Until not too long ago, it has been customary for a newborn Catholic to receive the name of a saint.
That saint was supposed to guide and watch over that child through his or her life.
I am named after Saint William.
There are many Joseph’s, Mary’s, John’s, Patrick’s and so on from my generation.
When my grandson Tyler was born nearly 15 years ago, I remember the deacon who baptized him saying that he hoped that Tyler would be the first Saint Tyler.
We lost Rosie our very good friend of 35 years last week.
And while she was apparently named after Saint Rose of LIma, no one I know ever called her Rose.
To all of us who loved her, she was just Rosie.
Rosie was the matriarch of a very large Irish family that included her six children and 19 grandchildren.
He husband and most of their kids and a few of the grandchildren were members of that invisible clan of fighting Irish from the University of Notre Dame.
The breath of Ireland was always on them and permeated their family life.
Coupled with their Catholic faith, it was their Irish heritage that gave joie de vivre to their family life.
When Rosie died that family spirit kicked in like nothing I had ever seen.
She had said all her goodbyes, received the last rites of her faith and from what I understand, did not really die but merely faded away.
While her cancer did afford them the time to prepare for her death with individual visitations, smiles, some laughter and in private a good deal of tears, when the day finally arrived the grandchildren and their parents had to gather from all over the country from college, spring break, work and family obligations.
They all made it in time to pay their deep respects to the woman who gave life to each and every one of them.
We should all die as she did, surrounded by family in grace.
Her funeral was a paragon of family values, wrapped in a liturgical service that underscored what it means to be a child of God.
Virtually each member of the family from the youngest grandchild to her oldest son had some important role to play in her requiem Mass.
While it lacked the frivolity of an Irish wake, the celebrant made up for it in a personalized homily that captured Rosie’s persona in words, stories and his infectious smile.
While all the family homage and friendly respect demonstrated how much she was loved and missed, it did not hold a candle to what made her a veritable saint.
We live a naievesociety that falsely assumes that everyone who dies immediately enters the Pearly Gates and plays golf with St. Peter or talks fashion with the Blessed Mother.
Most modern notions of heaven are cartoonish or sophomoric.
Like most popular notions of Heaven, this is a myth that puts a protective bandage over truth and reality.
It is the polar opposite of the heresy of the early 20th century that presumed all bad or unpopular people immediately went to Hell.
These are both false judgments and should be avoided at all costs.
Both attitudes are the result of superstition, ignorance and self-deception.
The Catholic Church teaches that before the faithful can see God in Heaven, their souls must be pure as the whitened snow.
For most of us that requires a purging in what the Church calls Purgatory.
I believe this teaching is a bit murky and to capture its essence, I attempted two plays these past couple years.
The first one was called For the Love of Dickens.
It took place on a New York City subway.
It centered around boredom as a vehicle for self-knowledge and purefication.
It didn’t work.
I only wrote three scenes of A Heavenly Touch, which didn’t seem to work either.
I attempted to transcend the subway by making a massage spa the vehicle for purefication.
I reasoned that a good therapist can rub away, not only one’s pains and anxieties but just maybe the stains of years of sin and guilt.
I seriously doubt that Rosie will have to experience Purgatory in any manner, shape or form.
Maybe God will use one of my plays to do just that in the next life.
What makes for sainthood is the purefying mercy of the Cross of Christ.
The Bible is fairly explicit that unless we pick up and carry our crosses daily…or maybe help others, like Simon of Cyrene carry theirs, we will not become saints…that is get into Heaven.
Rosie was a short, small woman who developed very broad shoulders over the last 15 years or more of her life in carrying her very heavy cross.
She suffered greatly from rheumatoid arthritis, a crippling, pernicious disease that made her down 15-20 pills, each and every day.
While her pain and suffering was excruciating, she never lost her cherubic smile.
She was one of a short list of people I have seen or known, like Mother Teresa, and Joe Garagiola that could light up a room just by entering it.
Her fatal cancer was in a way a blessing because it eventually freed her from the shackles of pain that dominated her for so many years.
Her husband told us that a peaceful calm came over her the last few weeks, even after she stopped taking her arthritis medication.
I submit that this is the stuff of sainthood.
Mother Teresa was once asked by a novice what she needed to do to become a saint.
She quipped that she should die soon because Pope John Paul II was canonizing just about everybody.
Will the church ever recognize Rosie as such?
Most likely not but had John Paul II still been pope, her odds would have shot out tremendously.
