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


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


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.”


“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


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?


  • 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


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?


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/


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


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.


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


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.



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


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


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


“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.


“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.



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.


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


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


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


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”


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


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


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.



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


“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.




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


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.


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.


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.



Send Planned Parenthood Federal Funds to Help the Fight Against Zika


Many debates have surprisingly simple resolutions if we would just step back and identify the priorities.  We would often find that two supposedly separate issues can easily be merged into one solution.

Such is the case of the Senate battle involving a bill to fund research in the fight against the Zika virus. Democrats are currently fighting it because, while the bill would allocate $40 million to community health centers to assist in this endeavor, it does not send funds to one of the Democrats’ favorite social agenda provider, Planned Parenthood.1

Their support for the organization which kills 300,000 unborn babies annually is legendary.2  In a way, it’s not surprising that they are willing to hinder Zika research in favor of one of their pet projects.

Their argument is that Planned Parenthood can provide contraception which would prevent the creation of any babies which might display the damage caused by Zika.  However, those willing to accept the use of artificial means to prevent conception do not have to be reliant on Planned Parenthood.

Step  Back  to  See  the  Resolution

The debate can be boiled down to two aspects.  On one hand, we have a potential health calamity which has numerous health impacts including birth defects.  On the other, we have an organization which receives $500 million in federal subsidies annually and whose primary mission/ source of income is the indiscriminate killing of unborn babies.

This becomes simple:  stop giving the $500 million of taxpayer money to the killing organization and apply it to the $1+ billion needed to prevent the suffering of babies and their families as a result of the Zika virus.

Sure, we’ll hear how Planned Parenthood might not be applying the $500 million directly to abortions.  But what this subsidy does is free their other financial assets to the killing processes and go to the bottom line of the anti-life organization.

Not convinced?  Here’s an analogy.  Suppose there’s a Senate bill written to fund orphanages, especially those who have children with special needs.  In this theoretical case, let’s say the Mafia also had a medical arm through which it launders money via medical device companies.

Would these pro-Planned Parenthood individuals be willing to allocate federal funds to these Mafia-sponsored medical companies. After all, the money is not going directly to their criminal activities.

Does anyone NOT see the serious moral problems with such an arrangement?3

Case closed, no federal funds for any organization engaged in first-degree killing regardless of the other activities it may be involved with.



1 – “Finally, and probably most importantly, Senate Democrats are upset that the Zika appropriations bill does not allocate funding for Planned Parenthood, arguing that it leaves women without care options. But, that’s not true. The bill allocates $40 million for community health centers that are more plentiful and offer a wider range of care, plus $6 million for the National Health Service Corps and $95 million to the Social Services Grant Program that can distribute funds for preventive care to the most at-risk areas. It is simply not the job of the federal government to fund the nation’s largest abortion provider, and it is unconscionable that Senate Democrats would block funding aimed to help protect pregnant women and babies because their friends at Planned Parenthood don’t get a cut.”  “Roby: Democrats are blocking Zika funding because Planned Parenthood doesn’t get a cut,” by Martha Roby, http://yellowhammernews.com/politics-2/roby-democrats-blocking-zika-funding , 8/7/2016.

2 – “Planned Parenthood performed 323,999 abortions and received $553.7 million from U.S. taxpayers during the 2014-2015 fiscal year, according to its most recent annual report.”

“Although it saw 200,000 less patients and provided 11 percent fewer services than the previous year, its taxpayer subsidy increased by nearly $25 million.”

“Abortions are down from 2013, when the industry performed 327,653 abortions.”The stability of Planned Parenthood’s abortion count – between 324,000 and 334,000 since 2008 – is remarkable, given that national figures for abortions have been in a nosedive since 2008,” the National Right to Life Committee noted. ‘They have dropped 13 percent in just three years.’”  From “Planned Parenthood reveals its 2014 stats: 323,999 abortions, $553.7 million from US taxpayers, by Ben Johnson, https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/planned-parenthood-performed-323999-abortions-and-received-553.7-million-fr, 1/4/2016.

3 – Here come the objections! “Abortion is legal.” Concentration camps in Nazi Germany were legal, too… So much for blind faith in fallible human court systems.

BLM Wants Reparations — Irish Americans Are Deserving, too


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.


Obama Administration Invites Terrorism — to a Community Near You?


From the answers many Democratic voters give to roving reporters these days, it is not surprising that no protest marches have filled our streets this evening against Jeh Johnson’s temporary amnesty to 8,000 Syrian refuges.  The declaration gives “permanent resident status, work permits, and other documents that would allow these migrants to remain without fear of deportation.”It also covers some who are here illegally, a staple of recruiting for Democrats.

It means that “almost anyone from Syria who is in the United States on an expired visa can stay here for at least another 18 months” as Syria has been given “temporary protected status” [TPS] because of its war-torn situation. 2

 To make matters worse:

“The background checks run on TPS participants are less stringent even than the screening of foreigners entering on some types of visas, let alone the multilayered vetting that refugees receive — procedures that FBI Director James Comey and other top government officials have said are insufficient to guarantee that terrorists cannot slip through.”3

Today, Trish Regan of Fox Business asked why does Hillary Clinton want to increase the immigration of those who “promised to seed with Islamic jihadists”?  Ms. Regan reminded us of the 1200 women who were sexually assaulted, mostly in Cologne and Hamburg, on New Years by migrants of Islamic nations.  This and the news of numerous attacks in Europe point to a reason why the UK left the organization which requires open borders in this time of war against radical Islamic jihadists.

Is this a case of taking political correctness to an extreme as Trish Regan offered?

It could be that reason or simply to create more chaos, thus “justifying” more big government control.  Any way we look at it, Obama and Hillary are welcoming the Trojan horse in to the cheers of the Left.  Because of their generosity (at our risk) these refuges can even apply for drivers licenses, too.4

Those of us who object will be reminded that we are not living up to the Christian directive to welcome the stranger.  The President and Ms. Clinton are thus following Hillary’s hero, Saul Alinsky and his 4th rule for radicals: “Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules [emphasis retained].”5

To them, it is irrelevant that Christian charity does not require that we lead with our chin either.  Or as Pope Francis said recently regarding the question of how Europe can handle its wave of immigrants: “[it is] a fair and responsible question, because one cannot open the gates wide unreasonably.”6

Assuming Obama and Clinton continue to follow Alinsky, the only question left is where and when will one of these guests, or future guests if Hillary wins, strike us next?


1 – “DHS Gives 8,000 Syrian Refugees Temporary Amnesty,” by Matt Vespa, http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/08/01/dhs-gives-8000-syrian-refugees-temporary-amnesty-n2200850, 8/1/2016.

2 – “Obama Grants Protected Status To Syrians In U.S. Illegally,” by Leo Hohmann, http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/obama-grants-protected-status-to-syrians-in-u-s-illegally/, 8/1/2016.

3 – “Thousands of Syrians Get Back-Door Amnesty,” by Brendan Kirby, http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/thousands-syrians-get-back-door-amnesty/, updated 8/2/2016.

4 – “Called Temporary Protected Status, it is anything but temporary.  The program basically works like this: big event, like a natural disaster or war, happens in a country, US then says anyone already in the US from that country doesn’t have to go home.  They can be here on a Visa or for some other reason (illegally?) and they then can apply for TPS and virtually never go home!

“They can work, get drivers licenses, do anything a legal citizen can do except vote (and they are probably doing that too!).”  https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/tag/temporary-protected-status/

5– From “Rules for Radicals,” by Saul Alinsky, Vintage Books, New York, 1971.

6 – From “Pope: Conscientious Objection Is a Human Right,” by CAN/ EWTN News, National Catholic Register, May 29-June 11, 2016 issue.


Anti-Portman Ad Criticizes Him for Proposing Social Security Funds be Taken From the Clutches of Congress


A Democratic  PAC ad opposing the re-election of Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) says he takes money from Wall Street (big deal, so does Hillary and just about everyone else from both parties) and wants to privatize Social Security to the stock market.  It suggests he be elected senator from Wall Street not from Ohio.

While he supported a House bill in 2005 which would have allowed anyone under age 55 to divert some of the withholdings to private investment accounts, he hasn’t supported privatization since.  Incidentally, that option would have been voluntary and did not pass.1

In any event, imagine that!  Trusting something other than the federal government to handle our Social Security funds – which are essentially missing under its mismanagement.

Let’s think about this.  What is riskier, investing funds in the stock market which, if it crashes to zero, then everything crashes anyway and retirement becomes irrelevant OR entrusting it to the same organization (Congress) which has been a kleptomaniac with our money and without punishment for decades?

What  Should  be  Done

Let the Feds continue to take the employers half of the Social Security contributions and hope they do something honorable with it for a change.  Allow the employees to invest their halves wherever they want, as long as it’s legal, with the stipulation that there will be no government safety net if they fritter their half away.

Simple.  That’s why it has only a long-shot of happening.



1 – “Campaign Ad Watch: PAC Criticizes Portman on Social Security,” by Jessica Wehrman of The Columbus Dispatch, 7/8/2016.

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


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


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.


Is This What You Had in Mind, Senator Warren, Seriously?


“It’s about what country we want to be.” — Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) during the Democrats convention last night in Philadelphia.

Her party has changed our country to one where:

1) The unborn live in the area of the highest death rate.

2) Civil law tells God to stick it in His ear because His idea of marriage is outdated

3) The inalienable right of religious liberty is subject to political correctness and its restrictions

4) People of influence can escape the consequences of breaking the law.

5) National sovereignty is considered old-fashioned so that borders are opened carelessly.1

6) The inalienable right of parents to teach their children is overrun by a centralized and unconstitutional Department of Education and experiments like Common Core.2,3

7) Parental stewardship of their children is taken away by subjecting them to arrest if they attempt to secure help for their children suffering from gender uncertainties.4

8) Parents must sign approval for big things like a school field trip, but not for trivial things like their daughter seeking to end the life of their grandchild.

The Democrats’ list goes on ad nauseam — literally.

No, Senator, people of solidly formed consciences don’t want your New Age vision of the USA — Ultimate Society of Abominations.


1 – “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.”

From paragraph 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

 2 – “As those first responsible for the education of their children, parents have the right to choose a school for them which corresponds to their own convictions.  This right is fundamental.  As far as possible parents have the duty of choosing schools that will best help them in their task as Christian educators.  Public authorities have the duty of guaranteeing this parental right and of ensuring the concrete conditions for its exercise.”  Paragraph 2229, Ibid.

3 – “Roger Pilon, constitutional scholar has said: ‘From beginning to end the [Constitution] never mentioned the word ‘education.’  Yet, the Department of Education has been around since 1979 when it came into being during the Carter Administration — even though the Constitution does not give authority to the federal government to collect taxes for funding and operating schools.”

“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 (D-N.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.”

From “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 as reported in “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.

4 – “Yet, amid the mistruths that have formed to normalize ‘gender transition,’ some voices of truth are making themselves heard.”

“Dr. Paul McHugh is the head of the psychiatry department at Johns Hopkins University. Writing this summer in the Wall Street Journal, he notes how he stopped allowing sex change or “reassignment” surgeries at the university hospital after research and experience showed that the surgeries in which men sought to become women did not cure underlying psychological problems present prior to surgery, and that the desire for the surgery was instead the byproduct of other psychological and sexual disorders.”

“In the words of Dr. McHugh: ‘We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it.’”

“The problem is not a question of how to help people make their bodies match their subjective psychological state. The problem is much deeper…”

“As Pope-emeritus Benedict XVI noted in an important address to the Roman Curia in 2012, a rejection of the reality that we are created male and female is, even if unwittingly, a rejection of the Creator and his creation.”

“Therefore, cultural currents or policies that seek to institutionalize or ‘mandate’ affirmation of gender ‘reassignment’ (as opposed to anti-discrimination laws, some of which ensure that people have access to the basic necessities of life) cannot be supported because they perpetuate the confusion, brokenness, or pain that someone who identifies as transgendered is experiencing, instead of trying to get to the root of the problem and recognize his or her human dignity as created by God.  ”

From “Catholic Spirit: Transgender persons, human dignity and our response,” by Jason Adkins, http://www.mncc.org/catholic-spirit-transgender-persons-human-dignity-response/, 10/9/2014.

Exposing Democrats’ Failures Gets Trump Label of Fear-Monger


The Hillary Clinton campaign had so little substantive criticism they reverted to personality comments after Donald trump’s acceptance speech at the Republican convention on Thursday night.  Comments  included a charge of fear-mongering and being divisive.  It’s a convenient putdown, but an erroneous one when examining the facts.

 National  Security

Are we safer as a nation compared to eight years ago? Based on increased recent terrorist attacks and assassinations of police, the answer is “no.” There is nothing irresponsible of Trump saying that attacks on police are attacks on all of us.  Unless, of course, President Kennedy was also guilty of the same when he said a Soviet attack on any Western Hemisphere country would be considered an attack on the U.S.  It was not fear, but in both cases, an assertiveness against threats.

Trump does not believe that all of our national problems are caused by foreigners. Rather, he is reminding the nation that it is every country’s prerogative to protect its borders, despite what the Left tries to shame us into abdicating.2,3

In addition, Trump reminded last night, “Syria is engulfed in a civil war and the world faces a refugee crisis.”  Events in Europe over the past year verify that this problem is extended into Europe and to us if we allow it.

In a time when terrorists have promised and have shown the ability to infiltrate themselves among legitimate refugees, the concern for borders is reasonable and prudent.  It is not fear-mongering to require extra vetting mechanisms in place before we increase immigration from nations who have been compromised with increased presence of terrorism. It is basic common sense.

Crime  in  Cities

Trump noted that homicides rose 17% in the largest 50 cities last year — the biggest increase in 25 years.  The implication is that it will be difficult to deal with this problem as long as the police have to be aware of additional threats to their safety, too.  Does this qualify Trump as a fear-monger?

Is it fear-mongering to be opposed to sanctuary cities? As Trump reminded, where was the sanctuary for Kate Steinle and others murdered by the product of these unconstitutional locations?  Fear arising from the lack of law and order enforcement is natural, not divisive or a product of propaganda.

Decline  in  Education

Education has been crumbling in our nation for decades.  Although liberals use the opportunities to send their children to non-public schools2, they rail against school choice. The only fear here is not  created by Trump, but from the teachers’ union establishment fearful of having to be accountable for a change.

The  Iran  Deal

The Iranian deal gave them $150 billion plus a path to nuclear weapons which it was supposed to prevent.  Terrible deal.  The free world, including Israel SHOULD be fearful.  So is this fear-mongering?

National  Debt  and  Infrastructure

 Our national debt has worsened immensely during the Obama, and what do we have to show for it other than deteriorating infrastructure?  Is it fear-mongering to recognize that we have numerous crumbling bridges which are subject to the laws of physics to our severe peril?  The aim of his speech is that we must and we can fix these issues before it’s too late.

Renegotiating bad foreign trade deals is promoting fear? — perhaps for the nations who have used various methods, including currency manipulation, in order to circumvent agreements.  Unfair trade practices require a response.  This doesn’t necessarily mean actions that could lead to trade wars, but there must be consequences.  Democrats are usually opposed to consequences, but it’s time to end the Era of Enabling (this writer’s words, not Trump’s!)

Legal  Double  Standard

Regarding the Hillary Clinton confidential emails on her personal server which endangered our security, but for which she was not held accountable: “I know that corruption has reached a level as never, never before in our country.”  We should be concerned when the powerful received unwarranted free passes as it undermines the public’s faith in the system of justice.  A double standard inevitably leads to a loss of freedom for the less empowered — which is divisive.

In summary, how much longer will the party of Obama and Clinton keep “their rigged system in place?”

THAT is a legitimate source of fear for anyone with reason — but it’s also something we “little people” can fix in November.



1 – “According to a report by The Heritage Foundation, ‘exactly 52 percent of Congressional Black Caucus members and 38 percent of Congressional Hispanic Caucus members sent at least one child to private school.’ Overall, only 6 percent of black students attend private school.”
“According to a 2004 Thomas B. Fordham Institute study, more than 1 in 5 public school teachers sent their children to private schools. In some cities, the figure is much higher. In Philadelphia, 44 percent of the teachers put their children in private schools; in Cincinnati, it’s 41 percent, and Chicago (39 percent) and Rochester, N.Y. (38 percent), also have high figures. In the San Francisco-Oakland area, 34 percent of public school teachers enroll their children in private schools, and in New York City, it’s 33 percent.”

“Only 11 percent of all parents enroll their children in private schools. The fact that so many public school teachers enroll their own children in private schools ought to raise questions.”

 From “Racial Trade-offs,” by Walter E. Williams, http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2013/10/09/racial-tradeoffs-n1718736, 10/9/2013.

2 – “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.”  From paragraph 2241 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

3 – “Enforcement: The U.S. Catholic Bishops accept the legitimate role of the U.S. government in intercepting unauthorized migrants who attempt to travel to the United States. The Bishops also believe that by increasing lawful means for migrants to enter, live, and work in the United States, law enforcement will be better able to focus upon those who truly threaten public safety: drug and human traffickers, smugglers, and would‐be terrorists. Any enforcement measures must be targeted, proportional, and humane.”  From the “Catholic Church’s Position On Immigration Reform,”  http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/churchteachingonimmigrationreform.cfm; August, 2013.



Cruz Thinks He Has Vision for 2020, but He Has Become Short-SightedTed


Cruz  Being  Booed  at  RNC

(Photo from Fox Business News last night in their review of the evening’s events.)

Ted Cruz has always fancied himself as the second coming of Ronald Reagan.  After last night’s speech at the Republican convention, he should start hoping it wasn’t his Good Night in America speech instead.1

The bitter struggle which saw the Republicans narrow seventeen candidates down to one has a few who disregard the loyalty agreement of last year.  Even Ohio governor Kasich, who had thought Donald Trump’s loyalty was the one suspect from the beginning, disappointed his constituents by not appearing to greet his party on Day One.

While some voiced their dissatisfaction by not attending the convention, the senator from Texas did the best job of alienating party faithful by being present last night.

Many, except the most perceptive, didn’t see the bus wreck coming.  Cruz began his speech with a touching story of one of the children who lost her father in the Dallas police murders.  He skillfully wove a narrative tying our need and respect for law enforcement with the Constitutional rights which we cherish so much.

He contrasted these to the track record of Hillary Clinton and reiterated the differences between the Democratic Party and those values dear to the Revolutionary founders and to current Republicans.

But as his time at the podium began winding down, it became obvious that no attempt at extending a unifying olive branch was going to be given to Donald Trump that evening. The tide began turning with his request: “to those listening, please don’t stay home in November.”  It accelerated as Cruz exhorted the crowd “to vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket, who YOU trust to defend our freedom to be faithful to the Constitution.”

By then, chants of “We want Trump” became obvious and Cruz aggravated his situation by saying, “I appreciate the enthusiasm of the New York delegation.”  He tried to play the crowd with a continuation of his family’s story of immigration to the U.S. and restating the image of the murdered policeman’s daughter.  Those with cowboy hats tried to offset the growing unhappiness in the rest of the audience with their approval.  The catcalls indicated Cruz had lost his credibility despite statesman-like: “We must make the most of our moment, to fight for freedom, to protect our God-given rights even of those with whom we don’t agree.”  “We want Trump” and other comments of disapproval were not going away.  Cruz’s “L” was cemented in the loss column as the boos strengthened.

Trump was shown watching and skillfully began to emerge from the side curtain with smiles, clapping with his followers and a reassuring thumb up as if to say “All is well, I’m still the candidate and definitely in charge.”  He Tweeted later that he had seen the Cruz speech two hours earlier, but he “let him speak anyway. No big deal!”

In the final analysis, Ted Cruz attempted to solidify his independent crusader-at-all-costs image.  For the time being, it cost him his image.

“trusTED” had tossed himself under the busTED.


1 – “’Prouder, Stronger, Better’, commonly referred to by the name ‘Morning in America’, is a 1984 political campaign television commercial, known for its opening line, “It’s morning again in America.” The ad was part of the U.S. presidential campaign of Republican Party candidate Ronald Reagan. It featured a montage of images of Americans going to work, and a calm, optimistic narration that suggested the improvements to the U.S. economy since his 1980 election were due to Reagan’s policies. It asked voters why they would want to return to the pre-Reagan policies of Democrats like his opponent Walter Mondale, who had served as the Vice President under Reagan’s immediate predecessor Jimmy Carter.”  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morning_in_America


News Flash, Pro-Choice: We Don’t Own Our Bodies, Including the Unborn


The longstanding argument rationalizing the killing of the unborn is the presumption that it solely involves the woman’s body and she can do with it whatever she wants.

Two errors here.  First of all, the chromosomes of the baby prove that a second, unique individual is also present.  Therefore, it’s not just about the woman’s body.

Secondly, we are only stewards of our bodies, not the ultimate masters of them.

“Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.  It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.  We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.  We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.  It is not ours to dispose of.”1

“The Torah states that the human body was created Bi’tzelem Elokim, in the image of God, and is the property of the Creator.  Man is given custodial rights to his body, and has no more right to harm or destroy his body than the superintendent has to ransack the building he is hired to maintain…”
“By extension a physician may not hasten the death of a patient, not only because of his duty to preserve life, but because he has no right to destroy the property of another, in this case God… Because one’s body is not his property…”2

Consequently, suggesting that we own ourselves is a position which cannot be held by those who hold to Judeo-Christian traditions.


1 – Paragraph 2280 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

2 – “Sanctity of the Human Body,” by Daniel Eisenberg, MD.  http://www.aish.com/ci/sam/48960576.html



PBS Documentary on the Unborn: Sneaking in a Requalification of “Human Individuality”


A recent PBS program about the development of the unborn baby claimed that at eight weeks “we’re not an individual yet.”

It said that the very “first signs of individuality” (which it described as sex identity) are known after eight weeks.

WRONG.  The uniqueness of a person’s individuality, including gender, is established at the moment of conception, NOT eight weeks later.  Science knows this.  And the Catholic Church knows this, Ms. Pelosi.1

It is the height of arrogance to push a lie in an attempt to dehumanize the baby at early development — with the accompanying implication that there’s no need to place any importance about this supposedly unidentifiable life.  A human exists from the moment of conception.  Any attempt to arbitrarily disqualify life as being less than human after that moment follows in the steps of great perpetrators of evil like Hitler, the Ku Klux Klan and Planned Parenthood.





Satan Thrilled With Jihadists and Police Killers


The first degree murders in Boston, Paris, San Bernadino, Brussels, Istanbul airport, Orlando, Dallas, Nice and Baton Rouge are a sign of his handiwork.  The Father of Lies has been angry at the God, the Author of Life since before the universe and he continues to use those with poorly formed consciences as his pawns.1,2

Sadly, we see more and more falling prey to his message of hate and revenge.  Those who so wantonly despise and execute anyone who believes differently are not on a holy mission.  The perpetrators of the police deaths forget that revenge belongs to God.3

Jihadists and police murderers should recall that their virulently negative emotions are not from God, but from the one who allowed pride to throw away his spot in eternal happiness. But, perhaps I’m assuming too much on their behalf.

