-agenda-n620966, 8/1/2016.

2 – “The Iberians are believed to have been originally an African race, who thousands of years ago spread themselves through Spain (undecipherable) Western Europe.  Their remains are found in the barrows or burying places in sundry parts of these countries.  The skulls are of low prognathous3 type.  They came to Ireland and mixed with the natives of the South and West, who themselves are supposed to have been of low type and descendants of savages of the Stone Age, who, in consequence of isolation from the rest of the world, had never been  (undecipherable) competed in the healthy struggle of life, and thus made way, according to the laws of nature for superior races.”  Credited as coming from Harper’s Weekly, 1899. Artist Unknown, Misusing Darwin’s science theories as a basis, the idea of the Irish as less than fully white persisted. This 1899 cartoon showing the Irish stereotype as less evolved, presented as scientific fact 11 years after Nast’s last cartoon was published by Harper’s. Source: Wikipedia Commons, as published I “Irish As Subhuman,” https://thomasnastcartoons.com/category/irish-americans/, 3/1/2016.

3 – “being or having an upper or lower jaw that projects abnormally forward, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prognathous

4 – “Irish Immigrants in America in the 19th Century,” http://www.kinsella.org/history/histira.htm

5 – “The Irish in America: 1840’s- 1930’s,” http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug03/omara-alwala/irishkennedys.html

6 – From page 88 of “Baseball as America,” by George Plimpton, W.P.Kinsella, Paul Simon, Roger Angell, John Grisham, Jules Tygiel and others, National Geographic, Washington D.C., copyright National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, 2002.

 

Lesson for ISIS: Murdering the Priest Sent Him Straight to Heaven as a True Martyr! [1]

Featured

A French priest, Fr. Jacques Hamel (age 85), was killed while saying Mass two days ago and the terrorists further insulted the God they pretend to honor by filming “themselves preaching in Arabic by the altar.”2

The irony is that those who mistakenly think they can become martyrs3,4,5 by suicide bombing or being killed while murdering “infidels” actually assisted in achieving that glorified status for a fellow human whose faith they despise.  Now, the priest in heaven will be interceding on their behalf for their conversions!6

 

1 – “But some people do go directly to heaven–certainly as in the case of martyrs. Our Lord told the ‘good thief’ [that] he would be in heaven that day (Luke 23:43).”  — Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P., http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=667156, 4/19/2012.

2 – “France in shock again after Isis murder of priest in Normandy,” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/26/france-shock-second-isis-attack-12-days, 7/26/2016.

3 – first definition of “martyr” by this source:  “a person who voluntarily suffers death as the penalty of witnessing to and refusing to renounce a religion,” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/martyr

4 – “Sacred Scripture attests to the courage of men and women who were willing to die as martyrs rather than renounce their faith or be unfaithful to God’s law.” “What is the Church’s Teaching on Martyrdom?”http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-teaching-on-martyrdom/

5 – “Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life.  It is gravely contrary to the just love of self.  It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations.  Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.”  Paragraph 2281 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

6 – “The witnesses who have preceded us into the kingdom, especially those whom the Church recognizes as saints, share in the living tradition of prayer by the example of their lives, the transmission of their writings, and their prayer today.  They contemplate God, praise him and constantly care for those whom they have left on earth.  When they entered into the joy of their Master, they were ‘put in charge of many things.’  Their intercession is their most exalted service to God’s plan.  We can and should ask them to intercede for us and for the whole world.”  Paragraph 2683, Ibid.

 

 

To Clinton Campaign: Russians Aren’t Waiting for the Green Light to Hack Our Government

Featured

How the Left can spin anything to attempt taking the focus away from their ineptitude and corruption.  Here is what gave their followers what they perceived was an opening:

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said, according to the New York Times. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”1

So, Hillary Clinton’s campaign says this:

“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent,” said Jake Sullivan, Mrs. Clinton’s chief foreign policy adviser. “This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”2

You had better believe it’s a national security issue and foreign powers were encouraged, not by Trump today, but years ago whenever they discovered Mrs. Clinton took it upon herself to circumvent State Department procedures and put sensitive and classified emails on a private and unsecure server.

Russians  Don’t  Have  to  Be  Invited  to  Initiate  Mayhem

Since when have the Russians needed invitations or permission to cause trouble?  Ask Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia who have faced domination from outside powers for centuries, including last decade when Russia used its natural gas as a political tool.3  Or, how about Ukraine and Crimea?4

No, if Russia steals any of our secrets, it won’t be because Donald Trump encouraged them. They have shown repeatedly that they are very adept at being an international nuisance on their own.  Sure,  the Democrats will try to blame Trump, but the only ones who believe that are those who get their news from social media (or as Watters World discovered when a Democratic voter said Cuba is a successful socialist country and another who wasn’t sure who won our Civil War)….(!)… Then again, with the sad state of average public awareness of current events, Trump just might need damage control on his harmless comment.

 

1 – From “Donald Trump on Twitter:  Russia Should Give the FBI Hillary’s Emails,” by Rider Torrance, http://www.inquisitr.com/3354505/donald-trump-twitter-russia-treason-clinton-emails-news/, 7/27/2016.

2 – From “Donald Trump Calls on Russia to Find Hillary Clinton’s Missing Emails,” by Ashley Parker, http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/us/politics/donald-trump-russia-clinton-emails.html?_r=0, 7/27/2016.

3 – ” Attempts to control them began in the Middle Ages, with a period of Scandinavian domination in which Sweden and Denmark took prominent roles. By the end of the 18th century, the Baltic states were swept into the growing Russian Empire. Their subordination was briefly broken by a short period of independence in the early 20th century, before Nazi Germany invaded during World War II. Not long after, the region was annexed into the Soviet Union. After regaining independence in 1990 just prior to the Soviet Union’s collapse, the three nations entered a new phase: integrating with the West. It culminated with each of the Baltic states joining the European Union and NATO in 2004…”

“This became problematic when Russia resumed its role as a regional powerhouse with the rapid defeat of Georgia in August 2008 and use of natural gas cutoffs to punish Ukraine in 2006 and 2009. The small and vulnerable Baltic states became increasingly nervous that Moscow would set its sights on them next.”  From “Russian Influence Fades in the Baltics,” https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/russian-influence-fades-baltics, 6/10/2016.

4https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation