A few years ago I was talking to a little girl who whimsically referred to her mom and dad as the love people.
The fact that both of them looked to the port side of every political issue has prompted me to think of the 1970 movie, based on Erich Segal’s book of the same name, Love Story.
In the movie the lead actress, played by Ali MacGraw became terminally ill.
Her lover, played by Ryan O’Neal fumbles around and beats his breast in sorry and apology, leading to her classic line, Love means never having to say you are sorry.
Just look back to the so-called McCarthy era when a politician seized on an issue of government disloyalty and infiltration of Communists into the very heart of the Democratically lead executive department.
In 1953 playwright Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible opened on Broadway.
The McCarthy period inspired him to write his play about the notorious Salem witch trials of 1696.
The term witch hunt emanated from this era.
This play gave birth to the term witch-hunt which has become a permanent fixture in the modern political lexicon.
For 70 years writers, politicians and pundits have lambasted any talk of disloyalty as a throwback to McCarthyism.
They even blame McCarthy for the blacklist and censorship of 10 writers and producers who would not admit their communist connections during, not of one of McCarthy’s Senate hearings, but before the House on Un-American Activities Committee, a totally separate investigation.
In truth it was one of the biggest canards and falsehoods ever inflicted on American history and still stands as the gospel truth for schools on all levels of education.
No one dare set the record straight despite the irrefutable evidence that there was hundreds of communist agents and sympathizers who had made it even into the Oval Office.
Had Henry Wallace not been removed from the vice-presidency for FDR’s fourth presidential campaign a Soviet sympathizer would have become president of the United States.
One need only consult the Venona Dispatches which appeared after the fall of Soviet Communism in 1991 when they opened the KGB and other archives.
The left’s protests against Republicans like McCarthy was disengenuous, deceptive and blatantly false.
The bold truth was that many communists had found a niche in the Democratic presidency of first FDR and later Truman.
Their Democratic defenders, like Obama on ObamaCare are either ignorant or bold-face liars.
Like today Democrats consistently violated the truth to protect their own petty political legacies.
To this day no liberal has ever admitted his wrong doing and in fact they still perpetuate the myth of McCarthyism.
Liberals never say they are sorry. And I mean never!
Like the parents described above liberals are America’s Love People.
Like Peanuts’ Lucy van Pelt, they love humanity.
It just is individual people that mean little or nothing to them.
The poor are mere cogs in the wheels of state that sometimes must be propelled under the bus in order for the power aggrandizement to progress forward.
Liberals have all been conditioned by the same-thinking marriage of Nico Machiavelli and Saul Alinsky who taught them how to get their own power and expand it when they were in control.
This is the motivation for the ACA and every other policy coming out of this White House.
There are no absolutes for liberals, except this self-serving dictum.
Truth and fact are only words that are to be nuanced, distorted or obliterated as each situation dictates.
While President Obama has offered the first two in what might become a weekly reality show of apologies for mishandling and even fumbling the ball with regard to his signal calling as the nation’s starting quarterback, he never has said he was sorry for all the lies, deception and prevarications that he put out publicly that has already negatively impacted millions of lives.
Were he a Roman Catholic and he told these sins in the confessional in the old church his penance would have been sack cloth and ashes.
In today’s kinder and gentler church I think his resignation would be required for atonement.
Of course he would have to promise to amend his ways to get absolution.
His resignation would be the only honorable thing.
Given the lack of character president in the Democratic Senate impeachment will never happen.
Nixon paid for his lack of trust in the American system with resignation only because of the character and leadership of several Republican leaders.
There are no such profiles of courage existent in the Democratic Party today…none whatsoever.
The last chapter in Obama Agonistes has not been written yet.
We will have to wait see if the events unfolding will eventually cause liberals to fully understand the meaning of sorrow for their political sins.
Recently I did something that I had not done since eating a rotten apple in 1962 at an orphanage where I was a weekly big brother.
I lost my lunch after I had eaten it.
Without going into any gross detail I was trying to avoid getting sick in my car. I got out without parking it but didn’t make it to the garage.
Losing one’s cookies as they sometimes call it is one of the most unpleasant things any human being can suffer through.
That’s why I vowed 51 years ago never to do it again. I guess never was too long a time.
I had an interesting vision during the grotesque episode.
A woman who assists my wife with Christmas decorations grabbed me from behind and positioned her knees to brace me as I leaned forward.
She is a very strong and athletic-looking beauty whose strength helped me find a small realm of security in the midst of my digestive distress.
I have repeatedly stated how much I enjoy movies.
I had this vision of Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio on the deck of the Titanic in an enchanting scene from the movie of the same name.
He is holding her from behind as she leans forward over the rail and feels the power of the wind and the warmth of the setting sun on her face and upper body.
The only trouble with my vision was I was Kate and Tiffany was Leonardo.
That brings me in a circuitous route to ObamaCare.
I had really thought about calling this essay the USS Obamanic...a real disaster movie.
Obama would have the Captain Smith role as the valiant ship’s captain that went down with his ship of state while taking millions of us with him.
There is no way that will ever happen.
Our ship may sink but there is no way this leader will even be on board.
Many films have memorable lines that I often use to illustrate a point or enhance one of my stories.
In Sunset Boulevard with Gloria Swanson and William Holden, the deranged aging actress makes her final appearance near the end of the movie after having shot Holden’s real character to death and says:
All right, Mr. DeMille, I’m ready for my close-up.
I think William Shakespeare anticipated Washington D. C. when he wrote the world is a stage and we all must play a part.
I say this because I am convinced that Cecil DeObama has been directing everything that has happened to the American people with regard to its complicated health care system.
Of course at this juncture he seems a disengaged director who would rather be on the golf links than stuck in the oval director’s chair.
But that is part of his genius.
He is also the lead actor in this disaster movie.
Like Robert Redford, Obama has made the smooth transition from an actor impersonating a United States Senator to playing the most important role of his life and ours as well from behind the scenes.
The president’s highly touted health care system, aka ObamaCare has been a colossal failure from the start.
Obama looks the part of a buffoon…an ignorant fool whose right hand does not have any idea what his left-hand has been up to.
But that is all part of his script.
Despite his lack of any real academic achievement the man is a genius in manipulating people to perform just the way he wants…even if it is by misdirection.
This goes doubly for the Republicans.
It has not been his ignorance or disinterest that have created an untenable situation fraught with uncertainty, fear and broken lives.
These exchanges are doing just what they were designed to do—FAIL!
Obama has surrounded himself with political hacks, pettifogging lawyers, imbeciles–think Pelosi–and zombie-like thugs from the central casting division of the Democratic Party.
There is no way these disparate unprofessionals could construct or lead their way out of a paper bag, let alone absorb 16% of the US economy and make it a workable system.