So, I ask them, on whose side do they want to be for now and, more importantly, for eternity?


1 – ”Satan or the devil and the other demons are fallen angels who have freely refused to serve God and his plan.  Their choice against God is definitive.  They try to associate man in their revolt against God.”  Paragraph 414 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November, 2013.

2 – “The education of the conscience is a lifelong task.  From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience.  Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults.  The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.”  Paragraph 1784, Ibid.

3 – “Beloved, do not look for revenge, but leave room for the wrath; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.”  (Romans 13:19) from The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

USA Today Section Headline About Trump is “Incompetent, Irrelevant and Immaterial”1


This objection was used by both prosecutor Hamilton Burger and attorney for the defense, Perry Mason, in the old television series and is applicable to a recent USA Today section headline, “Trump: Litigator in Chief.”  The subheading  goes on to say that “Exclusive USA Today analysis finds 3,500 lawsuits, unprecedented for a presidential nominee.”2

This blogger is not objecting to the possibility that Trump’s firms may have been involved with that number of legal actions and that it could very well be a “first” for a presidential nominee.  Giving credit where credit is due, the article does raise an interesting thought that this data could indicate what style of leader he might be because his negotiating skills appear hard-nosed.  So what?  It would actually be a relief to have a leader who was at peace defending America’s values and interests — something which has been sadly lacking in the White House since January 20, 2009.

Back to candidate Trump.  It is use of the word “unprecedented” that raises the objection.  The implied criticism could be valid if the United States has had previous Presidents who were heavily involved in the world of big business.  But to date, we have had —  zero.  Top occupations for previous Presidents are as follows3 (as most commanders-in-chief had several occupations before being elected, even just the top three jobs have a sum in excess of the 44 Presidents we have had):

#1)  Lawyer 25
#2)  Congressmen 17
#3)  Governor 16
#4)  Senator 15
#5)  Vice President 13
#6)  Soldier 12
#7)  Schoolteacher 4
#7)  Secretary of State 4
#9)  Diplomat 3
#9)  Professor 3

Trump total of lawsuits doesn’t make him a risky choice just because his number of lawsuits seems high to those of us who have not spent four decades in big business.  His total simply cannot be compared to any other President in our history.  Using the USA Today’s implication, Reagan would have been dismissed as a viable candidate because he probably had the most poor movie reviews.  Of course, he was the only President who was an actor in his list of occupations.

This is certain.  If Hillary Clinton is elected, she will bring an unprecedented list of unsavory deeds that will bring relief to supporters of the memories of Presidents Grant, Harding and Nixon by redirecting the spotlight of notoriety to her.



1 – “(often stated together, which may mean the question is not about the issues in the trial or the witness is not qualified to answer)” —  http://dictionary.law.com/default.aspx?selected=1364

2 – From the USA Today 6/2/2016 issue, Section B.


Hillary Ad: “Our children are watching. What example will we set for them?”



Yes, Donald Trump could use some polishing in his speech and a few policies.  But while it’s easier to ridicule his superficial faults, we disregard Hillary Clinton’s foundational faults at our peril.

If we disregard her abominable record of:

  • the (preventable) lives lost at Benghazi
  • the transfer of 20% of our nation’s uranium to Russia1
  • loss of trust from our allies when she was Secretary of State,
  • the thousands of at-risk national security emails which will endanger us for an unknown amount of time
  • seeking the support of those who believe freedom of religion and speech can be limited by arbitrarily assigning “hate speech”2,

Then, the question to “With whom would our children better off with as a role model?” can be limited to their parenting abilities.  That is the only case it would be difficult to decide.

But this is certain, the only children who have a chance with Hillary Clinton are those already born. Unborn babies are at severe risk with a woman who thinks a human life can be taken by “choice” and who is amused by Madeleine Albright’s often used “There’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other!”3 for women who stray from the Left’s agenda regarding women including support for Hillary Clinton.

Those millions not allowed to live can never see what example she may be setting for them.  But then, she’s not concerned about them, they can never vote against her.


1—” –Bill and Hillary Clinton had helped a Canadian financier named Frank Giustra and a small Canadian company obtain a lucrative uranium mining concession from the dictator in Kazakhstan;

–The same Canadian company, renamed Uranium One, bought uranium concessions in the United States;
–The Russian government came calling and sought to buy that Canadian company for a price that would mean big profits for the Canadian investors;
–For the Russians to buy that Canadian company, it would require the approval of the Obama administration, including Hillary’s State Department, because uranium is a strategically important commodity;
–Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval;
–Some of the donations, including those from the Chairman of Uranium One, Ian Teler, were kept secret, even though the Clintons promised to disclose all donations;
–Hillary’s State Department approved the deal;
–The Russian government now owns 20 percent of U.S. uranium assets.

2 – “Conservative outlet Townhall notes that several European countries have prosecuted their citizens for merely speaking out publicly against radical Islam and Sharia law, including a pastor in Northern Ireland who gave a sermon critical of the religion.”

“’This resolution is an overt attempt to force Sharia Law compliance worldwide – banning criticism of Islam everywhere – and Hillary Clinton supports it wholeheartedly,’ claims Bare Naked Islam. ‘Despite the countries of the OIC ignoring and perpetuating many human rights abuses and even refusing to sign the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights, these nations worked with Hillary Clinton to meet their objective of criminalizing so-called ‘Islamophobia.’” From “Hillary Will Impose ‘Blasphemy’ Laws to Protect Islam: Conservatives,” http://www.therightperspective.org/2016/05/14/president-hillary-will-impose-blasphemy-laws-to-protect-islam-conservatives/, 5/14/2016.

3 – “Albright: ‘special place in hell’ for women who don’t support Clinton,” https://www.the guardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/06/madeleine-albright-campaigns-for-hillary-clinton, 2/6/2016.


Railroading Trump Makes it Hillary-ous For Democrats and Dismal for The Future of the U.S.


Just for a moment, let’s disregard Hillary Clinton’s unethical and illegal present and past.   Is Trump the best the Republicans have to offer?  The simple answer is “no.”  Is protesting his  nomination by not voting or voting for third party candidate helpful to our country’s future?  A more emphatic, “NO.”

A Trump Administration will not likely be the “Morning in America” which Reagan brought and our nation needs again.  Trump is a little unpolished when it comes to foreign policy and has a public relations problem with some groups and his economic plans could go sour.  That is why a President has a Cabinet to advise him.

It’s crucial that potential Trump voters not be intimidated by the demonstrations of the Left. They are protesting the “splinters” in his eye while  ignoring the planks in Hillary Clinton’s.  To make it worse, some of these disturbances are being financed by notoriously anti-U.S. billionaire George Soros according to Monica Crowley of the Washington Times on July 11 in a Fox interview.

Who  is  Really  Promoting  Division?

Their claim is that Trump is promoting hate.  Yet, it’s the current Administration which has fanned the flames of racial division during its seven years with comments slanted toward those instigating trouble but against those trying to keep the peace.  Trends from Gallup, which do not include possible changes from recent events in Louisiana, Minnesota and Dallas:1

Increase in racial tensions

Police forces are staffed by imperfect people — just like the ones they are protecting.  The Democrats’ discussions that racism is our biggest sin overlooks the top killer of the President’s race: abortion.2

Terrorism  Through  Immigration

Trump’s initial plan to ban all Muslims was certainly not diplomatic and he has learned the need to modify it.  As flawed as his initial position was, it is not as dangerous as the Democratic plans to allow thousands of refugees from the Arab world without an ability to screen them adequately.  ISIS has vowed, and has been successful in infiltrating jihadists into Europe.  We’re next… Probably already happening.

Tenuous  Freedom  of  Religion

How about inalienable rights?  Trump will defend freedom of religion, speech and the right to bear arms.  Obama, Clinton and followers believe that those with religious convictions are out of touch with “progressive” times and should be forced to participate in abortions and comply with the legitimization of disordered behavior with same-sex “marriage.”

And their “religious accommodations” in Obamacare aren’t as advertised.  Signing over the authority to a third party to implement abortion and abortion-causing drugs for one’s employees is the same as signing over one’s car to be used in a crime.  Just because you didn’t drive the car doesn’t mean you weren’t participating.

True religious freedom means being able to not provide any of the items used for a same-sex “marriage.”  Forcing believers to concede is outrageous.  Marriage does not originate from the state and, therefore, cannot be defined by the state.  Marriage is also not a right because it is a vocation – a calling requiring discernment.  Conditions must be met for it to be valid.  The state’s only legitimate involvement is from its original interest regarding separation of property in the case of a divorce and care for minor children..

The tide is already turning to classify Catholic and some other Christian beliefs as “hate speech.”  The Left’s sense of “tolerance” includes silencing dissenters– even if they are espousing timeless truths that have survived Sodom, Gomorrah, Rome, the Dark Ages and modern totalitarians.

Second  Amendment  

Self-defense is a basic human right.

“Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality.  Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one’s own right to life.  Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow…”3

Giving our right to do so, then relying on a very fallible government to protect us at all times is foolish.  These governments prove their fallibility with policies such as gun-free zones (which make law abiding citizens mere sitting ducks) and sanctuary cities which put law-abiding citizens at the risk of criminals.

Gun availability was easier in the past.  Then why were mass killings far less frequent?

“Catalogs and magazines from the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s were full of gun advertisements directed to children and parents… The 1902 Sears mail-order catalog had 35 pages of firearm advertisements. People just sent in their money, and a firearm was shipped. For most of our history, a person could simply walk into a hardware store, virtually anywhere in our country, and buy a gun…”

“Why — at a time in our history when guns were readily available, when a person could just walk into a store or order a gun through the mail, when there were no FBI background checks, no waiting periods, no licensing requirements — was there not the frequency and kind of gun violence that we sometimes see today, when access to guns is more restricted?…”

Customs, traditions, moral values and rules of etiquette, not just laws and government regulations, are what make for a civilized society, not restraints on inanimate objects [emphasis added]… Moral standards of conduct, as well as strict and swift punishment for criminal behaviors, have been under siege in our country for more than a half-century… At best, the police and criminal justice system are the last desperate line of defense for a civilized society. The more uncivilized we become the more laws are needed to regulate behavior.”4

Federal  Government  and  the  Economy

Financial responsibility?  Trump at least knows enough to say and work for reducing a dangerous federal debt. His success is yet to be determined.  However, Hillary and Bernie are enamored with giveaways, but with no rational plan to pay for them.  Either the federal debt would become unsustainable under them or their redistribution of wealth would recreate an eastern European form of socialism — one of man’s greatest failures.

Speaking of fiscal disasters, there is the proposed $15 per hour federal minimum wage. This has thousands of followers despite the critical fact that national pay standards are reasonable only if the cost of living is similar across all fifty states (not 57, Mr. President).

But it isn’t.  Mandating $15 in Mississippi, which has the lowest cost of living, would be like requiring $24.25 in New York and California.  Florida has the median cost of living. Only $11.10 is required there to accomplish what $15 does in those other two states.5

Job losses through trade deals?  It’s ironic that the parties have turned 180 degrees.  NAFTA was a Republican darling when it became effective in 1994.  Now that it has been shown to aggravate trade imbalances and loss of jobs, the Republicans want to revisit it.  For some unknown reason, Democrats want to keep it, possibly because they’re afraid of upsetting China — despite the fact that it has shown not to need a reason to trade unfairly.

Future  Composition  of  the  Supreme  Court

Finally, we have a number of Supreme Court positions which will be vacated soon in addition to Justice Scalia’s death.  Add another Obama/Clinton type term and the Court will be the playground of those who believe the Constitution is a malleable list of suggestions, like their view of the Ten Commandments and Natural Law.

