Hurricane Katrina Relief

Donate through Catholic Charities.

Politics as Usual?

Tom McClintock is still lying about proposition 74 - politics as usual. Here is the exact quote from his recent e-mail on the initiatives:

"Proposition 74: Teacher Tenure. Do parents have a right to expect a higher level of competence before a teacher is granted life-time tenure? YES. This modest measure simply increases the teacher probation period from two years to five years."

Hey, Tom, try reading the entire initiative since it radically changes the due process that teachers currently have in the firing process as well as retroactively repealing tenure for those who had it granted to them this summer. It also prevents those who are just one year away from getting it next July 1. At a time when experienced teachers are being lured out of state by better paying positions (like in Clark county, Nevada), fools like McClintock are making teaching jobs in the Golden State appear quite tarnished and undesirable.

The good news is that it is not politics as usual with the Club for Growth. Its hard hitting ad on the repeal of the death tax has already caused one senator to switch to the side of the good and is pushing the oddball McCain in the same direction. Check it out at the Club's website.

Values III

Same theme - different thread...

The seminaries of the United States will get their official Vatican visit soon. None too soon if you ask me. Hoepfully, this will prompt the removal of the lefties and allow good men not to be turned away for being too orthodox as has been happening over the last 25 years or so.

Given my prediction of a couple of months ago that the new Pope would allow the Tridentine and Latin Masses of the Novus Ordo to be freely practiced in the next year or so, it should come as no shock that the Pope has agreed to meet with the leaders of the schismatic SSPX by months end.

If the two sides can reach an agreement, perhaps they can celebrate by replacing the atrocious tabernacle in the cathedral of Los Angeles.

Of course, if the silliness of the lefties gets to you, just go here.

Values, Part II

Probably the key difference between the values of Provo and the values of Detroit is that the vast majority of people is that the former understand that they were created by God, that they are His children, and that they owe God fidelity and allegiance and should follow the command to love one another as I (Jesus) have loved you.

On the surface, it is easy to claim that the liberal big government welfare state is following this command as well. But as any student of such governments knows, the government granted entitlement system is long way from inalienable God given rights that government should protect (life, liberty and property or the pursuit of happiness). The shrill anti-Christian statements comeing from the left its spokesman (like Howard Dean), suggest that the ultimate source of morality is the individual in a nihilistic way and not God who has granted us free will to choose to follow Him or not.

The values of the folks in Provo are more in line with the traditional liberal ideas of the Founding Fathers. The values of the establishment and its supporters in Detroit have a bizzare mix of radical individualism and socialism that only makes sense in light of the writings of Antonio Gramsci.

I'm not Mormon, but I'll stick with the general values of Provo, thank you.

Values

While listening to Dennis Prager last week, I was struck by an interesting point. A recent survey shows that Detroit is the most liberal city in America while Provo, UT is the most conservative. The question asked was, "if Detroit adopted the values of Provo and if Provo adopted the values of Detroit, would Detroit be a better place to live in five years while at the same time would Provo have become worse?"

If you think that values matter, as many of the people who voted for Bush last November do, then you will answer the question in the affirmative. If you dont think values matter, if you think that it is all about money, then you would answer in the negative.

But that led me to thinking (yikes!): How much does money impact values? And, does the source of the money impact values.

More later.

No Clue Administrative Association

The geniuses at the NCAA have once again shown that they should all be consulted on how to win the war on terror, in a sensitive Kerry-style fashion, by deciding that:


"Colleges and universities may adopt any mascot that they wish, as that is an institutional matter," said Walter Harrison, chair of the Executive Committee and president at the University of Hartford. "But as a national association, we believe that mascots, nicknames or images deemed hostile or abusive in terms of race, ethnicity or national origin should not be visible at the championship events that we control.