A single payer system like Medicaid has always been his goal.
As the Wall Street Journal said on October 30th, Americans are losing their coverage by political design.
This could be the biggest act of overt political fraud in the history of the country.
Are Americans to blame for this public film?
Too many believed his calculated and repeated lies about keeping their insurance plans and their doctors but hopefully they will awaken from their slumber and realize this is what he wanted all along.
And they sadly bought his message, not once but twice.
None of this has been by accident but the coming home to roost of the liberals longtime goal that everyone has essentially the same health coverage and that government is the only institution that can ensure that it is done equally…except for them and their friends of course.
Such political and economic control is the driving force of the Affordable Care Act not the health and well-being of the American people.
Unless this monstrosity is pulled from the screens across America we can expect the worst to happen.
In two years when the deed has been done to us and we no longer have any viable health insurance and less actual care, he will be able to add an Oscar to his mantle right next to his Nobel Peace Prize.
Had Obama put as much effort into governing as he has done in playing politics with 300 million American lives he could have gone down as one of the great presidents of all times.
Sadly true historians will see him as an abject failure who had an epitaph penned for him by John Greenleaf Whiter centuries ago…
The saddest words of tongue and pen are what might have been.
Two of the more enduring images of the Bible are the gift of tongues and the Tower of Babel.
Priestly gifts and this would include Pope Francis have often been blessed with such spiritual and physical gifts as the gifts of speech, the gift of tongues interpretation and prophecy.
The Tower of Babel refers to a story in Genesis.
According to this first book in the Old Testament, Moses related the story that after the Great Flood, a united humanity appeared from a land in the east called Shinar that spoke a universal language.
They resolved to build a city with a tower whose top may reach unto heaven.
This way they could make a name for themselves lest they be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.
Because their intention was egotistically motivated because of the vanity of their nation, God came down from above and made their speech unintelligible.
Thus they were scattered over the face of the earth.
I think if a priest, especially a new and green pontiff were not extremely careful he could run the risk of turning discussion of the Catholic faith into an occasion of confusion and misunderstanding.
Pope Francis has said many thing since his becoming pope last April that have upset and even confused many of the faithful.
Of course his statements gave hope to the liberal wing of the Church.
Quite frankly I can understand the concern that many Orthodox Catholic have with his pronouncements.
The first statement that concerned me was when he told Catholics that as a Church we cannot insist only on issues related to abortion, gay marriage and the use of contraceptive methods…
I hadn’t realized that was what we were doing.
In fact from the pulpit one hardly ever hears about the evils of abortion, euthanasia or homosexuality.
The pope did state that we had to talk about them in context.
I submit that is exactly what we are doing when we do talk about these issues.
The context is a culture war that was started by the Marxists, dating back to Sardinian communist, Antonio Gramsci, who ordained a long march through western culture in the early 1920s.
The advent of the culture war was predicted many years ago by Russian author Igor Shafarevich, whoreduced the Communist Manifesto’s 10 planks to three specific targets, which were private property, the Christian religion and the family.
The pope seems to have failed to note that these basic human institution that have provided the moral and physical glue for Western Civilization have been under vicious assault for many generations.
Another statement that turned a few devout heads was when the pope opined on women in the church.
Of course this is a loaded question that the last four popes have had to walk on cracked eggshells to address.
The pope suggested that the feminine genius is needed whenever we make important decisions.
While that sounds like a nice, even flattering thing to say about the gentle sex…especially the part about the feminine genius, what does it mean in the context of Church teaching?
Well for starters I am sure someone longing for a female priesthood could seriously reason that women should become ordained because they could then apply this genius, which I wish he had defined, to the important decisions that priests make each and every day.
Then the pontiff was asked what the Church’s role in the modern world.
He answered that what the church needs most today ability to heal wounds and warm the hearts of the faithful.
The pope offered the image of the Church as a field hospital.
I am not at all certain what he means by that but it does not seem to agree with mu childhood and adolescent understanding of the what the Catholic Church was supposed to stand for?
I guess I fear that we will fast become a church of social workers.
I have to stifle my urge to laugh or make a glib remark because he is our pope but I always thought that the church’s divinely ordained role was to lead the faithful to heaven.
Unless the pope is a believer in universal salvation, which was declared a heresy 120 years ago, that’s the only thing that counts.
As Hillary Clinton likes to say among the ruins of our foreign policy, what difference…does it make….if you gain or heal the entire world and suffer the loss of your immortal soul?
Nothing...nada...if the church is relinquishing this primary function why do we really need a church?
There are plenty of medical and psychology organizations who will heal wounds and warm hearts.
Then there is the issue of Liberation Theology.
I have written about it for the Mindszenty Foundation and am scheduled in March to talk about it in Chicago for them as well.
Basically it is a relatively new teaching about the poor, especially in Latin America where it originated well over 40 years ago.
It has led to such derivatives as the so-called preferential option for the poor and an obsession for helping the poor no matter what the means.
This has essentially led to trillions of dollars in spending that has been borrowed from America’s future .
This is standing G. K. Chesterton’s idea of the democracy of the dead where traditions and customs of the past must be recognized as still valuable.
With today’s leaders we have the tyranny of the living.
My additional research has uncovered the fact that Liberation Theology was essentially the idea of the KGB and the Soviet’s attempt to undermine its chief antagonist, the Catholic Church.
Personally I think you could trace it back to the ideas of the Enlightenment in the 18th century, which sought to do away with religion, royalty and the middle class.
Pope Francis is considered the pope of the poor.
So when he became pontiff many on the left assumed that he would jump right in on their behalf and support Liberation Theology.
My guess is that the only thing that has held him back is that its proponents make no excuses for the necessary violence that is left in the wake of this powerful abstraction.
Behind the growing skepticism is the fear in some quarters that Francis’s all-embracing style and spontaneous speech, so open as it is to interpretation, are undoing decades of church efforts to speak clearly on Catholic teachings.
Some conservatives also feel that the pope is undermining them at a time when they are already being sidelined by an increasingly secular culture.
Francis is certainly a lot different at least in the beginning than both of his predecessors.
During the previous three decades, popes John Paul II and Benedict had a similar focus. Each wanted to make orthodox teachings crystal clear so Catholics would not get confused or lost what Benedict XVI called the slavery of relativism.
That is precisely the risk Pope Francis has been running since his rise to the throne of Peter.
We all need to pray that his gift of tongues does not degenerate into a new kind of theological babel and misunderstanding.
The stakes are just too high!
My massage therapist is from Ukraine.
As a courtesy to her I save all the articles that appear in the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal that have anything to do with her native homeland, Russia and anything remotely close to the old Soviet Union.
It is the least I can do for her after all she has done for me the past few years.
