I have written about Mel Gibson a number of times.
His The Passion of the Christ was probably the finest rendition of the central tenet of the Christian faith, namely the Incarnation where Christ assumed the nature of a human being to open the gates of heaven, which had been closed by man’s fall from grace.
I have enjoyed many of his other movies, including his epic on the Revolutionary War, The Patriot, as well as his Conspiracy Theory, which really captured the aura of truth and paranoia that surrounds most such conspiracy ideas.
There is a constant theme in many of these movies and it is freedom–our innate desire to be unhindered by all unreasonable infringements on our mobility, time, ideas and livelihoods.
From the early 17th century well through the early days of the 20th century, millions of immigrants have emigrated to America in search of a nation that would enhance and permit this kind of personal liberty.
Mel Gibson captured this universal yearning to be free in his film, Braveheart.
This was the story of 13th century Scottish patriot William Wallace, who wound up being hanged on a gibbet, drawn and quartered on a hurdle for his fevered right to be free of English tyranny.
It was not only his genitalia, entrails and limbs that were exposed to public scorn on that steamy August day in 1305 but the notion of all mankind’s yearning to be free from tyranny and servitude.
Along with Andrew Moray he defeated an English army at Stirling Bridge in 1297, and was the Guardian of Scotland serving until his defeat at the Falkirk.
He was later captured and handed over to King Edward I who gruesomely executed him in the public square for high treason against the throne.
The best scene in the movie was when Gibson/Wallace rallied his kilt-clad troops with his heroic charge across their ranks, screaming at the top of his lungs, Freedom…Freedom…Freedom!
The freedom Wallace sought was essentially what Americans wrote in our Declaration of Independence in 1776.
They wanted what all people yearn for–life, liberty and what they called the pursuit of happiness, which was a catch-all for private property, financial success and the freedom to travel uninhabited across our vast continent.
These were their rights just by the fact of their humanity.
However since the dawning of the so-called Progressive Era in the United States that notion of freedom has been unconstitutionally assaulted.
Unlike the founding fathers, these new revolutionaries promised a different kind of right.
Another scene from Braveheart illustrates the innate difference between such natural rights and those rights created by government.
According to British law the royal governor of a principality had the right to have sex with a new bride on her wedding night before she lay with her lawful husband.
It was not a right in the natural sense but a privilege provided by a government that gave an unfair freedom of one human over the body and rights of another.
It was President Woodrow Wilson, the country’s first transformative progressive, and his New Freedom that sought to change the old freedom of the founding fathers and substitute government-granted rights.
Along with abortion rights, the progressives have been tirelessly promoting gay rights, affirmative action, the right to have a job, medical care and so on.
These are all are new rights promised by the Leviathan state that is long on promise and very short of delivery.
But people who benefit from these rights should realize that what the government grants it can just as easily cancel.
Only natural rights cannot be cancelled.
Of course they can be violated as is Obama’s government with regard to his mandates to the Catholic Church that its institutions must provide free birth control insurance.
Liberals detest freedom and man’s free will.
It is the one fly in the basic ointment of the paradise they wise to create here on earth.
Their animus toward other people’s freedom is at the root of their anger and hostility toward conservatives in this country.
Rational individual freedom is the bane of their existence.
It also fuels the paranoia that fuels their mental illness–their fantastic dream that they can make this world into a paradise.
Most people will not shed their freedom for the chains of slavery in a world that cannot exist.
They have to be forced, coerced and dragged to the plantations, gulags, and crematoria that will by nature be the only solution for their failure to heed the progressive will.
But they say we are the ones that are for freedom!
The only kind of freedom they advocate is freedom of behaviors that enslave, not liberate human beings.
This is the fallacy of liberalism!
This is their big lie!
They want people to be free to have sex with anyone or anything they choose.
They want mind-numbing drugs available.
They want pornography on all street corners and for free in the public libraries.
They lobby to make teens free to engage in all the sexual activities their bodies can withstand.
All these have been universal distractions that have clouded the people’s minds, deadened their souls and made them a class of addictive zombies who cannot think, reason or see the noses on their twisted faces.
These people make the best slaves for this kind of New World Order.
Liberals also promise to take care of all their children who must remain dependent on them from cradle to grave.
If anyone should dare try to exercise religious or moral freedom, they will be punished.
The ObamaCare mandates were necessary because no one in his or her right mind would ever freely choose something like universal health care.
It has failed dismally wherever and whenever it has been tried.
That is the insanity of liberalism.
Our freedom is the price of their forced beneficence.
Freedom, the kind William Wallace died for, is what makes America what it is.
Progressives and liberals are heirs of the French Revolution School of dictatorship, oppression and slavery.