Eighteen colleges and universities continue to use Native American imagery or references and are subject to the new policy:

Alcorn State University (Braves)
Central Michigan University (Chippewas)
Catawba College (Indians)
Florida State University (Seminoles)
Midwestern State University (Indians)
University of Utah (Utes)
Indiana University-Pennsylvania (Indians)
Carthage College (Redmen)
Bradley University (Braves)
Arkansas State University (Indians)
Chowan College (Braves)
University of Illinois-Champaign (Illini)
University of Louisiana-Monroe (Indians)
McMurry University (Indians)
Mississippi College (Choctaws)
Newberry College (Indians)
University of North Dakota (Fighting Sioux)
Southeastern Oklahoma State University (Savages)


I guess Southeastern Oklahoma State has offended Michael Savage the well known radio talk show host. Yes, linking your school to a right-winger is indeed offensive.

Perhaps the University of Illinois can change its name easily from "Illini" to the "Illin'" or "Chillin'" and come up with a new rap song for its fight song. Oops... rap is associated with minority groups and to call something a "fight" song is hostile on its face, so scrap that. Perhaps it can become the "Electioneers" in tribute to the state of Illinois' fine democratic tradition.

I can certainly understand the objection to the Carthage College Redmen. What good redman would want to be associated with a college that takes its name from a city that lost (that would be the Carthaginians). I know that when my fine Irish skin burns and turns red, I am embarassed enough. I certainly don't want to be associated with historical losers.

Missisippi College would have an easy change if the NCAA wasn't so uppity about tobacco. It could just change their name to the Chaws. Perhaps if they have a stick of bubble gum as their mascot it will still work.

And whoever thought that the name "Indian" was acceptable should be ashamed. Afterall, all those Americans who have lost their jobs to Indians due to outsourcing to India must cringe every time they open a sports page. Maybe all of the schools who have that mascot can change their names to the "Cabdrivers" or "7-11's."

The University of North Dakota could cash in on a name change if it chooses to go corporate. How about the "North Dakota Sue Honey Bees?" Toast, anyone?

Unfortunately, the NCAA has failed to address several other schools with insensitive monikers.

Sorry Notre Dame. I'm Irish, and given your recent poor performance on the field you neither deserve nor have earned the right to use "Irish" in your name. Additionally you are a FRENCH school, so stop running away from your roots (oops, sorry, running away is in your roots)... and that whole "fighting" bit is just so hostile. Can't we all just get along?

As a Roman Catholic, I have to let my own alma mater know that the name "trojan" can be seen as a direct slap at my beliefs against artificial contraception, and, therfore the school must change its name. Perhaps we can henceforth be known as "The Rhythm."

UNLV will have to change its mascot to, I guess just "The Runs" since the "Rebel" moniker could be deemed offensive by African-Americans. Perhaps UNLV can work in a sponsorship with Pepto-Bismol. Pink uniforms aren't so bad.

I am sure that the Sierra Club and other like-minded environmentalists will object to the poor way in which Stanford uses its tree mascot. I suggest that Stanford simply be known as the John Leland Stanford Junior Mints.

PETA will likely demand that the Texas Longhorns, the Georgia Bulldogs, the Florida Gators, etc. refrain from using animal mascots as it dehumanizes them (and all this time I thought PETA stood for "People Eating Tasty Animals." Boy, was I wrong!).

The University of Tennessee Volunteers are insulting all good volunteers by wearing a hideous shade of orange and singing Rocky Top that includes these offensive lyrics:


Aint' no smoggy smoke on Rocky Top
Ain't no telephone bills
Once I had a girl on Rocky Top
Half bear, other half cat
Wild as a mink,
but sweet as soda pop...

That's why all the folks on Rocky Top
Get their corn from a jar...

I've had years of cramped-up city life
Trapped like a duck in a pen
All I know is it's a pity life
Can't be simple again"


Surely the NCAA will not allow UT fans to sing this song at NCAA championship events as it is so offensive on many levels: Urbanites who suffer from having to live in a smoggy environment are attacked; there is some weird bestiality going on that will offend PETA (girl/human who was half bear, half cat, with mink like qualities); and, members of Alcoholics Anonymous will certainly rail against the corn from a jar reference.

I am sure that the NCAA will want Holy Cross to lose the Crusaders name since it might upset Osama bin Laden.