She and her husband subscribe to six Russian cable stations and know a lot about what is happening there but they seldom read the American papers for our country’s perspective about their native land.
Her sister and nephew work in the office of Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, so I always clip any article about him and what’s going on in his government.
Before I leave a short stack of articles on her table that she leaves with us now that we are upstairs in my office, I generally read with intent or peruse what I give her twice a week.
As a result I have become very interested in her part of the world, especially Russia’s president Vladimir Putin.
Lena does not like Putin at all. She is also not fond of Ukraine’s previous prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko, who wound up in jail after losing the election for president in 2010..
Despite what she thinks I have developed a small fondness for Russia’s reigning autocrat.
I know he is former KGB and I guess that is like being a Mason–once a Mason–always a Mason.
Obama was a Hapa in his native Hawaii. That is someone of mixed ethnic descent.
Of course to look at Hawaiians born in the mating place of the world, I would hazard a guess that virtually all Hawaiians are a mixed bag of races and nationalities.
Obama’s most generous and comprehensive biographer, David Maraniss says that his Hapa status seems to have grated on the moody young man as he tried to find himself on the mainland.
I think Obama has had a hard time fitting in wherever he has gone since then.
He is not a very personal man and appears uncomfortable, even among the people who support him and will not tolerate anyone criticising or rebuking him or his policies.
With a separated father and for all practical purposes–an absentee mother, I am not surprised that he has felt alienated from his family surroundings.
This might explain why he feels at home in no specific place but proclaims himself a citizen of the world as were Woodrow Wilson and Bill Clinton, his progressive forebears.
I think Putin wins any competition with Obama hands down!
For one thing he loves his Mother Russia.
Can we honestly say that our president has put his country first?
Is Putin trying to kill capitalism, level the playing field in the name of something vague and amorphous like equality?
The world respects and fears Putin which is not necessarily a bad thing.
No one outside of his racialist circle and few Democratic stalwarts–think Harry and Nancy–really respects Obama and no one quakes in their boots about his power over them…so far at least.
When Putin speaks—like the old E. F. Hutton commercial–people turn around and listen.
That was also true of Ronald Reagan because he said meaningful things that inspired millions of American–not just the chosen cronies and friends, purchased with trillions of taxpayer dollars.
People listened to Reagan because his speeches were from the heart and he was not lost without his teleprompter.
There was never any controversy about Putin’s birth certificate.
And surprisingly for a KGB Russian Putin is a practicing Christian.
This is thanks to his mother.
OK maybe he is a born-again with a Bolshevik past.
What is Obama? He’s never practiced anything remotely resembling true selfless Christianity.
The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is no Christian.
He has taken the black liberation of rogue priests and the like and attacked America with a hateful vengeance.
It is always payback for him and Obama. They will never turn the other check nor love thy neighbor.
I doubt if these principles would emanate from Putin much as well and he is a little weak on the Sixth Commandment–adultery in Catholic ordination.
I have already written about the sweet young rhythmic gymnast, Alina Kabaeva who won medals in the 2004 (gold) and 2000 (bronze) Olympics for whom he has finally left his wife of over 30 years.
All Christians are sinners but they are still Christians.Obama has repeatedly pushed the gay thing down our national throats.
I don’t know what Putin thinks of them personally though I might have a good guess.
He is a very virile man and the type of affected feminine characteristics that seem to characterize many young gay men would repel him but on a higher level I think he fears their affect on Russian society as a whole.
Many Russians fear that the gay adoptions of young boys will create a colony of new gay men. Recent statistics show a disproportionate number of adopted boys becoming homosexuals.
Most children who are adopted adopt the religions of their new parents, so why not the sexual behaviors?
My Catholic Church’s collective head will be on the chopping block very soon and if its bishops and priests are true to the faith they will be imprisoned and maybe driven from the country.
I believe that most civil rights groups that have any history of prejudice and abuse that once they are accepted they want, not equality but retribution and the enactment of more severe penalties than had been applied to them.
Is America far away from that?
With Obama at the helm and using his Affordable Care Act to bully the Catholic Church on abortion and birth control, can the rainbow curtain be far behind?
In Russia Putin wants the gays to stifle themselves and not make a mockery of the Winter Olympics, scheduled to start in Sochi next year.
I admire him for this stand as well as stopping the poorly named Pussy Riot from defaming the Russian Orthodox Church.
Obama is more of a practical atheist, which is the religion of politics today, according to Russell Shaw’s new book, American Church: The Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall, and Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America.
Putin has also had to deal with a Ukrainian-based women’s group, called Femen, who have protested his power all over Russia.
Their simple means of protest is similar to America’s PETA, except they usually keep their pants on.
Personally I do not see how women bearing their breasts in public are going to change anyone’s thinking but…
I will admit that their women are against prostitution and trafficking, which is all praiseworthy but this is not going to help their situation.
What I like most about Putin is that he is all man.
He is quick to prove it by ripping off his shirt whenever he can and flexing his pecks.
Maybe he thinks he is Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Terminator. Bad choice of words!
Obama on the other hand has never impressed me with his manliness.
He tries to show what a great athlete he was in high school but little has been made of the fact that David Maraniss said that he was the only player on a very good high school team who could not dunk a basketball.
Didn’t he miss 22 shots in a row a few years ago?
That makes him racially atypical.
Obama’s feckless and spineless attitude toward foreign policy has disgusted me since he led from behind in Libya.
If he didn’t want that responsibility as the WSJ suggests then why did he want to be our the president of the UNited States?
He reminds me of C. S. Lewis’ book, Men Without Chests. Perhaps a more vulgar title would aptly describe President Obama’s leadership inability.
No one can say that about Putin.
I know the tundra is probably greener on the Russian side of the fence but one can only dream.
Now it seems that Putin has pulled Obama’s bacon out of the fire he started in Syria.
Of course Obama’s incurable vanity will compel him to take full credit for saving the world again! Another Peace Prize?
Putin doesn’t care what bonfire Obama’s vanities burn in–he owns him…and with our presdent…this country.
Now that is a scary thought!
In grade school the nuns taught us that our bodies were temples of the Holy Ghost.
I don’t know how many of us really understood what the teaching meant though it did sound really nice to most of us.
I wonder if they even teach that concept in today’s Catholic schools.
It probably does work its way into talks on chastity and sex and of course any workshop on late pope, Blessed John Paul II’s theories on the Theology of the Body have to have some allusions to the reverence that we should pay our natural bodies.
Americans love their bodies. We spend billions every year taking care of them with hygiene and beauty products, gym and spa visits, painful and dangerous exercise routines, vitamins and many other ways of increasing their longevity and to many their immortality.
Look at how many liberals or vegetarians lobby against polluting our bodies and those of others with cigarettes, second-hand smoke, alcohol, fatty foods, bad carbs and even meat.