The  Challenge  is  Clear

Trump is not the prototypical conservative even for those of us independents who don’t care about the party establishment’s thoughts.  There’s a time to be unwavering about some political ideals.  This is not one of them because there won’t be an opportunity to undo the damage with the 2020 elections, especially if the Democrats reclaim the Senate as well as keep the White House.

Trump may or may not perfectly promote all of the values which our Founding Fathers fought and died for 240 years ago.  But whatever is done to trip him up will do nothing except guarantee a third term of Obama’s path to our downfall.

Our federal deficit, the condition of the Supreme Court and the most crucial of constitutional rights cannot withstand a continuation of the last 7-1/2 years.  The choice is ours.  The consequences will impact the next generation or two in a way unseen previously.

Human history is littered with the fossils of societies who believed they were invincible to the consequences of unwise behavior.  Likewise, we are not immune to a big fall.


1 – “Concern Over Race Relations Has More Than Doubled In The Past 2 Years,” by Janie Velencia, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/race-relations-worry-rise_us_570bd5a7e4b0836057a1c547, 4/11/2016.


2 – “In announcing the new web page, Right to Life of Michigan said, ‘More than crime. More than accidents. More than cancer, heart disease and AIDS. Abortion has taken more black American lives than any other cause of death since 1973.’”

“’Did you know that? Abortion is the leading cause of death in the United States, but for black Americans abortion causes more deaths every year than every other cause of death combined. Now is the time for this fact to be addressed in the media and in the classroom,’ it added.”  From “Abortion Has Killed More Black Americans Than Crime, Accident, Cancer or AIDS,” by Sarah Zagorski, http://www.lifenews.com/2015/06/25/abortion-has-killed-more-black-americans-than-crime-accidents-cancer-or-aids/, 6/25/2015.

3 – From Paragraph 2264 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

4 – “Are Guns the Problem?” by Walter E. Williams, http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/walter-e-williams/are-guns-problem, 10/1/2013.


“Martyr” is Being Misused


The Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary gives its first definition of the word “martyr” as the one pertaining to faith:  “a person who is killed or who suffers greatly for a religion, cause, etc.”

Another description:  “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.”1

It’s pretty straight forward.  A martyr is a person who is killed by someone else for refusing to say or do anything contrary to his beliefs.

Yet we see other views.  Some declare that a person is a martyr when he commits suicide in the process of killing others in the name of his religion.  Impossible.  Suicide is an objectively evil deed.  True, the state of that person’s soul is known only by God.2  However, no such act can be glorified by assigning the respected title of martyr to the perpetrator because “suicide is seriously contrary to justice, hope and charity.  It is forbidden by the fifth commandment.”3  In addition:

“Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.  It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.  We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.  We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.  It is not ours to dispose of. [emphasis added]  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.”4

So, the next time someone claims martyrdom for a suicide bomber or for anyone who is killed while murdering others in the name of a religion or other cause (including the mass murderer in Dallas last week5), don’t accept that distorted use of the word.


1 – “What is the Church’s Teaching on Martyrdom?” http://catholicstraightanswers.com/what-is-the-churchs-teaching-on-martyrdom/

2 – Summary of Paragraph 2283 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing, November, 2013.

3 – Paragraph 2325, Ibid.

4 – Paragraphs 2280-2281, Ibid.

5 – “The first black woman crowned Miss Alabama is standing by a controversial video in which she called the Dallas gunman a ‘martyr — but admits it was a poor choice of words.”  From “Former Miss Alabama Admits She Shouldn’t Have Called Dallas Gunman ‘a Martyr’… But Won’t Pull Video,” http://www.insideedition.com/headlines/17473-former-miss-alabama-admits-she-shouldnt-have-called-dallas-gunman-a-martyr-but-wont-pull, 7/12/2016.

Hillary’s Emails ARE Potentially More Dangerous than Gun Violence


Most Americans of mature thought are tired of the Left’s treatment of Hillary’s at-risk classified emails  as if it were merely a harmless use of communication.  Today, Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) made the dismissive statement in a Congressional hearing that it appears her emails are taking precedence over gun violence.  His comment emphasizes his party’s desire to deflect attention from the huge danger her irresponsible actions, in violation of State Department regulations, have put us at risk.  What she did endangers ALL Americans for the foreseeable future and in many ways we cannot easily prevent.

Gun violence is far more preventable.  However, unlike Clinton’s negligence (which requires consequences, Mr. Comey), it can be better curbed by returning to the values which made the U.S. special, and not by even more laws which handcuff honest citizens.  As evidenced in a Walter Williams column:

“Youth involvement with guns has a long history. The 1911 second edition of the Boy Scout Handbook made qualification in NRA’s junior marksmanship program a prerequisite for obtaining a BSA merit badge in marksmanship. In 1918, the Winchester Repeating Arms Co. established its own Winchester Junior Rifle Corps. The program grew to 135,000 members by 1925. In New York City, high school gun clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training and Stuyvesant high schools. I would like to ask America’s anti-gun fanatics what accounts for today’s mayhem: Have guns become more evil or have people become more evil?1

… Wonder why Rep. Conyers is overlooking abortion violence which takes hundreds of thousands of innocent lives each year across our nation?


1—“Isn’t it Strange?,” by Walter E. Williams, https://www.creators.com/read/walter-williams/02/16/isnt-it-strange, 2/16/2016.



Not BusyNess, But Faith-filled Loving and Hope


When we ask each other how our lives are, what are the most common responses?  Many rely on the well-used “everything has been hectic.”  Recently, “it’s been crazy” has gained popularity.  Could the Freudian connection to “insanity” be any more telling?

Sometimes events can be truly out of control and beyond much influence from us.  But for this condition to be so widespread, it indicates a shift in our priorities instead of just our lots in life.  Jesus doesn’t ask us to be hectic or crazy, but to love others as he loves us.1,2

If we remember that God sometimes speaks in a whisper,3 perhaps we will make the effort to separate ourselves from the noise of the world which distracts us from Him.  C.S. Lewis wrote about a senior devil who was mentoring his nephew in the book, “The Screwtape Letters”who said:

“We will make the whole universe a noise…We have already made great strides in this direction as regards the Earth. The melodies and silences of Heaven will be shouted down in the end.”4

That noise can be literal noise such as constantly being plugged into music, endless activities and social media.  Or it can come from allowing the multitude of anxiety-causing dramatics of “news” programs to frighten us.

Fear is not from God, but from the Father of Lies. We should remind ourselves and encourage each other to focus on strengthening our faith in Him, the one who is truly in control of everything.  In that way, we are less likely to hide behind unnecessarily busy schedules which prevent us from having life-giving peace in our lives.



 1 – “I give you a new commandment: love one another.  As I have loved you, so you also should love one another.  This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”  (John 13: 34-35)  ) from “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

2 – “Without love, everything is painful, everything is tiring, everything is burdensome.”  From “I believe in Love: A personal Retreat Based on the Teaching of St. Therese of Lisieux,” by Jean C. J. d’Elbee, M.Teichert, M.Stebbins, http://amzn.to/29PvmaR

3 – “After the earthquake there was fire, — but the Lord was not in the fire.  After the fire there was a tiny whispering sound.  When he heard this, Elijah hid his face in his cloak and went and stood at the entrance of the cave.  A voice said to him, ‘Elijah, why are you here?’  (1 Kings 19: 12-13)  from “The New Catholic Answer Bible,” Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

4 – From “Baird: Why We Need Silence (Not Cell phones),” by Julia Baird, http://www.newsweek.com/baird-why-we-need-silence-not-cell-phones-81149, 10/21/2009.

Clinton Math: Extreme Carelessness Does Not Equal Gross Negligence


Hillary Clinton’s mismanagement of highly sensitive information as Secretary of State has resulted in ten other people being prosecuted for similar actions in the past — but not her — according to former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani in a Fox interview last week.

Last year, General David Petraeus was found guilty of “the unauthorized removal and retention of classified material, in the form of notebooks he shared with his lover and was given a sentence of two years probation and a $100,000 fine.1  Even though the attorney for Eric Snowden called Petraeus’ punishment “a slap on the wrist,”1 she must be really astonished at FBI Director James Comey who described a longer list of more dangerous errors on Hillary’s part.  It included his admission on July 7 that her server was less secure than gmail.  Yet, he did not move to prosecute, saying she was only guilty of “extreme carelessness.” According to Giuliani, that equates to gross negligence which, by law, requires consequences.

Going back 42 years, President Nixon was compelled (and rightfully so) to resign after his Watergate cover-up.  As a protector of the Constitution, he attempted to be above the law when he interfered with the investigation of a break-in which he likely did not initiate.2

His mistake was serious.  Not only was it illegal, but it irreparably damaged the nation’s confidence in his ability to lead.

Ms. Clinton, on the other hand, actually engineered the violation of statutes regarding classified State Department information and lied under oath.3  When her husband talked for thirty minutes with Attorney General Loretta Young in her personal plane a few days prior to Comey’s decision, it added to appearances of favoritism.4  Even without this Ill-advised meeting, it should seriously undermine her ability to lead PLUS it has put our nation at risk internationally to the point that she is “blackmailable” by foreign governments5  — a much more far-reaching impact than Nixon’s error.

How she can still be considered a legitimate candidate for our nation’s highest office after she put herself above our nation’s security defies logic.

We have come across something more flawed than the new math of the 1960’s and the current Common Core.  It’s called Clinton math where one’s position in office magically changes the final outcome regardless of the facts.

The distortion of logic gives us this:

Extreme Carelessness + Lying Under Oath + Bill Clinton + Loretta Young = free, I mean, three.



1 –“At issue are ‘black books’ — eight notebooks in which Petraeus kept highly classified information that the government says included ‘the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings, and defendant David Howell Petraeus’s discussions with the President of the United States of America.’”

“That description comes from court documents that were filed along with the plea deal. The documents also included an email in which Petraeus promises to give the black books to Paula Broadwell, his biographer with whom he was having an affair.”

“The government also said that Petraeus gave false statements to FBI agents about giving Broadwell the notebooks, and that he also falsely swore when he left the CIA in 2012 that he did not have any classified material in his possession or control.”

“The black books were found in 2013, after the FBI conducted a search of Petraeus’ house. They had been sitting in an unlocked desk drawer, according to court documents.” From “Petraeus Sentenced To 2 Years’ Probation, Fine For Sharing Classified Info,” by Bill Chappell, http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/04/23/401672264/gen-david-petraeus-will-be-sentenced-thursday-over-secret-notebooks, 4/23/2015.

2 – “Early in the morning of June 17, 1972, several burglars were arrested inside the office of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), located in the Watergate building in Washington, D.C. This was no ordinary robbery: The prowlers were connected to President Richard Nixon’s reelection campaign, and they had been caught while attempting to wiretap phones and steal secret documents. While historians are not sure whether Nixon knew about the Watergate espionage operation before it happened, he took steps to cover it up afterwards, raising “hush money” for the burglars, trying to stop the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) from investigating the crime, destroying evidence and firing uncooperative staff members. In August 1974, after his role in the Watergate conspiracy had finally come to light, the president resigned.” From “Watergate Scandal,” http://www.history.com/topics/watergate

3 – “Oops, When Clearing Clinton, FBI Accidentally Proved She Committed Perjury,” by Claire Bernish, http://theantimedia.org/hillary-clinton-perjury/, 7/6/2016.

4 – “Bipartisan Disapproval Follows Bill Clinton’s Meeting With Loretta Lynch,” by Carrie Johnson, http://www.npr.org/2016/06/30/484192533/bipartisan-disapproval-follows-bill-clintons-meeting-with-loretta-lynch, 6/30/2016.