Finally, the University of Syracuse will have to lose the name Orangemen as it demeans all (especially sun-sensitive Irish types) who can only get a spray on tan.

If I have missed any inappropriate names, please report them directly to:

Bob Williams
Managing Director of Public and Media Relations
317/917-6117

Thank heavens the NCAA is on the job!

Why is it...?

Imagine two different news stories, one about a series of suicide terrorists and one about someone who either blows up an abortion clinic or kills an abortion doctor. Since these are or have been real events, conjuring up the reports in your mind should be an easy task.

Now, tell me if I'm wrong...

Story number one (terrorists), would probably generate great angst on the left whose representatives would probably (and have) argue that we need to understand the terrorists and help them in some way.

Story number two (abortion clinic explosion) would generate great anst on the left whose representatives would probably (and have) decry the attempt to take away a woman's "right to chose" while at the same time attacking the ideology of the "crazy Christian right."

Why won't the liberals attack the ideology of the crazies in story number one?

Liberal Answer: Christianity is the problem in both stories (i.e. the crusades and anti-abortion thought).

Correct Answer: Both sides have killers who have intrepreted their personal religious doctrines so that they have the "right" to kill. In reality, both sides of the lunatic fringe of Islam and Christinanity are wrong if they are led to kill in such a way.

Big Bad Government

Big Government strikes and strikes and stikes...

Congress gave final approval (short of the president's signature) to a silly energy bill on Friday which includes a four-week expansion of daylight savings time. Under the guise of saving energy, our buffoons in Washington are putting our school-age children at more risk as it will extend the amount of time many children must wait in the dark waiting for school busses. One of the reasons given for the extension is that people will be less likely to turn on lights at night since it will be lighter later. Hmm... what about in the morning when it will be darker later into the day? Additionally, many people use the additional "light hours" to run errands and go places IN THEIR CARS. More pollution, anyone? Finally, what about all those pre-programmed devices that cannot be changed that already have the time change built in like clocks, radios and cell phones (to name just a few)? Thanks for the headache, D.C.

Then there is the continued debate over President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act. Not only does this act come with unfunded mandates, it is another encroachment of big government into local affairs. Bush obviously does not agree with Tocqueville about what the strength of American politics is -i.o. local participation and control of politics and government. The Department of Education was created in 1979, and part of Reagan's 1980 platform was to ABOLISH it.

It's time to do it!

The Ascendance of Orthodoxy

Fr. Neuhas reccomends the article A Hard Faith by Peter Boyer (not a Catholic). I doubt that this article was or ever will be bed time reading for the Bernadin faction of the Church in America.

The Death Tax

I cannot add too much to the Club For Growth's webpage and commercial. Check it out.

Roberts and Schumer (and the Vatican)

Conservatives who are dancing in the streets need to settle down. Judge Roberts had this to say about Roe v. Wade during his last round of confirmation hearings:

"Roe v. Wade is the settled law of the land... Theres is nothing in my personal views that would prevent me from fully and faithfully applying that precedent."

As for Schumer's reaction to the appointment, what is interesting is that finally I have read the truth. In other words, for the first time, a known high ranking liberal Senator has spoken the truth about the intentions of liberals as it comes to the courts:

"Now that he is nominated for a position where he can overturn precedent and make law, it is even more important that he fully answers a very broad range of questions."


MAKE LAW! And I always thought that was in Schumer's job description and not that of any judge at any level.

Oh, by the way, the Vatican has taken another swipe at strict Darwinian evolution (the randomness line).

Fruit of the Mouth

Okay, this is a real rant:

Would you, the cooks in the restaurants of America, stop putting orange slices underneath or next to my eggs and potatoes. I don't like the tast of orange eggs or orange anything else with breakfast!

Also, shut up and drive, and I don't just mean your phone. To the lady who was flossing while driving yesterday, try putting two hands on the wheel and shut your mouth.

To the repairmen who don't come when they say, have the courage to call me and cancel so I can try to find someone else.

That's all for now...