We glorify our bodies in books, TV shows and photography.
If I see Terry Bradshaw in that weight-loss commercial one more time I will….!!!
Now if the Church could get some of these same people to see the dire effects of pre-marital sex, pornography, marijuana and drug use, reckless driving and alcohol abuse, just maybe they might be able to see beyond the flesh and understand the teachings about the human person.
The human body had been the traditional subject of art for centuries if not millenia.
The nude form, male or female has often run up against censorship.
This negative attitude emanated from the pagan philosopher, Plato who helped establish the duality of man’s body and soul as a principle of Western Civilization.
Once the two were separated philosophically ethical and moral divisions were not far behind.
The Christian religion before John Paul had this strong sense of the body, especially the female being a near occasion of sin.
Most Platonists and later many Christians acted as if they were uncomfortable in their own bodies, mainly because they believed the souls were made for heaven and the body for the grave.
The early Puritans had an insulting attitude toward the human body that the Bible clearly said was created in the image and likeness of God.
Other philosophies and religious view, like the Jansenists, the thinking of St. Augustine and others inflicted terrible psychological damage on maturing young people.
Father Robert Barron’s Book Thomas Aquinas: Spiritual master has a marvelous chapter, entitled The Human Body was made for Ecstasy.
Father Barron reported that according to Aquinas human beings should make peace with their own bodies and renounce the heretical views of the Puritans and the Jansenist Catholics’ tendency to demonize the body and its pleasures as an evil inimical to the will of God.
The story of Adam and Eve with Eve as the temptress that ruined Paradise for everyone has had a long run among moralists and millions of Catholics and Christians.
Unfortunately thanks to Freud who empathized the mental side effects of repressing normal urges, modern society has gone 100% the other way, mistaking libertinism, promiscuity and license for liberation and freedom.
Too many have followed philosopher David Hume who argued that reason or conscience had to become a slave to the passions.
Our society treats any kind of nudity as a prelude or invitation to sex.
John Paul taught that nudity had it correct places–and that in our minds the human body should be divorced from sex except during those rightful times between husbands and wives.
That’s what has been wrong with our society for so long and the liberals are as guilty as the conservatives in perpetuating these misanthropic and misogynistic views.
ESPN Magazine recently published its new annual body magazine.
The pictures of several well-known female and male athletes—all nude– look and appear like visions from the Parthenon of ancient Greece.
One of my new heroes is golfer Gary Player who was photographed for the magazine. The Australian Player is 77 years-old and does 500 sit-ups every day.
Those who will be shocked by these photos should rethink their attitude toward the human body.
There is nothing suggestive or indecent about any of the photos.
The editors were careful to cleverly block out any sign of genitalia in all their subjects.
In a way this is the only dishonest thing about the issue.
John Paul says that we are all male and female. Our distinctive sexual organs are an important part of what makes us male or female. They don’t define us as sexual objects but relate to the essence of our personhood.
To him pornography was showing too little,.
In the name of prudence and even modesty ESPN has ironically done that.
I know perfectly well why they did that. To have followed the pope’s TOB would have invited condemnation. censorship and disdain from the people I described above.
I have to admit that much of the above affected me for much of my early life.
I think my attitude has changed to the point that I see a pretty women, not as an object of sex or any prurient urges but as a beautiful example of God’s creation.
Modesty and chastity have often argued for keeping the female totally in wraps.
The West has nearly completely rejected that idea well into the 21st century to the disadvantage of women everywhere.
Women now represent little more than commercial objects.
It was these attitudes—a disdain for the human body and the reduction of the person, especially the female person to a sex object that the pope hoped to counter.
The Catholic church in Poland can’t handle the naked truth about tennis star Agnieszka Radwanska.
Shortly after Radwanska’s tasteful and relatively modest photos appeared Poland’s Youth Crusade severed its ties with the fourth-ranked tennis star over her immoral behavior while the hierarchy blasted her for her semi-nude spread.
I find it incredulous that John Paul II”‘s native country and a European country to boot would still hang on to this antiquated views on the human body.
This has seriously contributed to the infantilization of millions of men.
It is these contradictory and warring principles that rob human life of much of its daily happiness.
Aquinas believed that contrary to all this, the soul was most at home in a human body.
The soul and body always belong together and the joys and pleasures of both will be astronomically magnified in Heaven.
Barron says Aquinas also wrote that the sensible delights that come from sexual intercourse was greater in paradise than it is on earth.It is absolutely not the case, according to St. Thomas, that pleasure and carnality are signs of or inducements to sin.
Fresh from the creative hand of God, the human being was if anything, sexier than she is at present. This is true because sin diminishes some of the sensibility of the body.
Sin has only rendered the bodily passions disordered and hence less intense and less deeply satisfying.
Maybe this is why there always seems to be something missing–a hunger for something more.
That something more is God and the life He has promised us in Heaven is the place where our human bodies will be returned to us some day.
While the world loves to celebrate the human body never forget that the reason we have such unique bodies is to provide an earthly home for our souls.
When the two are rejoined in heaven—hopefully–at that moment our souls can finally be at home.
Many of you probably have seen the bogus interview between MSNBC’s Chris Matthews and Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio that made the rounds in April on the Internet.
I was over-joyed after reading the transcript of the so-called interview that never aired.
Then it dawned on me, it was too good to be true.
Some research proved that was the case.
Given the state of mind of most of the Catholic Church’s hierarchy, I could not even fathom that our new pope thought exactly as I did on big government, the poor and our duties as Christians.
So even though these words did not actually emanate from Pope Francis’ lips, they still ring true and anyone who reads them can learn what is wrong with the world and why millions of the poor are the way they are.
In fact this phantom interview should be required reading for all who preach about poverty, economics and government.
One of my serious pet peeves is how dense so many of our Catholic hierarchy are on the matter of jobs, economics and even poverty.
I remember as a child in the fourth or fifth grade, the nuns would tell us that Papal infallibility did not apply to secular subjects, such as math, history, and science.
In other words the popes could be as ignorant on logarithms or quantum physics as any high school sophomore.
This goes doubly for the bishops of the Church on economics.
Perhaps the dismal science is just too complicated or worldly for them.
Every time our Archbishop Richard Carlson tries to muster the troops against an ObamaCare that will force Catholic compliance with insurance that offers birth control, I turn a deaf ear because he does not understand the real issue.
I would love to ask him if Obama would grant the Church an exemption or a waiver would he still support the odious health care bill?
I fear that his answer would be in the affirmative.
What the archbishop may fail to understand is that there is more at stake than religious freedom.
ObamaCare is just a large government welfare program, designed to confiscate the wealth of those who produce and give it to the under-productive members of our society that have latched their livelihoods to the federal government hand-outs and take-aways.