They despise this kind of freedom because it is the main obstacle to their tyranny.
Why do they believe in birth control, gun control and in New York City soda and fat control?
New York mayor, Michael Bloomberg is the personification of the Nanny State and a threat to the American political genius.
For some reason liberals like him resent the American essence that had made us the most industrial productive country in the world and the most generous and the most profoundly energetic nation.
Freedom is his enemy.
Freedom is also what makes us distinctively human.
A big government that wants to care for us as if we were all adolescent children is a threat to the freedom to build our lives as we would like them.
Government does not build our lives!
Government is for the lazy, the selfish and those who like to command others what to do.
Other than the Incarnation, the Church’s teachings on freedom and free will are at the heart of its theology and its history.
For without a free will, man could not have sinned and be tossed out of his original paradise.
Without a free will, there would have been no need for an Incarnation or a history of salvation.
A school of atheists, led by Sam Harris have tried to dispute and eliminate any idea of a human free will that can choose good over evil.
They believe we are all Darwinian animals…mere robots who need a powerful elite to tell us what to do, think and how to live.
It is not society that makes some of us good and others bad.
Government seldom motivates us in a positive way.
Freedom has been the engine that has driven our prosperity.
Freedom, not government, has been the fuel that has propelled us since 1776.
But in 2012 we are in serious danger of losing the greatest gift that the Almighty could have bestowed on us.
A recent poll showed that still 43% of the American people believe that freedom has what has made us great.
No other choice was even close.
But we need more people to reflect on our history and our culture and see if it is still freedom that drives us.
Otherwise our freedom will wind up on the gibbet as did William Wallace 800 years ago.
For the obvious reasons, I am glad that the conventions are both over.
I found Tampa to be uplifting but not quite inspiring enough.
What I saw of Charlotte, North Carolina, a city I grew fond of when my son was a student at Belmont-Abbey, which ironically has been fighting the birth-control mandates of ObamaCare for a couple of years already, made me nearly sick to my stomach.
I have never seen a more disreputable collection of people in my life.
That Debbie Wasserman Schultz is absolutely repulsive..another angry woman with an irrational grudge against all the virtues and values that have made this country great.
And Sandra Fluke…what a joke she has become.
She parades her sex life around for all voyeurs to see and then expects us to pay for it while millions look for work and millions give up looking.
Then there was Michelle Obama, who loves her husband for promoting abortion among other things.
They have the nerve to call Todd Akin an extremist!
All he wants to do is save human lives.
The Democrats want to sacrifice the unborn on a false pagan altar of choice.
They are all extremists, especially their elected leader.
The only abortion he met that he didn’t like–was a failed abortion.
And he voted in the Illinois Senate to solve that little problem–with an ex post facto infanticide.
The scary part is that these people think they are the face of America!
There was a silver lining in her speech of saccharine bromides about the inner Barack and that was the Democratic Party has finally pulled off the veil of “pro-choice.”
This party has NEVER been for any choice unless if was to kill an unborn child.
All this talk from its Catholic leaders about being personally opposed, has been another blatant example of the party’s moral bankruptcy and its penchant for mendacity.
This party does nothing and has done nothing to promote a real choice.
Sonograms, waiting periods and anything that would allow the pregnant mother to think clearly and not act out of desperation and fear is thwarted, opposed and stonewalled.
They want dead babies as the only choice in an unwanted pregnancy.
This makes me wonder what the future will like since few if any of the Democrats have condemned or even criticized the Peoples’ Republic of China’s forced abortion requirement is.
Environmentalists are already on record to the extent hat there are too many people in this world and stresses how we need to get rid of four or five billion of them.
Forced abortions are not inconsistent with Green philosophy, which fits in nicely with our “culture of death.”
Democrats also tell us that they have a different vision of the way we should be.
That is true and that is the case.
Abortion is just one factor of this bifurcation.
The Constitution is at the forefront of the rift that separates the two parties.
It goes much more deeply than the idea of a living constitution that a society must change with the times
It was during his tenure at Harvard Law School that Barack Obama encountered the Brazilian socialist Roberto Mangabeira Unger, the author of over two dozen books on social theory, legal thought, economic thought, political alternatives, and philosophy.
One course Obama took from Unger was Reinventing Democracy.
Unger taught Obama not to take the words of the Constitution too seriously.
The cult of the Constitution is the supreme example of American institution worship, he told him.
Unger also urged Obama to be flexible so that he could circumvent the law of the land when it got in his way.
In other words the constitution’s elastic clause has been so stretched that it means what we want it to mean.
In a recent column, George Will called emancipating government from the Founders’ constraining premises.
