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

Featured

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]

Featured

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

 

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

Featured

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

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

So, Hillary Clinton’s campaign says this:

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

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

Russians  Don’t  Have  to  Be  Invited  to  Initiate  Mayhem

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

Featured

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

Featured

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