Pope Benedict is anti Harry Potter

It has recently become clear that Pope Benedict is anti Harry Potter. Given this news, it becomes apparent that Catholic parents should keep their children away from the corrupting influences of these works. Those who have questions about the problems should check out the LifeSite site.

Los Angeles' Gay Deacon

Why did Cardinal Mahony allow an openly gay man, who appears to be a gay activist as well, to become a deacon? L.A. Catholic blog asks this question and delves into the thinking of Eric Stolz, including two links to the latter's website which should cause any Catholic loyal to Rome to question whether or not the Cardinal is as well.

Of course, if all of us had been paying attetion, then this event woldn't come as a shock. In case you missed it, here is a list of known gay bishops in the United States.

Heaven help us!

But Was He Tenured?

It turns out that one of the terrorists in the latest attack in London taught disabled children in England according to Sky News. This seems to blow a hole into the good ship "lslam, Religion of Peace" about the size of the hole in the USS Cole. Unfortunately, most people will forget or overlook this little inconvenient fact just as most people probably don't remember the Cole.

Folks, they don't all look and act like fanactics found in the streets of the Sunni triangle or various other "Death to America" locales. They want to kill at least four million U.S citizens, half of which must be children. Bin Laden argues that since we pay taxes, and the government spends those tax dollars to kill Muslims, we are all guilty.

You cannot rationalize with fanatics. Stop trying.

Some Still Don't Get It

The Financial Times lead editorial in yesterday's edition shows a complete lack of understanding of the dangers of multiculturalism. Those who embrace the idea of mutliculturalism also must embrace the idea of moral and cultural relativism since no one culture or value system can be valued above another. Somehow, the twits at the Times don't get this, nor do they bother to understand that multiculturalism is rooted in Gramscian Marxism. The ignorant editorial board sums up their core idea as follows: "At its best London offers a dream to rival the American dream: more genuinely multicutural, more relaxed and capable of humor."

Of course, the same editors go on to contradict themselves by writing that "more must be done to integrate Islameic London with the wider community." Multiculturalism is not about integration; rather, it is about undermining the hegemonic culture in charge. For radical Muslims, it is a temporary tool to destroy the culture of the west. London's Islamic community has a history of harboring such nuts, and even the Washington Post has an article showing as much (free subscription required).

This sort of twaddle is enough to make one's head hurt. But, not to be outdone by the goofballs on the editorial page, the current socialist prime minister of Spain, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, writes in the same edition from another position of silliness: that this whole problem is a) the fault of the West (implying the United States) and, b) it really is a legal problem, "The EU is an area of law, freedom and democracy and must continue as such." The is the same dangerous mind that ran against Spain's involvement in Iraq, and, when the terrorists blew up the trains in Madrid, used that to "prove" that the West's and Spain's policy of fighting state-sponsors of terror was wrong. The Socialists won, Spain pulled out its troops (like the terrorists demanded) and... authorities found another Islamic-terrorist bomb on a train track the next month (and were fortunate enough to disarm it before it went off). So, his policy did not prevent Spain from being the target of another Islamic-terrorist attack.

Of course the prime minister of Spain argues that we have to understand their mind set, and then goes on to blame financial conditions (like a good socialist) among other perceived problems. Well, Mr. Prime Minister, this is all you have to understand - they are trying to kill you. Stop them before they do or die.

Of course, the appeasement of the socialist government of Spain showed weakness, which is exactly what the terrorists thrive on. In reality, the action of this fool last year emboldened the terrorists and probably encouraged them to strike out again, this time in London. But I'm willing to bet he will never look in the mirror and come to that conclusion. Rather, he is more likely to spit on President Bush and hug the corrupt and ineffective United Nations (and he does the latter in his piece).

Then there is David Gardner who leads the charge of the blame-America-first-bandwagon. He sites some recent polling data that shows that Muslim Arabs really like ideas like democracy, and even like our culture. "In other words, they don't hate us for our values, but because of our policies" which is in direct contrast to the position of President Bush.