He quoted at length from Charles Kesler’s new book, I Am the Change: Barack Obama and the CRis of Liberalism.
Obama has never liked the constricting anachronisms of America’s supreme law and guiding principles.
This vision of an activist government, at war with its own laws dates back to the New Freedom of Woodrow Wilson who did not like America’s structure of government.
He vastly preferred the British model where the legislative and executive departments were blended into a single part of government, the House of Commons.
Since Wilson and his most successful heirs, Franklin Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson and now Barack Obama, the United States has virtually ignored or rewritten the Constitution so that it can do everything it wants without restriction or limitation.
People screaming about the original intent of the founding fathers have been relegated to the sidelines of history as if they were fossil s left over from a dying and regrettable age.
The differences are significant and with consequence.
The Founding Fathers wanted to preserve man’s natural rights.
Disciples of Wilson want to replace them with a government that gives new rights to its people.
Using the word “rights” is a mere contrivance–a form of verbal legerdemain, a kind of cultural semantics
These rights are not absolute and can be taken away, making them more like privileges than real human rights.
Lewis Carroll recognized this nearly 200 years ago in his Alice’s Looking Glass.
The Constitution according to progressives is an impediment to progress.
FDR wanted to erase the dividing line between the practical and the idea…and make government an instrument of imagined power… for social improvement.
FDR and his followers wanted a sort of Faustian deal with the American people.
The more power the government can usurp from its people, the more “rights” it could give them.
In exchange millions of Americans have sold their souls to the federal government.
They accept welfare, aid, health care, and so on for their votes.
Their dependence and fear of losing their hand-outs is their greatest incentive to vote for the status quo—no matter what it does to the rest of us.
Their freedom is cheap and their ability to think weak and even non-existent.
Was this why Karl Marx was in favor of public school education in his Communist Manifesto?
They have little trouble being wards of the state because they reason that since their rights, like abortion are dependent on the state why shouldn’t they be.
That’s why their Great Half-White Father warns them that they should be terrified for being on their own.
The most important idea to emanate from Charlotte two weeks ago was their almost prophetic words of warning was what all Americans had in common.
With apologies to Holy Cross alum, Joe McGinniss, these minions of a blind and fatal vision boasted as how they thought that the answer to this question was, not religious faith, culture, education, a love of sports or music, entertainment or any of the millions of real choices in this country…but GOVERNMENT.
They meant that as a positive.
People with a brain that still is functioning should have recognized this as a warning—a threat to their present and their future as they have known it.
That’s why one of the most frightening sentences in the English language is the declaration…I am here from the government and I am here to help us!
* I had to refrain from using photos that were far more graphic than what I used. Abortion is a crime against humanity that cries out from the heavens.
Does anyone really understand Barack Obama and his policies?
Why does he do the things he does?
What makes him tick?
Is there a Rosetta Stone that can decipher his policies that seem to work against the best interests of our nation.
Is the man stupid…ignorant…dense…?
I hardly think so.
Is he just an amateur as Edward Klein writes…a man whose woeful lack of experience has just been too great for his being able to lead this nation?
Or for something more sinister, is he the Manchurian Candidate, a robotic figure who has been crafted by the powers that be–think George Soros?
Was this president literally designed like a cup of coffee to thwart America’s democratic heritage and knock it from the lofty perches it has enjoyed for nearly 100 years?
Is he a socialist as Stanley Kurtz tells us without equivocation, in the closing words in 2011 book, Radical-in-Chief?
David Maraniss, in his epic biography of the president, spends nearly 600 pages telling us of all the social, demographic, genealogical and historical forces that have conspired to give us Barack Obama.
The Obama he paints in his volume, which just takes us to be his law school days, describes a young man, abandoned by both parents, who just doesn’t seem to fit in wherever he may be.
His father left when he was two weeks old–actually his mother took him to Seattle right after his birth and Barack Sr. decided to go to Harvard for a Ph.D he never finished.
He was of mixed parentage–the Hawaiians see a lot of that and they call these children—Hapa.
Maraniss also details the principle of the Jadek, in Kenya where his forbears were all on the outside of the mainstream.
Maraniss is a well-respected biographer who does 100s of interviews for his subjects.
He filled many of the gaps I had about this president.
I now know what he liked to do on a Sunday afternoon.
I know some of his telephone numbers, his roommates and several other pieces of interesting minutiae.
This sympathetic tale is also significant for what it doesn’t tell us.
But what Maraniss seems to conveniently leave out is the fact that Obama’s first male role model was Frank Marshall Davis, who happened to be a former card-carrying, self-admitted member of the Communist Party of the United States. (CPUSA)
I do not believe this is a small detail.