There can be no real religious freedom without economic freedom.
People have to be allowed to keep as much of their money as they can so they can support the churches and synagogues of their choice.
That’s what freedom is all about.
This Leviathan in Washington has gotten so large and so greedy that it lusts for every dollar that is not nailed down.
So to illustrate the truth of economics, I have chosen to excerpt several statements that phony interview put in the pope’s mouth.
Pope Francis on Economics and Poverty
In Europe first and now in America , elected men have taken it upon themselves…to create an atmosphere of dependency.
For their own selfish need to increase their own personal power.
Governments are very good at creating poverty where there is no reason to explain it.
I believe poverty is part of the natural condition and that is bad enough.
But my task is to prevent the aggravation of this condition.
The ideology that adds to the poverty must be denounced.
I have a saying for myself, No more poverty than God originally intended in the fall from Grace.
Certainly God would direct the new Pope to have more compassion for these newly created poor.
And if there is any social justice in the Church, the new Pope would have a stern word for the creators of the new situation.
No buyer, or seller either, enters into any exchange against his will. It is the nature of the economy. Man is frail, and he makes mistakes and sometimes is greedy and they enter into exchanges that don’t help them.
Sometimes they become poor, but they made choices.
There is nothing the Church can do except try to educate people to become good consumers. Chiefly, for me, it is an education solution on that side.
And the Church has more schools around the globe than any other faith. I say teach the people to save their souls, and also teach them how not to become poor. And how not to allow the government to trick them into poverty.
I blame the self-serving politicians.
Friend, (Matthews) you are a socialist and your friends are socialists. And you are the reason for 70 years of misery in Russia, and Europe now is seizing in pain from your policies.
You believe in the redistribution of wealth and it makes entire populations poor. You want to nationalize everything and bring every human endeavor under your control.
You destroy a man’s incentive to take care of his very own family, a crime against nature and nature’s God.
You want social control over populations and incrementally you are making everything against the law.
Together this ideology creates more poverty today than all the corporations you vilify have in the history of man.
People being dominated by socialists need to know we don’t all have to be poor. Some poverty is part of our being cast out of the Garden of Eden.
But look at the empire of dependency created by Hugo Chavez.
Promising them, tricking them into worship of government and his very own person.
Giving them fish but not allowing them to fish.
If a fisherman does develop a talent today in Latin America, he is castigated and his catch stolen by the socialists.
Sure, there is voluntary poverty that is virtuous. Many understood the nobility of making themselves independent of the fleeting things of earth. They are distractions from our pursuit of the truth.
I only oppose involuntary poverty.
I think people agree, through their economic choices that some of their money goes to build these. Capital building should be voluntary.
Only when the politician confiscates their wealth, to build government factories, government schools, government hospitals.
Only then do the people not agree. Money given voluntarily is legitimate to build with. Money coerced from the people is not legitimate to build with, because it isn’t given voluntarily.
The best government was created by the Americans, in which they admitted that people are endowed by their creator and most of the administration of society was left to the relationship between God and man.
However, slowly that has been eroded by the atheists on the left, who would replace man’s relationship with God with a new relationship with an opportunist like Hugo Chavez.
Friend, I’ve been studying America this month, before the Pope chose to resign. You must not have fear at speaking the truth. It is for the salvation of souls and the recovery of Thomas Jefferson’s people.
America must not fall to the new painted communism. Even the low information voters don’t want America to be sold into slavery. I pray they cast out the money changers in their government!
What manner of government is there that condones sin?
Abomination upon abomination–giving monies for the murder of children, giving monies for the murder of the elderly!
Your government has been infiltrated by men of sin.
You have created a new type of state, the so-called welfare state. This has happened in order to respond to the needs of the politically created poor.
However, intervening directly is depriving the original society of its responsibility. Families escape responsibility in the welfare state.
And churches even escape responsibility. People stop giving to charity and see every poor person as the government’s problem.
I am a Catholic priest and there are no poor for me to take care of— they are made permanently poor and the property of the politicians.
The social assistance state leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic thinking than by real concern for helping people.
Needs are best understood and satisfied by people who are closest to them who act as neighbors and parish members to those in need. (Subsidiarity)
People are kept poor so they will vote for the very candidates that made them poor.
(Ed.’s note: I would add–just look at what the Democrats have done to the black communities that continue to vote for them!)
Realism in religion and economic! What a splendid combination!
Just look what Lyndon Johnson’s war on poverty did!
All the government spending in the world cannot eliminate poverty.
It is a utopian idea because the only way it will work is if government leveled the wealth of their citizens making everyone (except themselves) poor.
No inequality–just the equality of the bread line.
17 trillion spent on welfare since then and the poor are still with us.
They have become just what the Democrats want–a permanent underclass.
I am not going to write about homosexual priests in the Catholic Church.
For the record please do not continue to accept the false conventional wisdom that this has something to do with paedefilia.
Both the media and the church have hidden the true nature of the church scandal.
I want to write about the other scandal with regard to abortion.
When I was studying religion in high school the Jesuits taught me about the nature of giving scandal to other Catholics or even those who did not share my religious beliefs.
Giving bad example was deemed a very serious sin and it is something I have scrupulously guarded against my whole life.
Is this another teaching that the Church does not seem to care about in today’s modern world?
If this is not bad example or scandal, I have no idea what is!
The left will have rendered another Catholic teaching null and void.
It is common knowledge that the vast majority of Senators and Representatives in Congress, who are Catholic, pay no attention to the Church’s teaching on abortion, euthanasia or same-sex marriage.
They march to the inner drum beat of their political conscience and not their moral conscience.
Their duplicity in the culture of death is an affront to their voters and especially to their fellow Catholics.
It is not just their participation in these abject evils but it is the temerity with which they publicly beat their breasts and tout how loyal and faithful they are to their Catholic faith.
These self-professed good Catholics are reminiscent of the good Germans during the war, who considered themselves good and loving husbands and wives, and maybe kind and generous to a fault.
These were the Germans who thought of themselves as good people as to convince themselves that their participation gassing the Jews or euthanizing the elderly and the so-called useless eaters did not reflect on the state of their characters or of their souls.
I have more respect for Adolph Hitler who was a lapsed Catholic…a very lapsed Catholic but never uttered a word about how loyal he was to the Church.
The Church was always regarded as his enemy…an enemy he would deal with when the time arrived.
Every time someone of dubious reputation would say to me, I am good person I think about what guilt, sin or crime are they stowing down deep in the darkest recesses of their souls.
So is it with Senators Dick Durbin, Illinois,Patrick J. Leahy, Vermont; Claire McCaskill, Missouri, and Barbara Mikulski, Maryland.
Former senators, Vice-President Joe Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry turn a deaf ear to their church on abortion.