My response to Mr. Gardner is that he should review the tapes of the people dancing in the streets in various Arab-Muslim locales after 9/11. He should talk to the persecuted minority groups in various Islamic countries (like the Kurds), or to the women of several countries who have no chance at enjoying any type of freedom whatsoever or are treated as second class citizens. Mr. Gardner has no grasp of what the Ikwhan approach to Islam is about, nor does he seem to understand the mullahs of Iran; his ignorance disqualifies him from commenting on the situation, and he should be fired.

To its credit, the FT does print some opposing views. But, given its editorial and some other articles (including the silliness of its own Jeffrey Sachs), it is getting increasingly difficult to give much credence to any political reporting or analysis of politics or business that the paper offers.

(note: I am going on vacation for a few days... see ya later!)

Appeasement?

The Wall Street Journal (free subscription required) lead editorial nails it: it is time to be united and up our attack on terrorists. One of the major liberal blog sites, the the Daily Kos seems to have hardly noticed that anyone died. In fact they are more outraged over a politically incorrect slip of the tongue by a Fox reporter than the deaths and injuries sustained by Londoners and visitors. The New Republic is almost as bad as they fret about the size of the next attack. I am not much of a Christopher Hitchens fan, but at least he got it right this time.

Then there is the Mark Steyn interview on the Hugh Hewitt show yesterday where Steyn also lambasts the idiots of the Radio Left including Franken and his goofy guest, Oliphant.

A bit of an odd homily was given by Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor, who is the leader of the Achdiocese of Westminster which includes London. Generally speaking he was rignt on target with staments such as the following:

The people who carried out these monstrous acts with chilling efficiency and forethought are believed to have acted in the name of religion. If so, it is not a religion recognisable to the religious people of this world. Who is their god? It is not the God who revealed himself to Moses and Jacob; nor the God who, in Jesus Christ, walked this earth and died and rose to save humanity; nor the God worshipped by the Muslim people, who is a God Almighty and Merciful. Who is the god of the men of hate? It is a false god; one projected from the darkest recesses of the human heart.

The odd bit is as follows:

The law of history is not on the side of the terrorists. The past is littered with the burned-out husks of attempts at bringing about political change through violence. Violence, as we know, breeds violence, and violence ultimately destroys itself. If we stand firm, if we believe in peace, then terror will not succeed; it will exhaust itself in time.

Huh? "if we believe in peace" is simply not clear. I doubt that Churchill could be described as man who did not want peace, but faced with Nazi agression in Europe and against England, he acted forcefully to re-establish peace on the continent (with the Allies, of course).

I certainly hope the good Cardinal is not referring to the idiotic position of Pax Christi USA that leads its website today:

"The nonviolence we are talking about is not an acquiescence to aggression, not a passive acceptance of abuse. It is rather a firm standing up for what is true, a witnessing to the dignity of human life, an affirmation of the value of all human existence..." - Gerard Vanderhaar

I think the Pax Christi position can be summed up in this picture. It's time to recognize that appeasement does not work, even if it is hidden in tough words.

What will Roger do?

The Vatican has issued a statement that says Roman Catholics cannot support abortion rights as reported here.

Roger's spin should be interesting. Based on past experience, he might get around to it sometime in November.

Train Trip

My family and I took a train trip today and had a lovely time.

PBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBT! to the terrorists!

I can't stand it!

Cardinal Mahony allowed inauguration ceremonies for the new mayor of Los Angeles to take place in the cathedral. Mayor Villaraigosa is a pro-choice "Catholic." Protestors have called for Mahony to resign.

The cardinal has wrecked any credibility he has left by allowing for such a ceremony to be held in a church. I have no problem with him attending civic ceremonies for the mayor in his role as Cardinal, but this act of defiance against the teachings of Rome should get Mahony a one-way ticket to his "parish" in Rome from whence he should not return. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to happen and the result will be more politicians and cafeteria Catholics jumping on the "tolerant pro-choice" bandwagon. Another conseqence might be more Hugh-Hewitt like defections to conservative preachers (regardless of denomination or lack thereof) who may not be Catholic, but do not tolerate such gross and open defiance of moral law.