It is a failure like this that implies cover-up.
Just what are his supporters really hiding?
The public has every right and even a duty to doubt the honesty of the reports and information coming from the left on this president.
Any conspiracy theory that erupts is their own doing and maybe that is even their intention.
Conspiracy theories are easier to dismiss.
But all this still does not answer the question at hand.
By now you are probably wondering what my title means.
It has nothing to do with Sarah Palin or Joe Biden.
To my baseball-oriented mind, it should evoke memories of the sordid side of the game’s history.
There is a legendary story that after having appeared in federal court, a little boy went up to Chicago White Sox outfielder, Shoeless Joe Jackson, who had been accused of being one of eight members of his team who threw the World Series to Cleveland. in 1919.
The little boy with tears in his eyes, is purportedly supposed to have asked him the question above.
One of Jackson’s fellow conspirators, baptized as the Black Sox, was Lefty Claude Williams, who was on the losing end of three of the five Black Sox losses.
In 1919, the series was the best of nine games, not the traditional current seven games.
While the case against the players was ultimately thrown out of court because someone had mysteriously lost their confessions, all eight players were summarily tossed out of baseball for life by baseball first commissioner, Judge Kenesaw Mountain Landis.
Only one other pitcher ever lost three games in one series and that was hapless George Frazier of the 1981 New York Yankees.
When informed of his connection to the Black Sox Williams, he retorted, Yeah but I wasn’t trying to lose them!
Why would anyone try to lose a world series game?
The simple answer was for money–a lot of money–more than many of them made in the regular season.
Would anyone try to throw a country, that is drag it down to the depths of a third world nation?
Certainly not for money?
For power than–quite possibly but that person might get swept down with the whirlwind that followed, leaving a void that would lead to chaos and violence?
Could someone hate this country so much that he would conspire to destroy its economy, toss millions into the unemployment lines, relegate America to a weak, wobbly legged country that had no place at the table of nations?
Would a president destroy America’s global hegemony and allow its Russian, Chinese and other undemocratic nations to control the destiny of its people?
I suggest everyone see the documentary Obama’s America…2016, produced by author, Dinesh D’Souza.
D’Souza just might have identified Obama’s Rosebud Moment, the one thing that explains what has been the driving motivation behind this president’s policies that have been single-mindedly driving down the nation’s economic health.
One should also read his second book on this theme—Obama’s America: Unmaking the American Dream.
It is his theory that Obama is deliberately trying to undermine capitalist America’s way of life and radically change the course of its future.
He appears as some avenging angel to fulfill the dreams he says he inherited from his father–the father he never really knew except by word-of-mouth.
And all to get revenge for his father who hated all the colonial nations from England, the United States and all their allies, including Israel.
A small example of this might illustrate his thesis.
As one of his first official acts as president, Obama returned the bust of former British Prime Minister, the legendary Winston Churchill that had been publicly displayed in the White House for years.
This act was an insult to the British people.
Churchill had been an aggressive imperialist whose domination of Kenya offended the Obamas in Kenya during the Mau-Mau uprising in the 1950s..
D’Souza’s theme may be far-fetched but in my opinion it is far more creditable and plausible than some of the other explanations in the public square.
Human nature and revenge are mysterious to behold and respect.
Obama has not been known for his honesty during his reign but he was right on target with his promise that he would seek to change America.
And that he has done and my fear is that after another four years of his rule we will not be able to recognize the country that once was.
A phrase like the land of the free will be writ large on our nation’s tombstone.
I wish it weren’t so but the more I learn about this man, the more I believe his election was a historical aberration designed to teach us a very painful lesson about ourselves.
And that it has.
Yes today is my birthday. I have finally made it to sixty-nine.
Next year I hope to celebrate my sixty-tenth birthday.
Sevens have never been lucky for me.
Don’t let my title frighten you.
No need to call anyone–the forth-coming election hasn’t depressed me THAT much!
But on second thought, I think we will all be thinking more about suicide if President Obama gets a second term.
I don’t mean that it is something we would ordinarily think about but the president and his allies in the Skinner-trained media will be encouraging Americans in many subtle and maybe even a few overt ways to end our lives prematurely for a myriad of plausible reasons.
I write this because that is the only logical way they have any chance of making ObamaCare work.
There will not be enough money to fund it as it is designed.
That’s why they have switched $717 billion from Medicare to try to fund the care of the younger Americans.
We are old.
We are used up and most of us will become a drain on a limited supply of money and medical resources.
The cost of medical care will skyrocket as 30 million more consumers enter into the arena.
We already have a doctor shortage.
It is a simple case of supply and demand.