These are just a few of the high-profile members of Congress who have faithfully and loyally supported abortion on demand and all the dictates of Planned parenthood through most of their political lives.
Yet church leaders just let them go on touting what great Catholics they are.
What effect does their moral effrontery have on others, especially Catholics in the pews?
Does not their support of abortion encourage others to either be silent about its abject evils or even support abortion on demand as well?
Is this not the sinful scandal I was taught in high school?
Does it not mean anything to our church leaders any more?
Are they so much a part of our pagan culture that they only complain when our religious freedom is at risk?
There is at least one Catholic priest who is screaming from the top of his lungs.
I know there are many others who have spoken out, such as good friend Joseph Naumann the Archbishop of Kansas City, Kansas.
Below is a letter Father Frank Pavone, the Director of Priests for Life has written has written to the most outrageous Catholic in Congress, former Speaker of the House nancy Pelosi.
Please read it and then if you are Catholic go to your pastor with it and ask him to put it in the bulletin. One can easily get a copy on-line if necessary.
Or pass it on to anybody who will listen.
Dear Mrs. Pelosi,
Last Thursday, June 13, you were asked a question in a press briefing that you declined to answer. The question was, “What is the moral difference between what Dr. Gosnell did to a baby born alive at 23 weeks and aborting her moments before birth?”
Given the fact that the Gosnell case has been national news for months now, and that Congress, where you serve as House Democratic Leader, was about to have a vote on banning abortion after 20 weeks fetal age, this was a legitimate question.
Instead of even attempting to answer the question, you resorted to judgmental ad hominem attacks on the reporter who asked it, saying, You obviously have an agenda. You’re not interested in having an answer.”
Mrs. Pelosi, the problem is that you’re not interested in giving an answer.
Your refusal to answer this question is consistent with your failure to provide an answer to a similar question from me and the members of my Priests for Life staff. Several years ago, we visited your office with the diagrams of dismemberment abortion at 23 weeks, and asked the simple question, When you say the word ‘abortion,’ is this what you mean? In response, nothing but silence has emanated from your office.
In what way is this refusal to address an issue of such national importance consistent with the leadership role you are supposed to be exercising?
Public servants are supposed to be able to tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public. Apparently, you can’t. Otherwise, you would have been able to explain the difference between a legal medical procedure that kills a baby inside the womb and an act of murder — for which Dr. Gosnell is now serving life sentences — for killing the same baby outside the womb.
Moreover, you stated at the press briefing on June 13, As a practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred ground to me when we talk about this. I don’t think it should have anything to do with politics.
With this statement, you make a mockery of the Catholic faith and of the tens of millions of Americans who consider themselves “practicing and respectful Catholics” and who find the killing of children — whether inside or outside the womb — reprehensible.
You speak here of Catholic faith as if it is supposed to hide us from reality instead of lead us to face reality, as if it is supposed to confuse basic moral truths instead of clarify them, and as if it is supposed to help us escape the hard moral questions of life rather than help us confront them.
Whatever Catholic faith you claim to respect and practice, it is not the faith that the Catholic Church teaches.
And I speak for countless Catholics when I say that it’s time for you to stop speaking as if it were.
Abortion is not sacred ground; it is sacrilegious ground. To imagine God giving the slightest approval to an act that dismembers a child he created is offensive to both faith and reason.
And to say that a question about the difference between a legal medical procedure and murder should not “have anything to do with politics” reveals a profound failure to understand your own political responsibilities, which start with the duty to secure the God-given right to life of every citizen.
Mrs. Pelosi, for decades you have gotten away with betraying and misrepresenting the Catholic faith as well as the responsibilities of public office.
We have had enough of it. Either exercise your duties as a public servant and a Catholic, or have the honesty to formally renounce them.
Fr. Frank Pavone National Director, Priests for Life
Tic tock…tick…tock…the noise can be deafening even to someone who has lost more than half his hearing ability.
I can feel my internal clock, ticking away the seconds of my life.
During my whole life I seem to have been obsessed by time and its passage.
Think of how many expressions fill our lexicon with pithy meaning about time.
Time is running out.
In the nick of time.
It is just a matter of time.
Time on my hands.
It’s about time
The time of your life.
How many working mothers speak of quality time with their children?
Time is a wasting, as my dad used to say.
Ecclesiastes 3 is largest reservoir for wise statements about time.
It says that there is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens:
A time to be born and a time to die,
a time to plant and a time to uproot,
a time to kill and a time to heal,
a time to tear down and a time to build,
a time to weep and a time to laugh,
a time to mourn and a time to dance,
a time to scatter stones and a time to gather them,
a time to embrace and a time to refrain from embracing,
a time to search and a time to give up,
a time to keep and a time to throw away,
a time to tear and a time to mend,
a time to be silent and a time to speak,
a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.
When I was little I always had too much time on my hands.
The hours could not go fast enough!
I wanted the time to fly faster so that I could be older…be on my own…free to marry… and have a family.
I remember the eight years in grade school.
I can still see the clock on the wall.
The second-hand seemed to be operating in slow motion.
It took an hour for a few minutes to pass in my childish perception.
I think my whole life has been ruled by time and its keepers.
My mother always wanted me home at a certain hour and was anxious if I was even a minute or two late.
Even as a grandfather it upsets me to be even a minute late for a show, a reservation or a doctor’s appointment.
I am like the rabbit in Alice in Wonderland, whose nervous refrain was I ‘m late…for a very important date.
In fact I was and am still are several minutes early for all of the above.
I have spent about a third of my waking hours, in offices with ten-year old magazine for company waiting for others–doctors, and dentists,or on the street corners for friends. who are often 20-45 minutes late.
Maybe that is why one of my few indulgences is watches.
I must have 35 watches, 33 of which run on batteries.
I have at least seven “dead” watches in my drawer at any given time.
I like to rotate them so that I may wear three different watches every day.
Maybe that is why I love baseball so much because it is one of the few games that is never over until it’s over.
I can sit and visit with friends or just take in the action slowly and even relax.
I discussed baseball’s timelessness with Gene Shalit on the NBC Today Show in 1974 during three of my 15 minutes of fame.
He brought up golf as being another sport that is theoretically without a clock and that is golf.
Maybe that’s why I hate golf.
I was never any good at it, mostly because my lack of practice and “mastery” of the many different clubs or “sticks” as my late aunt used to call them.
But it was mostly because I never have had the temperament for the game. There was too much waiting!
I remember one time being so frustrated by a foursome dallying on the green ahead of me that I muffed a 2-wood shot that I know would have landed on the green.
That has happened more than once.
Unfortunately baseball does not have the same thrill for me any more–maybe because it is t is becoming interminably slow.
There are too many pitching changes.
Most pitchers run long counts.