Most of us who gave Rosie her well-deserved send-off rightfully assume that her suffering was her crown of thorns that she wore patiently, modestly and with firm religious conviction.
I can say without hesitation, like my sainted mother who had Alzheimer’s for 19 years, Rosie is experiencing the Beatific Vision right now.
Most of us who remain worry more about her husband who has to face a 50-year void in his life for which he only had a few short weeks to prepare.
I think I know what he is going to do to alleviate his grief.
He is going to get down on his knees, bow his head and pray to the first Saint Rosie.
First there was Vlad the Impaler!
Then there was Ivan the Terrible!
Now there is Barack the Tyrant!
The first trait of a tyrant is his ability to lie.
Obama has become the personification of a Pinocchio stick figure that lies and lies until his nose assumes the distance of a vaulter’s pole.
He lies about what he has accomplished during his three plus years as the nation’s president.
He lies about his Republican opposition to the extent of a defamation of character and serious calumny.
He lies about health care.
Do you really think you will be able to keep your same doctor if ObamaCare stifles the Court and the will of most of the people?
He lies about oil.
Like his predecessor in truth-destruction, Bill Clinton Obama brags about how much he has done as president and how hard he works.
I have found that most people that brag about their accomplishments have actually done very little of value..
His mantra has been Blame Bush.
He reminds me of the old Joe E. Brown movie character adapted from the pen of Ring Lardner’s, Alibi Ike.
He thought himself the world’s greatest baseball players but when he failed to produce, he had an excuse.
Psychologists will say his mendacity just clouds his own ineptitude.
He also reminds me of the high-minded Robert Redford character in the movie, the Candidate that after winning a Senate seat, said to his chief aide, What do we do now?
For over three years, President Obama has appeared, relentlessly clueless.
With the nation’s economy stagnating he has time to fill out, not just a bracket for the NCAA’s men’s teams but also for the women as well.
That is real chutzpah in the face of a looming repeat of a financial crisis unless, he learns how to stop spending money the country does not have.
Even worse is the fact that this tyrant has deliberately and methodically divided this nation on race, economics, religion and even sociology more than any president since Franklin Roosevelt.
His unnecessary intervention in the neighborhood killing of black Florida teenager, Trayvon Martin has turned the nation’s sympatheterati into dressing like authentic hoodlums.
Now the New Black Panthers, a protected species of the Justice Department has put an NFL bounty of one million dollars on George Zimmerman, the Florida shooter.
This is more ominous than anything the New Orleans defense could muster.
I expect Bill Belechick of New England to start wearing sweaters next football season to distance himself from this situation.
The hoodie is the usual attire of a bum.
It also is a veiled reference to being a hoodlum, which makes one think of Chicago politics and the Democratic machine.
Maybe that is the significance of the Obaman intervention, a pure form of synchronicity.
This would be bad enough if it were for his apparent inner need to personify the imperial presidency.
I know this is all starting to sound like a bad Russian novel with unpronounceable names, multi-subplots and a depressing ending.
The Wall Street Journal‘s recent half-page editorial laid the basis for his usurpation of constitutional power and his desire to assume the complete plenary powers of the state.
The Supreme Court will be hearing arguments on the jewel in Obama’s imperial crown–his health care bill, which will provide all Americans with health insurance but little care.
Americans will be equal in our slavery rather than unequal in our freedom.
That is a liberal tenet of faith.
The White House is already organizing its forces of intimidation and coercion on the Court.
A memo from a senior official in the Obama Administration was leaked recently.
It revealed that they are linking forces with liberal advocacy groups to pressure the Court.
The White House is also organizing demonstrations during the proceedings, including a prayerful witness encircling the Supreme Court.
The Executive Branch is supposed to speak through its Solicitor General, not hooded mobs in the street.
This just intensifies Obama’s disrespect for our constitutional form of government.
Like the Catholic Church it is one of the many obstacles in his imperial path.
Once that happens, the American Republic will disappear and the president or dictator then could easily establish martial law and extend his reign to a lifetime of hurt for the American people.
The case hinges on the Commerce Clause, which has always been about commercial and economic transactions, not about people who refuse to make them.
But for the first time in history, the Obama government wants to mandate all the American people to buy something millions feel they don’t need or even want.
This distinction is crucial.
If he can do it with health insurance, he can do it with automobiles and every other product under the sun.
Everyone will be driving a GM Volt, which is as good as the Russian Lada was.