5“(Breitbart News National Security editor Dr. Sebastian) GORKA: Right, which means that she is blackmailable. We know more than 100 emails contained classified information, some of, them TS/SCI, the highest level…


GORKA: SAP, special access program — which means that she could be blackmailed by anybody, Russia, China, North Korea, Iran. She was sending classified emails from outside U.S. territory on multiple servers using multiple devices. That means she could be — the second she gets into office, they give her the football with the nuclear codes. North Korea, Iran starts blackmailing her. She should recuse herself from any public office, Sean, instantly!

HANNITY: Colonel Peters, do you agree with that assessment?

COL. RALPH PETERS, U.S. ARMY (RET.), FOX MILITARY ANALYST: Well, yes, I certainly do. And when this all broke — you know, my — I just remembered my interactions with the old KGB in Moscow and here in Washington at meetings. And you know, the Russians must have been stunned. They probably thought it was all an elaborate CIA hoax at first, that no American secretary of state would do this, would be this stupid.” From “Gorka: Hillary Proven Vulnerable to Blackmail by Foreign Governments,” http://www.teaparty.org/gorka-hillary-proven-vulnerable-blackmail-foreign-governments-174700/, 7/6/2016.

Hillary’s Or The Donald’s Economy: Heads We Lose, Tails We Could Lose


Hillary’s ideas for her economy have varying levels of appeal.  They include free college, major expenditures on infrastructure, improved health and elder care, “help parents balance work and family” and an absurd $15 national minimum wage (leading to greater loss of jobs in many states with much lower costs of living).  Unfortunately, they would require us accept a race to see which means of funding destroys us first:

  1. Taxing all of us to death which kills the economy because government is never as financially efficient as the marketplace.
  2. Redistributing wealth by taxing the wealthy much more which drags us into widespread socialist poverty a la the old Eastern Bloc (which the liberal Baby Boomers conveniently forget and Millenials weren’t taught).
  3. Destroying us with unsustainable debt, either by putting us at the mercy of foreign creditors if their holdings on us are sufficient or devaluing our currency to nothingness and start a domino defaulting express of government securities.

We are certain lose catastrophically either way.


The Donald starts with budget cuts. Good luck, because:

“Mandatory spending is currently estimated to be $2.606 trillion for FY 2017. That’s nearly two-thirds of all federal spending and is a new record. It’s also three times more than the military budget…Federal law dictates that all mandatory programs must be funded. For this reasons, they are outside of the annual budget process that governs discretionary spending. (Source: Congressional Budget Office, Mandatory Spending Control Mechanisms)…”

“It literally takes an act of Congress to change a mandated program. For example, Congress amended the Social Security Act to add Medicare. However, Congress has a difficult time reducing the benefits entitled under any mandated program. Most consider it political suicide because such cuts guarantee voter opposition by the group receiving fewer benefits. That’s one reason mandatory spending continues to grow.”1

His other plans hinge on significantly restoring the US economy in order to pay for rebuilding the military, saving Social Security, effects of new trade deals, securing our border and winning the war on terrorism.  Regardless of how healthy our own economy is, it will always be somewhat dependent on the world economy as a whole.  It’s difficult for any nation to have a robust economy if most of the world is destitute.

We could very well lose with Trump, but it’s a sure thing with Clinton.

The lesson is this:

If basic economics were taught in high school and college, candidates wouldn’t even try to present these simplistic and risky ideas.


1 – “Mandatory Spending:  Definition, Programs, Impact,” by Kimberly Amadeo, http://useconomy.about.com/od/glossary/g/mandatory_spend.htm, 7/5/2016.


The Zika Threat, Planned Parenthood, Hitler and Democrats’ Tolerance


Dr. Denise Jamieson, chief of the Center for Disease Control’s Women’s Health and Fertility Branch, acknowledged that the Zika virus will lead to difficult decisions for some expectant parents.   What sort of decisions are these?  Could it possibly involve “terminating a pregnancy”?

A little background first.  The article in question explained what geographic areas are at the greatest risk and the birth defects resulting from this virus. It then quoted Dr. Jamieson who said, “Abortion is a legal medical procedure in the U.S., and in the context of Zika, couples need to make complex, highly personal decisions about their pregnancies.”1  So, the expedient way to deal with this disease is to kill the affected human?  Despite its prevalence in today’s society, it is still unsettling to realize that some, perhaps many, parents do not want children with birth defects.

Sanger  and  Birth  Control

Unfortunately, eradicating unwanted human qualities was Margaret Sanger’s philosophy.  She founded the American Birth Control League in 1921 which eventually became Planned Parenthood. Her goal was to improve the world with birth control because it “is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.”   She also proposed that governments should “apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is already tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring.”

 Planned  Parenthood  Morphs  to  Killing,  Hitler 2.0

Surprisingly, as late as 1963, Planned Parenthood was opposed to abortion: “An abortion kills the life of the baby after it has begun.”  But in December, 1971, George Langmyhr wrote: “We support the view that when an unwanted pregnancy has occurred, abortion services should be available, with the decision essentially being made by the patient and her doctor … . In summary, Planned Parenthood hopes that abortion will become even more available and supports the efforts of others in seeking reform and repeal of outdated laws.”5  It is likely that many parents, fearing possible birth defects from the Zika virus in their babies, will turn to PP to provide a Hitlerian “final solution” for the burden they wish to discard.6

This is the same organization which several ranking Democrats, including President Obama and Hillary Clinton, have expressed a strong loyalty for continuing its annual federal funding of just over $500 million.

But don’t they belong to a political party which professes inclusiveness and tolerance for all humans?

Democrats’  “Tolerance”  Must  be  Granted

Obviously, there are qualifications before someone is eligible to receive “tolerance” from the Obama/ Clinton Party of Death.  The most critical one is that a human not have a defect which would make him/her disposable at the hands of organizations like Planned Parenthood.  The irony is that imperfect humans have seized the power of life and death over the most defenseless and most innocent of humans — the unborn.

Thus, we have the legal killing of those deemed undesirable.  How is it that the United States of 2016 is like Germany of the 1930’s?


1 – “What You Need to Know About ZIKA + How to Beat the Virus – and the Mosquitoes that Carry It,” by Alexandra Sifferlin, Time magazine, May 16, 2016 issue.

2 – “Takedown,” by Paul Kengor, PhD, WND Books, Washington D.C., 2015, page 55.

3 – “Margaret Sanger Quotes, History, and Biography,” http://liveaction.org/research/margaret-sanger-quotes-history-and-biography

4 – “A Plan for Peace,” a summary of address before the New History Society, 1/17/1932 New York City as published in Birth Control Review, April 1932.

5 – “40 Years: Planned Parenthood Becomes Abortion Empire,” by Randall K. O’Bannon, PhD, National Right to Life News, Winter 2013, http://www.nrlc.org/archive/news/2013/201301/AbortionEmpirePage8.html#.V3_PXvkrKN0

6 – “The Nazis frequently used euphemistic language to disguise the true nature of their crimes. They used the term “Final Solution” to refer to their plan to annihilate the Jewish people.” From “‘Final Solution’: Overview,” https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005151

Hillary Clinton Says She is NOT Part of the Political Establishment?


During a primary debate, Hillary Clinton ridiculed the charge that she was part of the political Establishment because no woman has ever been a Presidential candidate for a major political party.  Consequently, are we to believe veteran women lawmakers such as Pelosi, Boxer, Mikulski and Feinstein are not part of the ruling class in Washington because no woman has run for President in a general election?

So, if Hillary Clinton wins the Democratic nomination, these women will suddenly be “reclassified” to Establishment status?

Back to Ms. Clinton.  She was the First Lady of Arkansas for nearly twelve years and First Lady of the U.S. from 1993-2001 where she was the chair of the Task Force on National Health Care Reform. Then, she was senator from New York from 2001-09.

Twenty-eight years involved with state and federal government – and she’s not to be associated with the problem Establishment?

Her supporters probably also believe that if they want to keep their doctor and health plan, they can.  Wait, that’s a falsehood from a different Democrat.


Buyers Must Share Blame Regarding “Unfair” Car Insurance Policies and Other Contracts


The “surprise problems” with some car insurance agreements and other contracts people sign often result from the same human weakness: CARELESSNESS.

What?  Example:  One well-known car insurance firm (using the Statue of Liberty) has been running ads attempting to depict their competitors as unfair and insensitive because of their policies regarding car replacement.  In reality, the ads inadvertently accuse the average policy holder of simple laziness with:

“Did you read all of the pages? Only lawyers do that.” Or:  “Does your insurance cover a tow truck?  Who knows?”

Not reading what you sign will get you get what you deserve!

This is not to suggest that insurance policies shouldn’t cover the entire cost of car replacement or provide for a tow.  These are reasonable things to expect in insurance.  But why would someone pay premiums periodically without knowing what’s covered?

It’s this same lack of attention to details which explains why many accept “free” phone apps without looking to see what invasive access to their phone is being given away.  Some apps can read address lists and even turn the camera or microphone on without owner approval.

Too many wander along through life with a sense of entitlement that Big Brother will always protect them (when, in fact, he’s a massive problem himself). Instead, we must take the time to read all contracts of consequence.

This includes not only car insurance policies and phone app agreements, but also house purchase contracts, condo/association rules and all ballot issues (bond issues and local/ state constitutional amendments).  In that way, we can avoid these times of dismay:  A condo owner discovers after damage occurs that the area in question is not “common property” but his responsibility or a house property tax assessment for a specific situation never seems to go away — because it’s an “on-going” tax without the usual renewal periods in place!

Yes, there is unfairness in the world, but there’s much we can do to prevent trouble in our lives.  We must shed the “victim” mentality and READ before we sign.




Time Magazine Trades Decency for Being Common


“Ain’t no man can avoid being born average, but there ain’t no man got to be common,”  —  Satchel Paige1

Time magazine has forgotten the motto “All the News That’s Fit to Print” made popular by Adolph S. Ochs, owner of The New York Times, in 1897.2 While his purpose was to make clear that his newspaper would be impartial in its coverage, the philosophy of that era also implied civility and decency in its presentation.  Unfortunately, Time has chosen the crass route in an attempt to be relevant or cool.

In its “Love it/ Leave it” section of the May 23, 2016 edition, it wrote “Adele stopped her concert in Denmark to praise Beyonce’s Lemonade [emphasis retained]: ‘How is it even possible that she only ever gets better?  How is that possible?  She is Jesus f-cking Christ.’”

Needing another thrill after that sophomoric rush wore off, it decided to quote Priyanka Chopra two weeks later in its June 6 issue:  “F-ck that – I wanna be Bond” in response that she might be the next Bond girl.

Perhaps Time magazine no longer needs readers looking for real news.  The publication would rather cater to the immature element of our society — which is sadly understandable seeing how prevalent being common has become.  Glad Satchel Paige didn’t live to witness this decline.





Terrorists Aren’t Really “Responsible” for Their Crimes


In the 1960’s, when jet hijackings and other acts of terror became more common, it took a while for newscasters to learn how to report these events.  It’s hard to believe that, initially, reports of such evil acts were described that a certain terror group was “claiming credit” for their crimes.  This was eventually changed to “claiming responsibility” which we hear to this day.

But is this accurate? Those claiming to be truly responsible must have several qualities as listed in http://www.dictionary.com/browse/responsible.  One is to be answerable or accountable to someone.  Some terrorists claim to be answerable to a god, they believe, who wants torture and destruction for those who won’t discard their beliefs and submit to Islam (the meaning of Islam is “submission”).1  Interesting view of the Deity.