They seem afraid to pitch the ball.
I used to thing that my presence at all nine innings of any game had some cosmic significance.
I felt that if I left the game early and the flow of the game changed dramatically, somehow it wouldn’t count.
I gave that idea up a long time ago.
In fact now I go to so many games, I put my own clock on it or limit myself to six or seven innings.
And I will not stay for rain-delays during night games because my relaxation and sleeping habits are so inborn that it would throw the rhythms of my life out the window.
When I watch games or anything on TV I can not waste my time on commercials…unless I know them to be entertaining.
I have worn out three remotes and two thumbs, surfing the multi channels that mostly bore me.
That’s why there is nothing like a movie that will really engage me so that I have no concept of time.
In fact the best moments of my life have been off the clock…that is when I had no idea how late or how long I was occupied with friends, family or just smelling the roses.
My late Uncle Al had the right idea about time.
He enjoyed his retirement more than anyone else I have known.
He had worked long and hard as an insurance adjuster for Equitable Life for many years and when he was not on the clock, he did all the wonderful things he had to deny himself for many years–he read many books, played tennis and took vacations with his lovely wife, the Amazing Grace as he lovingly called my aunt.
I will always treasure the time I got spend with him as my elderly parents declined in the early 1980s.
Uncle Al lived the full life until his time ran out.
Grace had developed Alzheimer’s before she was 70 and Al went a little nuts in the nursing home, as his dark memories of the war in the Pacific haunted him to his grave.
So now as I prepare for the conclusion of my 70 year–my seventh decade in September on this earth, I try to look past that and prepare for an eternity without clock, watches or even sun dials.
One of the attractive features of an eternity of bliss is there is no time.
Time implies deadlines, responsibilities and self-reminders that everyone’s time is running out…some faster than others.
I just saw the movie Gettysburg with Martin Sheen as General Robert E. Lee.
In one great scene Sheen had to chastise one of his generals. He cut him off in mid sentence several times, telling him…there is no time…no time!
I think that is what Bernard Shaw meant when he said that youth was wasted on the young.
I wonder what it may be like to just “be” and not have to worry about any of the above?
I will miss my watches but then again I will never need them again or any of my clothes or possessions that have so tied me to a present moment that I could never really enjoy.
This is true because I was always looking ahead, sometimes in fear and trepidation for the next moment in time.
I know this is a very sad and even painful admission but it is part of what has made my life and the fact that I even recognize it is a purifying step in the right direction.
Time has been the bane of my existence in many ways.
I blame no one but the fear within.
I know when I die I will shed all the ties of time and all the fears that come with it.
I hope to use what time I have left in preparing for a world without clocks.
That’s what I want to do. That’s where I really want to be. I hope and pray it will be my final destiny.
The media tells us we are on the brink of a historic point in our immigration policies.
Dozens of Republicans are working feverishly to concoct a bill, replete with many amendments that will reform a policy that is nearly as cumbersome and as ineffective as our tax code.
Don’t you just love it when bromides, such as change and reform are tossed around like the food in Animal House?
These words ar to e often used interchangeable, which to me is just another open conspiracy, designed to pull more wool over the eyes of the average American citizen, who cares little for the fine print of politics.
What they really mean is that things are going to change drastically or in the case of immigration reform they are going to remain exactly the same.
Nothing is ever reformed to any real degree in politics.
Rush Limbaugh opened millions of eyes in a recent program when he pulled the covers off another lie our government has told us.
Most Republicans want our immigration policies the way they are.
They don’t want reform.
Most American businessmen want cheap labor, even though it makes a mockery of American law.
The unions have been perplexed by this because cheap foreign labor is no good for their high wages.
But now they are on board because Obama and his cronies because they have been told that 70-80% of these illegals will vote Democrat and that will be oh so good for them.
Since they don’t want to upset their federal meal ticket, those union workers, who still have jobs throw their support behind something called amnesty.
In real English amnesty means that whatever immigration laws someone has broken, they can jump to the head of the line–ahead of those who have followed the rules and obeyed the country’s laws.
What does that tell you about our equal protection laws?
But why am I not surprised?
This administration has made it a rule to enforce ONLY those laws that help the Democratic agenda and reward those who have bellied up to the campaign donation bar so that the Democrats can maintain their power and control over the rest of us.
No administration has been more flagrant in its abuse of power than the Obama administration.
It is the Chicago school of corruption that now rules America.
Republicans like the charismatic Marco Rubio, the chameleon Lindsey Graham, who chastises the isolationists in his own party and even the dutiful Paul Ryan reflect not the tradition of our American heritage but the progressivism of the Republican Roosevelt.
As I have written before, it was Teddy Roosevelt and his patrician-oriented liberalism that had infiltrated the Republican Party around the turn of the century with its chimerical sense of reform, entitlement and duty.
These erstwhile conservatives are selling out to the political demands of the party. No matter how many amendments they attach and no matter how many promises the Obama administration and the Democrats make, there never will be any enforcement of their concerns for borders control
According to Limbaugh enough border security laws are already on the books.
They just never get enforced.
So do not be surprised when after all the Republican cheering, back-slapping and high-fiving is over that nothing will have changed.
In 1986 when there were just three million illegals, not the 11-15 million on the table now, Senator Teddy Kennedy promised that if the Republicans granted amnesty to them, the problem would be solved forever.
I never can understand why these Republican Charlie Browns continue to believe their Democratic Lucys and attempt to kick the ball.
The Democrats pull the ball away each and every time.
There will be no cause for celebration.
So cork the champagne bottle, the borders will not be any more secure than they are today.
There still will be violent assaults on the citizens of Arizona, New Mexico and California.
And while I am on immigration, how about the Catholic Church’s role in this?
According to Donald Kerwin in the Catholic Legal Immigration Network Cardinal Roger Mahony electrified the US immigration reform debate by announcing on March 1, 2006 (Ash Wednesday), that he would instruct archdiocesan priests and lay Catholics to ignore provisions in a House-passed ‘enforcement only’ bill (H.R. 4437) — were they to pass — that would make it a crime to assist unauthorized immigrants.
Since then, the Catholic Church has played a central role in the immigrant-led protests that have swept the country.
In many localities the church has encouraged parishioners to participate in the protests, offered bishops and priests as speakers, and served as an interlocutor for its newcomer members before Congress and in other public forums.
It has only been Amnesty Internal’s support of abortion rights that has had the church cancel its support for this extremist organization.
But according to Kerwin, the Catholic Church in the United States does not support open borders, illegal immigration, or an ‘amnesty’ that would grant legal status to all unauthorized immigrants. It believes nations have a legitimate responsibility to promote the common good by denying admission to certain migrants and by regulating the flow of all those who are seeking to enter.