As the WSJ says, the government is claiming it can create commerce so it has something to regulate.
This is another way of describing plenary police powers–regulations of private behavior to advance order and welfare.
The only two exceptions are for jury duty and military conscription.
The latter was eliminated in the 1970s by President Nixon.
The axiom with this has been…until now…presidents can make rules for actions and objects, while states can make rules for people.
Obama is in serious violation of this long-term principle.
ObamaCare requires a vision of the Commerce Clause that is so broad that it would erase dual sovereignty and extend the new reach of federal police powers into every sphere of what used to be private freedom.
This is the most salient issue here.
Contrary to what the Catholic Church thinks, this is about much more than religious freedom.
I think it has been the real reason behind his Health Care plan.
According to commentator Rush Limbaugh, this is a siege on the Constitution.
Once it is neutered they can consolidate their powers at record speeds.
In a past essay I briefly alluded to Obama’s second inaugural address from a balcony.
The balcony I had in mind is reminiscent of the one our tour bus drove by in Rome in 2006.
It was the same one that El Duce addressed his fascist supporters over 85 years ago.
Have I been smoking too much algae or is this what our president has in store for us after his re-election?
Is this our future?.
To answer Sinclair Lewis rhetorical question of 80 years ago.
Yes, it can happen here!!!
Here is another of my shameless self-promotions. My last book, The Scorpion and the Frog: A Natural Conspiracy Theory is now an e-book. (whatever that means.) http://bookstore.xlibris.com/Products/SKU-0025019001/The-Scorpion-and-the-Frog-A-Natural-Conspiracy.aspx.
Please check it out. BB For the real thing write me @ firstname.lastname@example.org.
I never got too upset over my grades at Holy Cross.
For the most part I hovered around a B, seldom cracking the rarefied air of A’s and B+’s.
That was even when the professors deliberately inflated our grades in junior year to keep us out of Vietnam.
A poker hand will illustrate my senior year.
During the first semester I had an academic straight——A, B+, B, C+ and a C. That averages to an even B.
The last semester of my college career, I had five of a kind—-you guessed it—-all B’s.
Of all the myriad of tests I took over those four years, there is just one grade that still frosts my pancakes.
That was a paper I wrote for our sophomore Rhetoric class in 1963.
The prof’s name was Father Madden and the question he posed to us—Was the Catholic Church a Democratic Institution?
After some thinking and a little research I argued that the Catholic Church was not a democratic institution for all the obvious reasons.
Catholics do not elect any of their leaders, nor do they have much say so about doctrinal questions.
The pope is their shepherd and they are his sheep.
As a cradle Catholic I have no qualms with that structure, given its religious nature.
The pope is infallible in certain limited occasions when speaking ex cathedra in questions of faith and morals.
To my knowledge this has happened only two or three times and two of them had to do with the Blessed Mother of Jesus. I have no trouble with this at all.
So when I got my grade–a D I was totally shocked.
After nearly 50 years of retrospect, perhaps my bad grade was attributable to my misunderstanding what he meant by democratic?
I was thinking democracy and the Greeks and he was thinking Kennedy and Johnson.
This has been a realization that was very late in coming.
Many Catholic priests and laymen I have encountered over the years had been completely enamoured with the presidency and personality of Franklin Roosevelt, the nation’s first great class warrior.
Despite his patrician heritage, FDR demonized the malefactors of wealth and at one time wanted to tax a 100% of the income above $25,000 a year.
That makes the current president sound almost conservative by comparison.
The Democratic Party under Roosevelt also had done a great deal to foster unionism and big labor in America.
These thugs are now an integral part of the Obama militia.
Roosevelt liked to deal in collectives blocks–I almost said Soviet–because he could control his base better that way. Unions were perfect organizations for this purpose.
People were sheep to him and he had a number of underlings, such as the Marxist Harry Hopkins, who knew how to wield the shepherd’s staff.
All Catholics had to do was substitute the Great White Father for their pope.
Millions of Catholic felt that he was their modern savior who had rescued them from the Depression that in reality he had extended and intensified.
Roosevelt’s false pretenses towards the poor also resonated well with these Catholics.
When Roosevelt defeated oppression all over the world, almost single-handed, his status was elevated to not quite saint but definitely legend.
This erroneous Roseveltian legacy was handed down from father to son and so on for several generations just like being a Dodger, a Yankee or even a St. Louis Brown was passed on as part of a father’s legacy.