Being “responsible” also means “having the power to control and manage” along with being the cause of something.  Terrorists would qualify here.

But the similarities between terrorists and being responsible spiral downward with “having a capacity for moral decisions and therefore accountable” plus “able to discharge obligations or pay debts.”  Terrorists may believe they are able to distinguish between right and wrong.  If so, then they had better hope their displays of ignorance regarding true virtue were caused by their upbringing and forces beyond their control.  Otherwise, their eternity is in severe jeopardy.

As far as paying debts are concerned, there is no doubt that they feel no obligation to atone for their crimes.  In fact, they believe acting heinously is somehow glorious.

The use of the word “responsibility” gives Islamic jihadists an undeserved air of decency.

Jihadists are not preoccupied in the civil spreading of spiritual good news.  For fourteen centuries, they have put a lot of energy in destroying all who disagree with them and establishing a worldwide caliphate.

Recommendation:  to avoid giving the slightest respect to terrorists, we should simply report that a specific group claims “involvement” with the atrocities.  Unfortunately, that word leaves out the horrible immorality of their acts and is too dignified for them.  There ought to be a more appropriate word.


1 – “The root word for Islam is “al-Silm,” which means “submission” or “surrender.” There is no disagreement about this among Islamic scholars. al-Silm (submission) does not mean the same thing as al-Salaam (peace), otherwise they would be the same word.”  https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110819104302AA2UHLT


Another Case of Well-Meaning People Not Understanding Math and Fairness


For years we have heard accusations of unfairness when the wealthy receiving greater dollar amounts in tax breaks when an across-the-board easing of taxes occurs.  It’s somehow discriminatory when people paying six figures in taxes receive several thousand dollars in tax breaks just because it’s more than the rebates received by those who pay only a few hundred dollars in the first place.

A recent business article shows that these irrational conclusions are alive and well.  The author was trying to make the point that upward mobility out of poorer neighborhoods is harder in part due to an unfair tax structure.  Changes are deemed necessary because of the following:

 “Some of this will require money, so funding priorities must also change.  As of 2014, U.S. households with an income of $200,000 or more received an annual subsidy (largely through the tax deduction on mortgage interest) of more than $6,000.  Households with an income below $20,000 received less than $1,500.  And only a quarter of the households that qualify for housing vouchers actually receive them.”1

It’s agreed that it’s an unfortunate waste of available opportunities if 3/4 of eligible households do not receive what the law can provide them.

But to claim an inequality regarding the data is misleading.  The wealthy receive 3% or less of their income when filing for the mortgage deduction.  Lower income families receive 7%.  Should the tax structure be skewed further in the favor of lower incomes so that they would receive the same $6,000?  This would be at least 30% of their income and undoubtedly more than the total they paid in the first place.

Let’s focus on making sure vouchers and other forms of assistance actually help people escape undesirable living conditions.  Just don’t use math disingenuously to paint a picture of unfairness where it doesn’t exist.


1 – “Helping Americans Move Out of Poverty, Bloomberg Businessweek ,May 23-29, 2016 issue.


Satan Likes to Control People (Strange, So Does Big Government!)


Evil’s dislike for Good is not restricted to the realm of the supernatural. The Earth has been a battleground since our most distant ancestors with consciences came into being.  For people of faith, these wars will continue until the Second Coming.  For skeptics, it could last until the sun becomes a red giant and overtakes the first three planets, including ours.  Either way, it will be a long struggle.

Many Good vs. Evil confrontations are obvious.  Organized crime, neighborhood gangs and Islamic jihadists are clear examples of those who attack innocent people.  However, the colliding political philosophies of small vs. big government are part of an overlooked venue.  Striving for big government unwittingly puts many on the side of the control freak who was bounced from Heaven; thus, creating Hell.

Respect  for  Human  Life  Creates  Two  Sides  of  the  Battle

A key principle around which sides are taken is respect for the dignity of human life.   Government intervention should be limited to doing for individuals what they have a right to do for themselves, but cannot.1  Assistance ought to be given where it is truly necessary.  Taxpayer funds should be available to provide the basics of life for those who are unable to provide for themselves.

But it must not also promote, unintentionally or otherwise, the breakup of the family as many of the War on Poverty programs have done over the last half-century.2

It also means that tax money should not arbitrarily fund some private startup industries just because they happen to be a favorite of someone in power (e.g. Solyndra).3   In addition, there are government intrusions which force communities to accept government subsidized housing.4

European  Union  Ruling  Class  is  Power  Happy

Overbearing control of government is seen in many ways.  Mandating that member nations take unreasonable security risks by the arbitrary and negligent opening of national borders was the main reason the United Kingdom decided to leave the European Union in order to restore its rightful sovereignty.  The EU ruling elites also find ways to control the trivial as well as the big picture.  They determined which tea pots and toasters they considered environmentally acceptable and, therefore, permitted to be used in the home.

Trivializing  Human  Life  in  the  U.S.

The more massive the exercise of control, the more it aligns with Evil. (The word “evil” may have fallen out of favor with the self-proclaimed enlightened.  Nevertheless, that doesn’t make it cease to exist.)

In our country, the creeping vine of mega-government has long since crossed the line from Good to its hellish opposite.  Legalizing the killing of unborn babies under the ironic claim of “women’s health” has been more devastating to both mother and baby than the pro-death crowd is willing to admit.5

Trivializing human life has surreptitiously led to relegating its status to mere animal life in the lab. In vitro fertilization/ genetic modification and surrogate motherhood are just two examples of breeding human life to serve our wishes as we do thoroughbred horses or cattle.  Discarding unwanted human embryos used in stem cell experiments causes less anxiety for researchers than getting rid of weeds in their carefully manicured gardens.

Those of faith understand that we are to have humane dominion over animal life, but not dominion over human life. That belongs exclusively to the Author of Life Himself.

State  Elevating  Itself  Over  the  Church

The unwarranted intrusion of Big Government extends to trying to force religious orders and organizations to comply with the contraceptive/ abortifacient mandate of the Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”).  For these in power, it’s not sufficient that our tax dollars are used for purposes which we have an inalienable right to object to.  Rather, the Obama Administration will not be satisfied unless we materially participate in the evil by giving our consent to a third party to carry out his control of human reproduction — which is not his to control in the first place. It’s the 21st century version of the Romans who threatened early Christians with severe consequences if they didn’t offer “just a little incense” to Roman idols in order to satisfy their political leaders.6

Broad  Range  of  Government  Dominance  Over  Citizens

Modern Big Government has reached new lows with a brazen insult to Natural Law. Citizens who understand the timeless irrevocable truth that a valid marriage can only exist between one man and one woman are being required to provide ceremonial items for same-sex “marriages.” While religious liberty must never be used to justify denying anyone the basics of life such as food, housing, medical care, employment, etc., it must not be dismissed in favor of the sham, known in politically correct circles as “tolerance” or “inclusiveness.”

These are only a few of the headlining points of concern. Requisite to the ultimate control (aka “possession”) of people involves intervention in the smaller details of daily life as well.  Mundane items such as kitchen utensils in the EU have already been mentioned.   It has also spread from the micro-managing of limiting the size of soft drinks in New York City to the insulting requiring of law-abiding citizens of Kentucky to have their urine tested annually – and at their expense – to ensure they are consuming specific prescriptions instead of selling them illegally.7

Where  Will  This  Lead?

The Prince of Darkness would be pleased with these displays of coercion.  The “religion” of secular humanism has set itself against the religion of eternal origins, mimicking the unsurpassed failure of the confrontation the Father of Lies had with the Creator before the universe existed.

God grants free will and proponents of small government defend it.  On the other hand, it drives Satan – and perpetrators of oppressing Big Government, crazy.  Being a control freak is an indication of a severe disorder.  Why would the Left want to have goals which parallel those of the infamous fallen angel?  Aiming for world domination now risks eternal disaster later.


1 – “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.”  Paragraph 1894 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, Twenty-fifth printing; November, 2013.

2 – “7 Ways the War on Poverty Destroyed Black Fatherhood,” by Nick Chiles, http://atlantablackstar.com/2014/12/24/ways-war-poverty-destroyed-black-fatherhood/, 12/24/2014.

3 – “Barack Obama Solyndra Scandal: 8 Facts About Green Energy Company Controversy,” by Alana Marie Burke, http://www.newsmax.com/FastFeatures/Barack-Obama-Solyndra-Scandal-Green-Energy/2015/01/29/id/621537/, 1/29/2015.

4 – “Under the new plan, residents from low-income neighborhoods would be placed all around Baltimore County, essentially integrating the poor among wealthier families.”
“Studies indicate doing cluster in one area is not successful,” said Tony Fugett, president of the Baltimore County NAACP. “The hope is that the units would be dispersed throughout the county.”

From “Low-income housing ordered to be integrated in Baltimore neighborhoods,” by Leland Vittert, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/05/low-income-housing-ordered-to-be-integrated-in-baltimore-neighborhoods.html, 4/5/2016.

5 – “How Abortion Hurts Women:  The Hard Proof,” by Erika Bachiochi, http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/abortion/how-abortion-hurts-women-the-hard-proof.html

6 – From a homily given by Fr. Joshua Lange when he was an assistant pastor at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Cold Spring, KY several years ago.  He was reassigned to a parish of his own in the summer of June 2012, http://www.stjosephcoldspring.com/Portals/stjoeschool/Documents/News/June172012FC.pdf

7 – “Urine tests required by new drug law can cost patients hundreds of dollars,” http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article44379045.html, 9/27/2012.


Root Problem for Obama, Hillary Clinton and Most Liberals is Vanity


Vanity:  “…is where we put the esteem of others first. Like the other root sins, vanity springs from insecurity. We place our security in what others think of us… “What will they think of me?” is a perennial concern of the vain person.”1

Politically correct speech is where the evidence is found:

  • The most recent example of the Left’s vanity is when they level the charge of xenophobia (fear and hatred of strangers or foreigners or of anything that is strange or foreign2) as a result of the Brexit vote.  Part of the support for leaving the EU came from a revolt against the ruling class in Brussels which opened the EU borders without reasonable care for security against terrorists.  The liberal philosophy ignores a central fact that nations have a right to protect their borders as long as it’s done humanely.3

Of course, we also hear this accusation of xenophobia when a Republican speaks of not allowing large numbers of Arabs or Mexicans/Central Americans into our country because the FBI has warned that there is no safe way to verify our safety.

  • A related charge of Democrats is Islamophobia.   Those using this term are afraid that any limiting of Muslim immigration will incite jihadists to more acts of terrorism, so they want to stay on their good side as much as possible; hence another example vanity. (This also displays an ignorance of key tenets of the Qur’an which, for 1400+ years, has instructed Muslims to convert those of other faiths, charge the “jizya” tax as a sign of submission to Islam or kill them if they do not comply.4)They are also disregarding the jihadists’ admission that they will use the large scale immigration of Arabs to assist the infiltration of fellow terrorists.  Just yesterday in a FoxNews interview, UK Independent Party leader, Nigel Farage, noted that a terrorist plot was foiled in Dusseldorf recently.  Of special significance was that all four of the guilty had entered as immigrants.

A most egregious example of Democratic submitting to vanity in the face of Islam was in the newly released House of Representatives report on the Benghazi killings.  It revealed that much of the delay which doomed our men came from a debate among Administration leaders regarding whether our military should wear their military uniforms when going to help our endangered citizens.  The overriding worry was not the safety of our people, but would the presence of these uniforms upset the Libyans into thinking we were invading them.

In addition, the President and Hillary Clinton lied repeatedly that the attack was inspired by a viral video when the report showed they already knew in advance that something was imminent based on intercepted terrorist communications.