I am not certain that is what the majority of Catholic priests are preaching.
Sure I agree that their has to be reform of a broken and ineffective system but that will happen when everyone is on the same page.
For some internal reason i can only speculate about, the Democratic Party does not seem to want to change things for the public benefit.
And lets face it, there never will be any moral reform of immigration unless the Mexican government complies.
I doubt if that will ever happen.
They are always looking for the political wedge that they can drive through the heart of all opposition to their never-ending quest for power.
Unfortunately the millions of suffering illegals are mere footballs in the hands of their Lucys.
The longer I watch and listen to all the debates, explanations and volumes of information that have been tossed around on the radio and TV new shows about the Obama scandals, I am convinced that the United States has become ungovernable.
By that I mean that our system of democracy has run into irrepressible forces that have derailed it from its governing framework.
The evolution of this power shift goes back to the Roosevelt Republican, who initiated the shift to the left within his Republican Party.
It was accelerated during the eight years the Clinton administration when virtually all due respect for the Constitution evaporated.
During the low-minded days when President Bill was caught, not just with his zipper down but spilling his seed on Monica’s blue dress, the country, protected by a defensive mainstream press, basically looked the other way.
As a result Clinton survived the turmoil to lead the country farther astray for the final years of his reign.
He was a power-clinger, unlike any other president in history–until now!
The only political figures their league, were the country’s second vice-president, Aaron Burr, who would have sold the country out to save his political power and Edmund Stanton whose relationship with President Andrew Johnson led to the latter’s impeachment and almost removal from office.
Only the courage of a Kansas senator, Edmund Ross, who cast the decive vote against impeachment whom John Kennedy included in his award-winning book, Profiles in Courage, saved the first Johnson from being removed from office.
Like Burr and Stanton, who had to be literally removed from his office as the Secretary of War, Clinton, in an act of sheer unrepentant bravado refused to take the honorable road Richard Nixon had taken in 1974 and resign.
No, Clinton made the country suffer through two Congressional trials, where he was impeached like Johnson but not convicted.
The main difference was that Johnson had been guilty of no wrong and Clinton had lied under oath.
Maintaining his power is the only mantra that rang true for Clinton then and in today’s circus atmosphere in D. C.,…especially if one is a Democrat.
President Obama seems to have inherited the stain of Clinton.
He is facing revelations of at least three full-blown abuses of executive power that threaten our democratic form of government.
By all systems of ethics and morality his Attorney-General Eric Holder should be past history.
Or even in jai!
During his four and half years at the helm of the Justice Department Holder has made a mockery of the rule of law and the equal protection clause.
I merely need to mention the Black Panthers and Fast and Furious to give two reasons why he should have already resigned.
The wiretapping of the AP offices, and the persecution of an entire News network, the Fox News Channel is beyond the pale of the Democrats’ dirty tricks.
His verbal gymnastics, with regard to James Rosen, by all standards constituted at worst –perjury and at best a misleading of the court system and the United States Congress.
If we were still a nation of laws, criminal charges would now be pending against this man who has repeatedly smeared his office, the Obama presidency (as if that were possible) and the United States government.
But he won’t leave!
If the Republicans can force his resignation, you can count on his reappearance in some other sensitive government like Susan Rice.
Ms. Rice was forced out of her United Nations position and was recently named as the head of Obama’s National Security team.
This was the woman who misdirected the world for well over two weeks after our Libyan embassy was attacked on 9/11 of last year and our ambassador and three cohorts assassinated.
Rice was a key player in the cover-up that played out thousands of miles away in Benghazi.
She not only protected her president but also the presidential future of Hilary Clinton, whose cowardly and imperious avoidance of any responsibility for the attack defiantly ripped the scab off five years of Obama malfeasance and corrupt practices.
What does it matter she screamed rhetorically at her Republican inquisitors!
To millions of true Americans and the families of the four dead American government workers, including two military men, it matters a great deal.
To liberals who use human beings like so much tissue paper, apparently not much at all.
Benghazi is comparable to Watergate…except that nobody died in Watergate.
People went to jail over a third-rate burglary.
Someone should be fired or maybe even in jail for this!
And why did the Watergate perpetrators, like Chuck Colson, serve time ?
Because they put personal power over country.
The Republican leadership, like Senator Barry Goldwater got Nixon to put the country first.
With the Obama administration, the maintenance of power is supreme.
And lastly there is there is I.R.S., which has been politicized like never before.
And this is the same organization that will enforce ObamaCare!
They used their considerable power to harass, threaten and dissaude several conservative and pro-life groups from being active in the last election.
These three scandals have, despite all the political media caterwauling, one thing in common.
And that was to give President Obama a second term.
All of these crimes and scandals were intimately related to the 2012 election.
Holder’s silencing of the opposing media sent a message to journalists—support us or run the risk of feeling our federal bite.
The I.R.S. scandal was designed to take out the Tea Party organizations, just as a linebacker might try to cripple the other team’s quarterback, so as to help his team win the game.
Many conservatives had wondered during the election where were those patriotic guys who had turned the tides in 2010?
The Tea Party was conspicuous in the last election by their lack of visibility.
Now we know why–they were fighting the I.R.S. for their political lives.
The battle effectively neutralized their participation in the presidential election.
And Benghazi–how was that politicized?
The late night attacks on the American embassy gave bloody lie that Osama was dead and Al Ouida is on the run!
The attack unraveled Obama’s entire Middle Eastern policy.
To buy time to salvage the election they contrived the false story of some rouge video, entitled The Innocence of Muslims had incited the attacks.
The Obama administration used the video seen and heard around the White House but nowhere else to cover their tracks until after the election.
As for the 14-minute video, produced by Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a Coptic Christian, who admits to his role.
The supposed mastermind is quite possibly a fictitious person, named Sam Bacile.
Nakoula has wound up in jail without bail, not because of his role in the video but because of some prior charges of bank fraud.
The Obama administration lied for two weeks about the video’s importance.
People have blamed her on this Benghazi controversy when like a good nazi she was just following her orders.
There you have it–the attacks on the media, Benghazi defense and the I.R.S. assault.
These were well-organized criminal assaults that all conspired to fix an election in the worst sense of the word.
And the American people will pay for it for generations.
And now that she is bunkered down in the White House, there is little chance that she will tell us just who ordered her to lie to the world.
How come many are not surprised by the antics of the #1 Community Organizer in history..and from Chicago to boot, the early capital of America’s organized crime.
One need just read Michelle Malkin’s 2009 book, A Culture of Corruption to fathom this idea.
By now the adorable petite woman with the excitable personality should have enough material for its sequel…the Chicago Mob in the White House.
As for Obama, forget about blaming this on anyone named Bush.
It would be wiser to blame it all on Bill Clinton and Monica’s stained blue dress.