This analysis goes a long way to explain the Catholic Church’s continued infatuation with our current president, despite his overt anti-Catholicism that seems to permeate his political agenda.
While the Catholic pontiff does have some protection from error, it does not cover his bishops, especially when the subject is economics, wealth and greed.
President Obama has played the same greed card that his ideological mentor played over 80 years ago.
And it still works!
Millions of Catholics are quick to demonize and even hate the very people whose riches and wealth helps to support their churches and the poor.
But Church leaders do have their principles.
They value the freedom to teach and practice the faith that the president demeans and attacks.
The proverbial straw was reached when he underlined his mandate that the Church had to pay for many things that the Church has consistently condemned– oral contraceptives, the morning after pill and even sterilizations.
This assault was a calculated risk in the president’s re-election strategy of dividing the Catholic Church.
He knew that millions of women, including many Catholic women have availed themselves of these proscribed pills and procedures.
Like the phony war in 1940, Obama had created the war on women that did not exists, hoping to pit millions of American women against a celibate priesthood that was still looking over its collective shoulder because of the infamous homosexual scandal that rocked its very foundation the last 15 years.
This was ironic because the Church had been on board for virtually every part of the autocratic health care bill that not only threatened freedom but also lives.
Now that the Church’s oxen have been gorged, they have awakened from their docile acceptance of the autocratic intrusion of ObamaCare into the of millions of Americans–all in the name of the poor and downtrodden.
Their awakening has not restored my faith in their leadership against this most adroit disciple of atheist Saul Alinsky.
Sadly the bishops have missed the larger issue and that is freedom...not just religious freedom but the human freedom to choose the way they wish to live.
For 80 years Democratic politicians and some Republicans have been gradually raising the temperature on the waters of American life to the extent that we have become a nation of frogs and not human beings.
It is also ironic that the Catholic Church does not support human freedom more than it does.
Many of its leaders seem drawn toward the utopian promises of Karl Marx more than the prophetic statements of Jesus.
Where would the Catholic Church be without man’s free will?
It is a central teaching because without it, there is no fall of man and therefore no sin.
Without sin, there is no need for a Redeemer.
If there were no Redeemer, there would be no Jesus and no Catholic Church.
But many Catholic leaders seemed perplexed by free markets and freedom of conscience.
When I use those terms, I use them in strictest accord with Catholic teachings on individual responsibility.
For example freedom does not mean the license to kill the unborn or steal from your neighbor.
All freedoms are tempered by the Seven Deadly Sins and the 10 Commandments.
That’s what morality is all about.
So as we prepare for the dog days of politics in August and September and see the Catholic Church in the middle of the struggle, it would be wise to relate to the uninformed all the dynamics that will be unfolding before our very eyes during the most important year in American history since maybe.
2012 will be not remembered for any Mayan prophecy but for what the American voters decided their future to be.
Were he alive, I wonder what Father Madden would have to say about this paper.
I know that my title sounds a good deal like a statement from the Green Movement, which thinks that humanity, or at least too many humans leaving their dirty carbon footprints all over the globe makes human beings comparable to a disease or even a plague.
Of course I assume the green people are human and not little men from Mars and carbon-joggers themselves.
Are these self-hating environmentalists or do they have an Obamian exemption from their own thinking?
This sounds very liberal to me.
I am writing more about the moral pandemic that is transmitted to every human being that is fortunate to dodge the green suction machine at birth.
Theologians have filled large libraries with theories and commentaries on man and his and her fallen nature.
Ironically it is many of the same kind of greens above that would disagree.
They like to promote the view that man is basically good by nature…except when he is driving a gas-guzzler or having a fetus.
they much prefer Jean Jacques Rousseau’s noble savage.
The tension between fallen man and Rousseau’s noble savage is the same tension that divides the sides in the modern culture war.
In political terms, it explains the major differences between conservatism and liberalism.
The term the right uses for fallen human nature is usually concupiscence.
It is a loaded term that most people think refers to lust and unmarried sexual relationships.
Pope John Paul II created quite a stir in 1979 when he said in one of his sermons on his revolutionary thinking that even married men should not lust after their own wives, let alone the wives of others.
What meant by that was that even married men should not treat their wives as merely sex objects but should learn the meaning of the spousal meaning of the body, which he defined as a mutual openness and giving of one to the other that recognized the subjective personhood of the other.
It has a much broader calculus.