Why is this another example of vanity?  The date of the attack was just 56 days before the hotly contested Obama/Romney election was to take place and an admission of their obvious failings would have been detrimental at the polls.

  • Finally, there’s the well-known claim that “homophobia” (which in its true definition rarely exists5) is what  makes citizens protective of their religious beliefs when it involves the LGBT community.  This charge is levied when an individual does not wish to be complicit with actions which condone disordered behavior against genuinely held religious beliefs (now arbitrarily legitimized by the Supreme Court).  This vanity of liberals does not arise from fear of retributions like the issues with Islam, but merely a desire to be liked by as many as possible (even if it goes against Natural Law) with the side benefit of ensuring more votes at the polls.

Former presidential candidates Dr. Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina warned our nation of the dangers of political correctness during the primary process.  “PC” emanates from vanity and we are less as a nation because we continue to ignore them.



1 – “How Can I Overcome the Root Sin of Vanity?, http://www.spiritualdirection.com/2011/01/06/how-can-i-overcome-the-root-sin-of-vanity, 1/6/2011.

2 – “http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/xenophobia

3 – ”A country has the right to regulate its borders and to control immigration.

The overriding principle of all Catholic social teaching is that individuals must make economic, political, and social decisions not out of shortsighted self-interest, but with regard for the common good. That means that a moral person cannot consider only what is good for his or her own self and family, but must act with the good of all people as his or her guiding principle.

While individuals have the right to move in search of a safe and humane life, no country is bound to accept all those who wish to resettle there (emphasis added)…” , http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/human-life-and-dignity/immigration/catholic-teaching-on-immigration-and-the-movement-of-peoples.cfm

4 – “Muhammad clearly established that people of other religions have to pay a poll tax to Muslims called the jizya, as a reminder of their inferior status. This abrogates an earlier verse stating that there is ‘no compulsion in religion’ and it destroys any pretense that Islam is merely a religion and not a political system.”

Quran (9:29) – “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”

Muslim (19:4294) – There are many places in the hadith where Muhammad tells his followers to demand the jizya of non-believers. Here he lays down the rule that it is to be extorted by force:“If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them”  http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/jizya.aspx

5 – “Homophobia” is Contrived, so where is “Adulterophobia?” , https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/homophobia-is-contrived-so-where-is-adulterophobia/, 5/19/2015.

The “Brexit” Choice: Short Term Pain for Long Term Stability?



British voters will go to the polls on Thursday for an issue possibly more important than choosing a prime minister as it will impact future prime ministers.

The issue:   to stay in the European Union or leave it.

The fear mongers against leaving will be convincing only if concerns for the immediate rule the day.  Yes, if Britain leaves, it must renegotiate trade deals with the countries it is separating from.  These new agreements could very well be less advantageous.  Also true, there may be some pullout of investment from current fellow EU comrades.

HOWEVER, the foolishness of the EU’s common currency (the “euro” which the UK would eventually need to adopt), is a far greater negative.  The euro joins many countries of varying levels of fiscal responsibility.  Several countries using the euro seem to believe that they can have their cake and eat it too.  As of last summer, six EU countries had debts greater than their GDP!  While the UK’s was ninth highest in the EU, hanging around with these rising debt nations only consoles them if they accept “misery loves company.”1  A few years ago, Germany was actually criticized for responsible managing of its trade balance.2  In addition, as of late last year, just eight EU nations had average working hours exceeding ours in the U.S. while fifteen worked fewer hours per week.3  Despite working less, several of those nations have well-known expectations of benefits which aggravate economic struggles.4

Britain has a chance to separate itself from an unsteady large ship known as the EU.

The choice is theirs.  They can stay with a modern day economic Titanic with its mesmerizing marketing glitter — and its fatal flaws.  Or, they can choose to guide their own smaller, less “cool” ship where rational decision-making is an everyday necessity.

If they choose this, they will be more likely to succeed because they will have their head on the wheel instead of partying on deck, blissfully ignoring of impending dangers.

If they stay, they will inevitably be dragged down with the rest of the EU because its reach is clearly beyond its wisdom… Besides, “President Obama sparked fury by pressuring UK to stay in the EU and telling its citizens their nation’s stranding (sic) would be diminished if it leaves… London Mayor Boris Johnson accused him of making an ‘incoherent’ and ‘inconsistent’ argument because the U.S. would never give up sovereignty.”5  Obama’s near-command for Britain to stay is a solid argument for them to leave the EU!

1 – “European debt crisis: It’s not just Greece that’s drowning in debt,” by Ashley Kirk, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/11705720/European-debt-crisis-Its-not-just-Greece-thats-drowning-in-debt.html, 6/29/2015.

2 – “A Common Currency (Euro) is Europe’s Real Problem, Not Germany’s Trade Surplus,” https://cartaremi.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/a-common-currency-euro-is-europes-real-problem-not-germanys-trade-surplus/, 3/12/2013.

3 – “Americans Work Hard, Nut People in These 15 Countries Work Longer Hours,” by Benjamin Snyder and Stacy Jones, http://fortune.com/2015/11/11/chart-work-week-oecd/, 11/11/2015.

4 – “France’s unemployment benefits are among the most generous in Europe, payable even for net salaries of €6,959 (£5,021) per month. That may seem to favour high earners in a country where the average monthly net salary is just over €2,000, however a spokeswoman for UNEDIC, which administers the benefits says that less than 1,000 unemployed people receive the top amount, out of a total 2.6 million claimants. The current system, negotiated between unions and employers last year, kicks in after four months’ employment. Workers aged under 50 can claim unemployment benefit for two years, while those aged over 50 can claim for three years. On average, benefits are about 65% of employees’ salary… Compensation for sick leave in Norway is often described as the most generous in the world: employees receive 100% of salary from day one for up to a year. But sickness absence is high, seen as a symptom of hidden, structural unemployment. Almost 7% of the workforce are on sick leave at any given moment – by far the highest rate of work absence among full-time employees in the industrialised countries, the OECD says…” from “Which are the best countries in the world to live in if you unemployed or disabled,” by Anne Penketh, Kate Connolly, Stefanie Kirchgaessner, Henry McDonald, Justin McCurry, David Crouch, Shaun Walker, David Smith, Mary O’Hara and Anna Bawden, http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/15/which-best-countries-live-unemployed-disabled-benefits, 4/15/2015.

5 – Obama infuriates the Brits as he threatens to send UK ‘to the back of the queue’ if they vote to leave the European Union,” by Francesca Chambers, Euan McClelland and Matt Dathan, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3553788/Obama-flies-Brexit-storm-President-faces-furious-backlash-downright-hypocritical-decision-tell-British-voters-stay-EU.html, 4/22/2016.

Do Lay People Have the Authority to Interpret Scripture Infallibly?


Visiting the Martyn-Lloyd Jones article about the supposed errors of the Catholic faith, we find this one about interpreting Scripture:

“Protestantism teaches the ‘universal priesthood of all believers’ and the right of every man to read the Scripture for himself and to interpret it under the illumination of the Holy Spirit.”

“Rome denies that completely and absolutely. She, and she alone, is able to understand and to interpret the Scripture and to tell us what to believe.”1

This is one of the celebrated differences between the numerous Christian denominations which have sprung up since the early 16th century and the Church which Christ established in the first century.

To  Whom  Did  Jesus  Give  the  Authority  to  Teach?

Jesus was clear about this at the end of the Gospel of Matthew: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you.  And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”2

The apostles were given the mission to teach and, importantly, “all that I have commanded you.”  He did not order them to write a New Testament.  While the Bible is divinely inspired, He did not say that teaching would have to wait until the Bible was completed and the canon ultimately defined at the Councils of Hippo and Carthage centuries later.3

Can  the  Laity  Interpret  Scripture?

Jesus established who the teachers are to be:  the apostles and their successors.4  Where does that leave the rest of us?

The teaching authority of the Church (“Magisterium”) has strictly defined just seven passages of the Bible.  The Church’s focus is to define doctrine.We, the laity, are encouraged to study Scripture and its myriad of finer points using all available and reliable sources.  The key thing to remember is that if we conclude something which is contrary to the Church’s teaching over the last two millennia, we would be wise to look for our error and not assume we are the final arbiter.  Failing to do this, we run the risk of adding our names to the confusion brought on by the 30,000+ who self-empowered themselves to start new denominations.6


1 — “Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Roman Catholicism,” https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/36351627/posts/18413

2 – Matthew 28: 19-20.  The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.

3 – “It was not until the Councils of Hippo and Carthage that the Catholic Church defined which books made it into the New Testament and which didn’t. Probably the council fathers studied the (complete) Muratorian Fragment and other documents, including, of course, the books in question themselves, but it was not until these councils that the Church officially settled the issue.”

“The plain fact of the matter is that the canon of the Bible was not settled in the first years of the Church. It was settled only after repeated (and perhaps heated) discussions, and the final listing was determined by Catholic bishops.”  From “Was the Canon of Scripture determined before the Church councils decided it?,” http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/was-the-canon-of-scripture-determined-before-the-church-councils-that-decided-it

4 – “Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect foreknowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned and afterwards added the further provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry.”  — Pope St. Clement of Rome, circa A.D. 80. From “Why is That in Tradition?, by Patrick Madrid, Our Sunday Visitor Publishing Division; Huntington, Indiana, 2002.

5 – ▪ The reference to being “born of water and the Spirit” in John 3:5 includes the idea of   baptism.

▪ In telling the apostles, “Do this [the Eucharist] in memory of me” in Luke 22:19 and 1 Corinthians 11:24, Jesus appointed the apostles priests.

▪ In Matthew 18:18 and John 20:22–23, Jesus conferred on the apostles the power to forgive sins; everyone does not share this power.

▪ Romans 5:12 refers to the reality of original sin.

▪ The presbyters referred to in James 5:14 are ordained, not merely elder members of the Christian community.

From “Are Catholics free to interpret Bible verses without the Church’s approval?,” by Peggy Frye, http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/are-catholics-free-to-interpret-bible-verses-without-the-churchs-approval

6 – The Bible was never intended to be our sole source of guidance.  “Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours.” (2 Thessalonians 2:15) and “Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God.” (2 Peter 1:20-21) as found in The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, KS, 2005.  If everyone outside of apostolic succession claims to be guided by the Holy Spirit, then why is there so much confusion and contradictions in the non-Catholic Christian world?

Clearing Up the Confusion About Praying to the Saints


Misinformation about the teachings of the Catholic Church has been accelerating since 1517.  The words of the late Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen ring truer with each passing generation:

“There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church.”1

The  Misstatement

Here is an example of a misconception regarding why Catholics pray to the saints for their intercessions.  As it appeared in a recent WordPress blog:

“They believe in perfectionism in this life, and they say that some of these saints have lived a perfect life. The result of this is that they have acquired and built up so much “merit” that they have much more than they need for themselves; so they have a superabundance of merit.”

“The result is that you and I, who may be failing and who are so lacking in merit, can go and pray to the saints and ask them to give to us a certain amount of their superabundance.”2

Saints’  Intercessory  Prayers  Are  Not  Like  Carbon  Tax  Cap/Trade

Outside of the Virgin Mary, no one, not even the saints, lived a “perfect life.”  In fact, some were far from it in their early days.  Just take a look at St. Augustine’s life!3

When we ask the saints to pray for us, we are not asking them to give us from their “excess merit.”  No, we are asking them to pray for us in the same way we pray for one another during times of trial in this life.  The saints are simply closer to God and they no longer have any need to pray for themselves.