People my age are a heavy burden on a system that is already over-taxed.
Assisted suicide will be the new abortion.
It is already big in Oregon where they would rather pay you to kill yourself than take care of you.
I just read that Sigmund Freud, who gave us our love of sex, was an assisted suicide.
Dying of throat cancer, he had a doctor friend give him a lethal dose of morphine.
I also just learned that the infamous Hemlock Society died nine years ago, I think from natural causes or perhaps in a fall…falling membership.
They would have loved Obama’s America where old age can be treated with a mere pill.
Its remnants have tried to piece the giant back together and now operate under their me identity of Compassion and Choices.
The country’s ministers of death are already using the same language they did to sell abortion to the American people.
Eventually the dividing line between euthanasia and assisted suicide will disappear.
Doctors will be enlisted into the culture of death with regard to the elderly.
Choice–the almighty choice this will be the new imperative and they will encourage it so that we can have death with dignity.
They will tell us we have a duty to die before that choice is taken away from us by dementia, disease and religious fanatics.
No one will want to burden their families with their elderly plight.
We will be encouraged to get out-of-the-way and do the world a favor by killing ourselves.
It is coming. I can sense it in my weary bones.
Given our loss of moral fiber, I fear that many people will willingly and even gladly go along with it.
Like the tired minions in the classic movie Soylent Green, they will go to killing centers that resemble spas.
They will disrobe, put on white gowns and be given a sedative amidst background music and scenic footage as they drift off into eternity.
The government workers took their bodies and ground them into ground chuck to feed the poor.
How practical can a government be?
Sounds like a liberal solution to me.
I was prompted to think about this subject after reading about the new biography of disgraced football legend, Joe Paterno, a fellow Catholic whose whole disintegrated during the last months of his earthly life.
I had to buy the author Joe Posnanski’s book and so far it is one of the most engaging and intellectually stimulating bios I have ever read.
Paterno was a deep thinker, a product of Brooklyn Prep, one of the Jesuit rivals in New York to my Xavier High.
He loved Virgil’s Aeneid, which I also read in high school and was driven by the search for his destiny.
He also had a profound interest in Ernest Hemingway, whose grace under pressure, has a distinctive Catholic ring to it.
Retirement or the inability to continue on one’ search for his destiny was worse than death according to Hemingway.
And that’s why he put a shotgun in his mouth on a sunny day in Ketchum, Idaho in July of 1961, the year I graduated from high school.
His father had also taken the Roman Way Out.
Like Hemingway we have been slowly conditioned to accept suicide as the Romans did.
They elevated it to their special code of honor.
It was better to die than be dishonored or in our case loss one’s sense of need and fulfillment.
Honor was the most important thing for the Japanese code of Bushido.
The made it a ritual that is correctly called seppuku and it requires the assistance of a noble associate who will use the long sword to lop off the suicide’s head and spare him the agonies of his own disembowelment.
It is more popularly called, hara-kiri.
No, not Harry Carey, the late Cubs’ announcer.
Suicide had always been a taboo in this country.
Things started to change with the 1970 movie MASH and its 13-year long TV series about a group of horny doctors and randy nurses during the Korean war, which only took three years.
I wonder how many people know that the marvelous and catchy theme for both productions, was entitled Suicide is Painless?
In the film a well-endowed doctor has been losing his performance skills and is seriously depressed about it.
He decides to kill himself.
His fellow doctors contrive a Last Supper with all the affectations of the time of Jesus and his apostles.
They administer a placebo suicide pill and then while he drifts off, a sultry nurse slips into his bed and cures him.
Since then I think we are being taught by our social engineers to accept this as a painless way to leave our mortal coils when our destiny seems to be clouded by pain, suffering and depression.
The compassionate professions are now the counselors who will talk us into accepting the Roman Way Out because God’s teachings and our sense of the sacred don’t seem to have any part in our civilized world.
The separation of Church and State really means the elimination or the complete neutralization of any religious sentiment, teaching or doctrine as we make the slow and steady road toward complete secularization.
Yes, the Roman Way is destined to become the American Way.
I suspect that’s what is ahead for me and anyone else who is over 60, plus those who seem to have lost their ability to function in our complex world…
They are what the Nazis called useless eaters, and God only knows how many of those we already have.
Remember Hitler started with his T-4 Program, not the Jews.
But whatever the case I am not going to despair.
I have been fascinated by suicide for a long time.
In fact my third produced play, A Moment of Grace, was a one-act drama that involved suicide amid a chaotic world of fear and suffering—all in a stuck elevator.
I firmly believe that in the end life will always be, as Cardinal Justin Rigali used to say, victorious.