Concupiscence applies to all aspects of human endeavor.
It is that special force in human relationships that seeks to spoil the good that people want to do but feel compelled by inner feelings to follow the dictates of anger, bodily urges and past slights or injuries.
This the condition that many people often excuse by saying well it is just human or even natural to do what they do.
St. Paul felt it when he pleaded with God to help him to attain the good that he wanted, not the evil he did.
Cartoon character Charlie Brown felt its inner tug-of-war.
I have felt that same tug virtually every day of my life.
In the 1970s, comedian Flip Wilson did a female character, Geraldine who often defended her inappropriate behavior by saying, the devil made me do that!
Catholic philosopher and humorist, G. K. Chesterton said it was the one dogma in Catholic teaching that did not have to be proven.
One need only pick up a newspaper.
The 10 Commandments and or the Seven Deadly Sins are all the proof one needs to recognize the depth and breadth of the inner urge to sin, do wrong or even evil.
It is the same weakness that caused Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York to shake his head in bewilderment when President Obama went back on a promise he never intended to keep in the first place.
How could he trust a man such as Obama?
Did he see him as Rousseau’s perfect noble savage?
Or should he listened to the wisdom of Ronald Reagan, who said trust but verify or we might say get it in writing.
It is also reminiscent of Heraclitus‘ statement that if one put a foot in the river or stream the stream would change every second but it would still be the same river.
This is what Charles Darwin or the Progressive School of 19th century historians and the Whig Theory of change could not understand.
While circumstances, accidentals, like height and weight and even intelligence, may evolve over time, the one constant that never changes, nor will it ever change is man’s human nature.
As long as we are alive, we will always have that capacity to do harm and maybe some evil.
Our intellect rationalizes often enable us to do that so we can sleep at nights.
Study German history in the Nazi period and you will easily understand this.
Politicians today are great at rationalizations, especially those in the Democratic Party.
They can rationalize killing millions of unborn children as a good thing that is justified because of freedom of conscience, women’s rights or health and the pressures of the environment.
Presumably they sleep well at night or maybe they just drink a lot to ease their pain.
Religion and self-disciple are the best ways to ease and mollify the extreme effects of the disease of man.
Pope John Paul wrote of the redemption of the body that would allow a return the original nakedness of the Garden when Adam and Eve could look at each other without lust or bad feeling.
They would see in their respective bodies the Imagio Dei and feel nothing love and respect.
That was until the snake showed up and made human history possible.
Mass, prayer, the sacraments are all tools for Catholics that can provide an antidote to concupiscence that will make our lives more loving and more enjoyable.
As a result a baby’s innocent smile, a party with friends, or even the geometric sway of a beautiful woman will make us think of God’s love and the greater joys that await us.
It is possible!
Five mo’ years of this? Really!
I guess President Obama has the same creative sense with the United States Constitution that he does with United States geography.
I believe in 2008 he talked about visiting all 53 American states during his campaign.
With regard to his knowledge of our Constitution, he seems to forget that when he was elected our 44th president, he would sometimes have to consider the wishes of the other parties, especially when they controlled at least one House of government.
When that actually happened in 2010 and his party was thoroughly rejected at the polls, he never backed down from his boast in 2009, I won the election.
There is a lot of Frank in him!
He proceeded to ignore Republican objections by offering edicts, executive orders and pure dictates.
I guess we should be thankful that he did not employ the White House balcony to proclaim his demands.
Since the Democratic loss at the ballot boxes, the president has done nothing more than campaign for his five additional years.
I have to admit this is what he does best.
He is a masterful politician who knows how establish coalitions that pit one segment of America against another.
For most of the last three years, his mantra has been for the wealthy to pay their fair share, which he loosely defined as a lot more than they were paying now.
Of course he knows that the top 10% already pays a huge disproportion of the taxes collected while nearly half of Americans pay absolutely nothing.
And some of the latter actually pay negative taxes–that is they get a refund or a credit on taxes they never paid.
This certainly flies in the face of any American notion of fairness.
Obama wants to soak the so-called rich even more, not for the little revenue their new taxes would actually bring but so that he can redistribute their money to…not the poor as the Catholic Church naively believes but to Obama’s cronies, such as Warren Buffett and Geoffrey Imelt of GE.
And don’t forget his union buddies who have sullied the reputation and history of unionism in this country with their orange, and purple clad jack-booted tactics of intimidation and violence.