Intercessory  Prayer  IS  Biblical

“And when he had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints…”

Again, those in heaven have no need of prayers for themselves since they have already passed judgment.  They now praise God directly, so they are presenting our prayers.  If this sounds silly, then so it is when we pray for each other on earth.  And that is certainly not the case! (“… and pray for one another, that you may be healed” James 5:16)5

Speaking of intercessions, we remember that the first miracle of Jesus’ public life occurred as a result of an intercession.  At the Wedding Feast of Cana, Jesus’ mother Mary approached him with the request to solve the problem of the wine having run out.  She was interceding for the groom and attendants who were capable of asking Him directly.

The American spirit of individual initiative certainly has its good points.  Carried to an extreme, however, it can cause us to forget that the Church Victorious can assist those of us in the Church Militant on our earthly journey.  This is accomplished by the inspiration their lives can be for us AND their active intercessions on our behalf.



1 – “Archbishop Sheen Quotes,” www.catholicbible101.com/archbishopsheenquotes.html

2 – “Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Roman Catholicism,” https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/36351627/posts/18413

3 – “St. Augustine of Hippo is the patron of brewers because of his conversion from a former life of loose living, which included parties, entertainment, and worldly ambitions. His complete turnaround and conversion has been an inspiration to many who struggle with a particular vice or habit they long to break…,” http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=418

4 – Rev. 5:8 as found in The Holy Bible, revised standard version Catholic edition, Thomas Nelson & Sons, Toronto/Camden, NJ/London, 1966.

5 – Ibid.

Yes, Jesus Really Does Give Priests HIS Authority to Forgive Sins



This is in response to a posting today from a fellow WordPress blogger who does not understand that we are to receive Christ’s forgiveness through a priest.  The basis for the Catholic Church’s teaching stems from the often heard: “Do Catholics believe in the Bible?” “Yes, the entire Bible.”

John 20: 21-22:  “Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace be with you.  As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’  And when he has said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit.  If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.’”

James 5:16  “Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.  The prayer of a righteous man has great power in its effects.”

Jesus continues to forgive sins through the priests who, with the Pope and bishops, exist because of apostolic succession.  Our Savior knew that , while Church leaders would never  be sinless, His Church would not teach error because of the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  He did not scrap apostolic succession because Peter denied Him three times and Judas betrayed him.  He said He would be with us always until His second coming.My prayer is that some day all Christians will avail themselves of the wonderful gift of the Sacrament of Reconciliation!


1 – “Go therefore make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”  (Matthew 28:19-20)  This and the other verses are taken from The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Catholic edition, Ignatius Press, San Francisco, 1966.

Needle Exchanges Without Rehab Requirement: Society’s “Too Big to Fail” Bailouts for the Addicted


Origins  of  “Too  Big  to  Fail”

The financial debacles of the last few Administrations have brought years of debates about whether “Too Big to Fail” subsidies from beleaguered taxpayers are causing more harm than good.The belief was that, while it was not the taxpayers’ fault that these institutions were failing, the average citizen should “take one for the team” with large financial assistance or risk company bankruptcies and massive job losses.   It has become a sort of hostage situation: “you fix the consequences of our greed or you’ll suffer more than we will.”  Fortunately, many in power are becoming more skeptical of these ransoms.

Unfortunately, there is another scenario where we citizens are being told to do something intuitively counterproductive or face dire consequences even though we are not the cause of the problem.  Drug addictions produce much physical and financial pain to users and frequently to non-users who have property useful for purchasing drugs.

It must be the belief of many social engineers that the human condition regarding addictions is hopeless2 just as Obamacare’s contraceptives and abortifacient policies express the notion that humans cannot suppress sexual urges.  Back to drug addiction: instead of an all-out strategy to help those who wish to regain control of their lives, needle exchange programs are funded by some local governments in order to reduce the additional consequences of irresponsible behavior.3  Those consequences include the spread of hepatitis C and HIV and not only to the substance abusers themselves.4

Financial  Bailouts:  How  Well  Have  They  Worked?

Some of the early federal rescues occurring either after a company failed or before it did have had mixed results at best.  Lockheed (1971), New York City (1975) and Chrysler (1980) settled accounts eventually and may have even yielded a return on taxpayer investment.5

Then there was 1989 Savings & Loan crisis:  “The Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act authorized $293.8 billion dollars to finance the folding of numerous failed S&Ls. The final tab for the bailout was roughly $220.32 billion. Of that total, taxpayers were responsible for about $178.56 billion; the private sector covered the rest.”5

Bailouts have digressed resulting in the “Trouble Asset Relief Program (TARP) which disbursed $700 billion dollars in Federal (taxpayer) money to clean up the mess because of the financial crisis of 2008.  In many cases, a profit was returned to the federal government.6  However, the bailout did not come to the aid of the average person who was essentially being held hostage again.  Instead, it rewarded those whose mismanagement created the crisis.  Such was the final analysis of TARP.7

Drug  Addiction  Bailouts:  Needle  Exchange  Programs  (NEP)

These programs had their beginnings in Europe during the 1980’s.  San Francisco, Tacoma, Portland and New York City implemented theirs before 1990.By early 2015, there were roughly 200 NEP’s in the United States.Most articles on the subject list data on the reduction of the previously mentioned diseases and other hazards.  Some will state anecdotally that drug usage has not increased with NEP’s in their communities along with a few testimonials of how the NEP encouraged a few to consent to rehabilitation.

Rationalization  Doesn’t  Warrant  Most  Bailouts  or  NEP’s

Even though entering rehab is not a stipulation of receiving free, sterile needles, supporters of NEP’s maintain their actions don’t condone drug use.  However, basic human nature comes into play with both financial bailouts and needle exchanges.  Without legal commitments to reform selfish fiduciary actions, what’s to keep businesses or banks from taking unwise risks — only existing laws which may be insufficient.  They will simply continue to operate as they have believing that a safety net will be thrown in their direction to neutralize the consequences of their actions and the innocent may or may not be spared.

The same goes for those who take unwise risks with their health; and therefore, endanger the health of the rest of us.  Very little will change as long as the focus is on blunting the natural consequences of bad decisions instead of encouraging the responsibility to change destructive habits.

The desire to stop the spread of any infectious disease is certainly noble.  However, before resorting to just any plan, we must remember that “The end does not justify the means… It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances.”10  Needle exchange programs must be modified greatly to be in concert with solving the root cause of the problem of substance abuse and to ensure that “NEP” stands for ‘not enabling people.”




2 – “This is an understandable argument; however, drug use is not going to end. Therefore necessary measures should be taken in order to help this unsafe practice become a bit safer.”  From “Needle Exchange Programs: Making a Risky Behavior Safer,” by Kimberly Swan, https://www2.cortland.edu/dotAsset/122267.pdf

3 – The most recent occurrence of this: “Campbell County officials made the right decision to support the creation of a needle exchange program to give to give heroin users access to clean syringes.  Studies have shown that, when implemented properly, needle exchanges can limit the spread of diseases including hepatitis C and HIV. Supporting needle exchange programs is not the same as condoning heroin use; it’s good public policy that protects us all from the potential spread of deadly infectious diseases.”  Part of a Cincinnati Enquirer editorial, 5/7/2016.

4 – “These diseases do not remain confined to the network of individuals who are injecting drugs, but are transmitted to their spouses, families and communities.”  From: “Column: Needle exchange programs not only help addicts, but the public, too,” by Dr. Judith Feinberg, http://www.wcpo.com/mobile-showcase/op-ed-needle-exchange-programs-not-only-help-addicts-but-the-public-too

5 – From “History of U.S. Gov’t Bailouts,” https://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts

6 – “Bailout recipients,” updated 5/23/2016, https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list

7 – “Study:  Bank bailout didn’t boost small business lending,” by Stephen Gandel, http://fortune.com/2012/11/14/study-bank-bailout-didnt-boost-small-business-lending/, 11/14/2012.


9 – “More States and Cities Consider Needle-Exchange Programs to Reduce Spread of Infection,” by the Join Together Staff, http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/states-cities-consider-needle-exchange-programs-reduce-spread-infection/, 3/31/2015.

10 – Taken from paragraphs 1753 and 1756 of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2000.

Biden Urges War on Cancer — Why Not a War on Abortion? It Kills More Each Day


Attempting to get global focus for President Obama’s war on cancer, Vice President Joe Biden called cancer a “constant emergency”.  He added that it kills 3,000 daily in the United States alone.1  (The same article’s estimate is closer to 1,600 per day, still a tragedy.)

Speaking of constant emergencies, “there are over 3,000 abortions per day. Twenty-two percent of all pregnancies in the USA (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.”2

Cancer research must be a high priority as it impacts so many lives, often indiscriminately, not by choice. Abortion kills and always by someone’s choice.

In addition to massive funding, curing the various cancers will take time.  It cannot be willed overnight.  Creating a more supportive pro-life society may require additional expenditures on the part of compassionate citizens and even governments if they become enlightened.  However, not to abort is a decision capable of being willed overnight.

With such an achievable goal at hand, why isn’t there a war on abortion?



1 – “Biden Urges Global Focus on Cancer as a ‘Constant Emergency,’”
http://www.voanews.com/content/biden-urges-global-focus-curing-cancer/3308974.html, 4/29/2016



Many activists and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have defined their version of a “living wage” to be a minimum of $15 per hour.Unfortunately, this cause gained some momentum last year as “Fourteen cities, counties and states approved a $15 minimum wage through local laws, executive orders and other means in 2015.”2

Cost  of  Living  Varies  Widely  Among  the  States

A national minimum wage of this magnitude makes the careless assumption that the cost of living is relatively equal across our country.  Not the case!

For 2015, the cost of living in California and New York was close to 35% above the mean for all states.3  For an “average” state such as Florida, it only takes $11.10 per hour to create the same economic climate for an employee as $15 does in California and New York.  Why should Florida be forced to effectively pay nearly $4 per hour more for the same work?

The absurdity is worse for states with below average costs of living.  Mississippi’s was 16.5% below the U.S. mean for last year.  A citizen of the Magnolia State would do as well on $9.28 per hour as his counterparts in California or New York would do on $15.  Requiring Mississippi to have a $15 minimum is as ridiculous as pushing California and New York to $24.25 —  a guaranteed method of raising machine employment at the expense of humans.

States  Are  Different  Despite  Simplistic  Liberal  Beliefs

For decades, the Left has confused equality with being identical.  The concept of a national minimum wage is just one of their futile attempts at creating fairness by legislating sameness among the inherently different.  Some national policies are unwise.  For at least two millennia, it has been shown repeatedly that the best policies result when problem solving occurs at the lowest effective level.4,5    

The U.S., with its diversity of geography, cultures, economic climates, etc., does not lend itself well to many across-the-board mandates because they can often be destructive.  A national minimum wage of $15 per hour is one of them.

1 – “Bernie Sanders is The Only Presidential Candidate Who Supports $15/Hour Minimum Wage,” by Jason Easley,  http://www.politicususa.com/2016/04/04/bernie-sanders-presidential-candidate-supports-15hour-minimum-wage.html, 4/4/2016. 

2 – “14 Cities and States Approved $15 Minimum Wage in 2015,” http://www.nelp.org/news-releases/14-cities-states-approved-15-minimum-wage-in-2015/, 12/21/2015.

3https://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/costof living/

4 – “… 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 to co-ordinate its activity with 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…”  — excerpts from paragraphs 1883 and 1885 of The Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, published by Libreria Editrice Vaticana, March 2000.

5 – So as to avoid confusing the real meaning of “common good” with the one currently in vogue (that it’s whatever benefits the most, even at the expense of individuals):  “The common good comprises ‘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 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 groups and of its member.”  Paragraphs 1924 and 1925, Ibid.