They can no longer stand as the oppressed minority since many of them, especially the public unions live better than the people who pay their salaries–the American taxpayers.
And while all this is going on, what are the Republicans doing?
They are doing their best to destroy any hope we have of making Obama a one-term president by the silly in-fighting, backbiting and bullet-biting.
They have let the president skillfully sidetrack them with the social issues when the only issues that will count in this election are jobs, jobs and more jobs.
In another arena the odious ObamaCare Bill has morphed into a battle for reproductive health.
While my Catholic Church finally got the message of this president’s disdain for the faith and virtually everything its stands for, I fear it will be back to business once the election is over.
Will they close the hospitals and remove themselves from the social arena?
I seriously doubt it–they will probably employ moral constructs, such as the double-effect and insure everyone as demanded by the White House, with the caveat that they don’t intend the evil side of the insurance plan.
And while I am on the matter of birth control…why is it so necessary for women’s health?
What disease or disability does it prevent or fight?
Oh yes I forgot.
Birth control is preventive medicine for the disease of children.
Like little parasites they mysteriously invade the dark watery recesses of a woman’s body and start growing their like a fungus.
I wonder what Charles Darwin would say about the moral progress of the human race.
And the Republicans have fallen for Obama’s bait.
The odds favor that the last man standing will be so damaged that he will all but cede the election to the bad guys.
What they failed to understand is that the sex revolution has trumped the abrogation of religious liberty issues, which are really only for atheists and agnostics.
People of religious faith don’t have much of public leg to stand on.
The church is fighting the battle of the 17th and 18th century.
Frequent copulation now is the issue du jour.
And speaking of frequent copulation, the movement now has a poster girl–a pretty sexual activist with the anomalous name of Sandra Fluke who achieved her Warholian allotment of time this past week.
Poor Rush Limbaugh.
He weighed in with his conservative mindset by trying to reduce Ms. Fluke’s illogical reasoning to its most absurd conclusion and took it on the chin, not only from the left but many of his fellow conservatives.
In our day and age Ms. Fluke’s brazen behavior resulted in society condemning her with the unsavory salutatioins that Rush employed in his monologue.
While slut is a gutter word it is not Rush that is wallowing there.
Rush was dead wrong about the prostitute comment, only because there is no indication that she accepted any money for her activities—in fact she she seems like a real dumb bunny to me for spending $3000 a year to share her favors with one man or maybe 20 men.
You think that they could help her out in that department but then that would make Rush right, wouldn’t it?
This woman is not just a law student.
Every since she set foot on Georgetown’s Catholic campus this sexual activist has been plotting and scheming to get the Catholic Church to renounce one of its most controversial teachings.
Basically she has been a fifth columnist with an agenda and she is using the members of the press to advance her cause to the detriment of my Catholic faith.
She has no right to do that and then act like the innocent little girl she obviously is not.
That was way before political correctness turned American into an amoral society where anything goes and women expose their dirty underwear in public and expect us to applaud her for her honesty and her candor.
The sad scenario is that Ms. Fluke, who thinks herself liberated and a modern woman is little more than one of the millions of sterile bunnies our society has produced for…you guessed it—men!
She must take her daily regimen of birth control so that she is ready for whatever may develop in the bars, the spas or even the back seat of an automobile.
Her love costs HER $3000 a year.
That’s a lot to pay for “free love.”
She sounds like one of those ads for Cialis for men with ED, which is incidentally a real medical condition that most insurance companies will not pay for.
Where is the fairness in that?
Whatever the case it appears that the Democrats have concocted a new issue that might just bring them back to near absolute power–the so-called war on women.
I cannot believe that this happened by accident.
I think Ms. Fluke is working for the Obama government, or at least being used by…you guessed it–more men in the most sinister of ways.
She reminds me of the other great activists of past history–Rosa Parks, who was not just a hard-working woman but an operative for the NAACP.
Her glorified bus ride was actually the third time she had tried to arouse the authorities and with it launch the Civil Rights movement.
The same is true of Betty Friedan, whose misanthropic book, The Feminine Mystique launched the Women’s Movement.
She was an operative from the Marxist Frankfurt School alumni, Herbert Marcuse.
The damage that she did to American marriage, the family and three generations of children is incalculable.
Like Helen of Troy who launched a 1000 ships, after the coming election will we be saying that Sandra Fluke launched a million votes for Obama and friends?
Will Heaven be forced to stand by and watch America drink the rest of its Hemlock?