Thursday, April 30, 2009
Obama Demagogues Chrysler Bankruptcy
The Dear Leader today just could not resist blaming bogeymen for the Chrysler bankruptcy:
In particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for an unjustified taxpayer bailout. They were hoping that everyone else would have to make sacrifices and they would have to make none.
I’m assuming Obama was referring to bond holders who did not appreciate taking pennies on the dollar while the unions who helped bring the American auto industry to its knees get much more. Blaming bondholders is absurd. They are probably the ones least responsible for Chrysler’s troubles. And normally in bankruptcies, bondholders get first dibs on the surviving company, as it should be.
But even if there is some distant element of truth to what Obama said, why couldn’t he just shut up and keep his own council instead of poisoning the atmosphere for both politics and the economy with his demagoguery? The stock market spilled 150 points almost straight down after his bout of childish finger pointing. More importantly, many companies need bondholders and their forbearance. But who will buy and hold bonds if they think Obama is out to stick it to them?
Perhaps more to the point, like others of a totalitarian bent, if Obama cannot find real villains to blame, he’ll invent them.
In any case, Obama, do the economy and financial markets a favor – SHUT UP, ALREADY!
In particular, a group of investment firms and hedge funds decided to hold out for an unjustified taxpayer bailout. They were hoping that everyone else would have to make sacrifices and they would have to make none.
I’m assuming Obama was referring to bond holders who did not appreciate taking pennies on the dollar while the unions who helped bring the American auto industry to its knees get much more. Blaming bondholders is absurd. They are probably the ones least responsible for Chrysler’s troubles. And normally in bankruptcies, bondholders get first dibs on the surviving company, as it should be.
But even if there is some distant element of truth to what Obama said, why couldn’t he just shut up and keep his own council instead of poisoning the atmosphere for both politics and the economy with his demagoguery? The stock market spilled 150 points almost straight down after his bout of childish finger pointing. More importantly, many companies need bondholders and their forbearance. But who will buy and hold bonds if they think Obama is out to stick it to them?
Perhaps more to the point, like others of a totalitarian bent, if Obama cannot find real villains to blame, he’ll invent them.
In any case, Obama, do the economy and financial markets a favor – SHUT UP, ALREADY!
The Real Culture War is Over Economic Freedom
Arthur Brooks has a perceptive piece in the Wall Street Journal this morning that asserts that the big culture war of this time is not over the usual social issues but over economic freedom. And as much as I care about abortion, home-schooling and such, I think Brooks is right.
The anger we see manifested in tea parties is over economic freedom. And that anger will only grow as Obama’s agenda progresses. That anger also has more tangible consequences than anger over social issues. Most of those opposed to same-sex marriage won’t crash gay weddings. But those opposed to confiscatory taxation will change their economic behavior to avoid those taxes. Most of those changes are not good for the economy.
That’s not to mention that people don’t respond well to thieves. Try burglarizing a Texan to find out about that. Being ripped off evokes a more visceral response than someone’s moral choices in Californicate. For better or worse, that's human nature.
I am heartened to see Brooks note that taxation and other economic freedom issues are moral issues. I have felt that way since supporting Ronald Reagan in my Duke days. I do not claim to know just where to draw the line, but when government’s take approaches 50%, I am convinced at least two of the Ten Commandments are broken. I know many of my Christian brothers (especially in the UK) think government is virtually incapable of breaking “Thou shalt not steal” and “Thou shalt not covet.” I beg to differ.
Unfortunately, through the years, I’ve seen very few assert that excessive taxation is theft. I’m heartened to see Mr. Brooks imply that it and other government enormities are so indeed.
He makes other interesting points I may visit at another time. For now, I commend his column to you.
The anger we see manifested in tea parties is over economic freedom. And that anger will only grow as Obama’s agenda progresses. That anger also has more tangible consequences than anger over social issues. Most of those opposed to same-sex marriage won’t crash gay weddings. But those opposed to confiscatory taxation will change their economic behavior to avoid those taxes. Most of those changes are not good for the economy.
That’s not to mention that people don’t respond well to thieves. Try burglarizing a Texan to find out about that. Being ripped off evokes a more visceral response than someone’s moral choices in Californicate. For better or worse, that's human nature.
I am heartened to see Brooks note that taxation and other economic freedom issues are moral issues. I have felt that way since supporting Ronald Reagan in my Duke days. I do not claim to know just where to draw the line, but when government’s take approaches 50%, I am convinced at least two of the Ten Commandments are broken. I know many of my Christian brothers (especially in the UK) think government is virtually incapable of breaking “Thou shalt not steal” and “Thou shalt not covet.” I beg to differ.
Unfortunately, through the years, I’ve seen very few assert that excessive taxation is theft. I’m heartened to see Mr. Brooks imply that it and other government enormities are so indeed.
He makes other interesting points I may visit at another time. For now, I commend his column to you.
Labels: economics, freedom, taxes, tea parties
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
And Now, Inclusivity Out Your Ear
For some reason, nothing is really inspiring me to blog at the moment. But in case my good readers feel deprived of their daily bile, I present to you Church of the Redeemer, Morristown, NJ.
Enjoy.
Enjoy.
Labels: The Episcopal Church
Monday, April 27, 2009
Obama’s First 100 Days Summarized . . . Last Year
Last week, I was wondering what, if anything, I should say about Obama’s Most Holy First Hundred Days.
But then I discovered I had summarized the First Hundred Days pretty well already . . . back before the election:
When Obama governs like the Leftist he is, I think even many who voted for him will feel they were sold a bill of goods. There will be not a little anger.
A “uniter” Obama is not.
What can I say? Sometimes I’m good.
But then I discovered I had summarized the First Hundred Days pretty well already . . . back before the election:
When Obama governs like the Leftist he is, I think even many who voted for him will feel they were sold a bill of goods. There will be not a little anger.
A “uniter” Obama is not.
What can I say? Sometimes I’m good.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Communion Partners Show Some Backbone
Maybe I began ignoring The Episcopal Church and the ACI crowd too soon.
As my readers know, Communion Partner bishops supported by the Anglican Communion Institute signed a Statement on the Polity of the Episcopal Church that basically says, in a scholarly way, of course, “Hey Schori, who made you Presiding Empress?” It asserts quite convincingly that dioceses and their bishops, not the General Convention and its Presiding Heretic, are the chief authorities in the Episcopal Church, not the other way around. In case people miss that, Section III is titled “Dioceses Are Not Subordinate to a
Metropolitan or Central Hierarchy.”
Baby Blue has a good summary of the brouhaha surrounding this statement. It’s quite the soap opera complete with the Episcopal Left screaming and making asses of themselves. (That’s redundant, but anyway . . . ) As Christopher Johnson observes, this statement has struck a nerve.
I am pleasantly surprised by the statement myself. Heck, I’m shocked by it and by who signed it, including Bishop Wimberly of all people. I practically fainted when I saw his name. I guess he wants to make a statement on the way out. (He’s retiring.) Good for him. I did not think he and a number of the other bishops had it in them. I am glad to say I was wrong.
And, yes, I have to tip my hat to the Anglican Communion Institute as well. I was fed up with them long ago for reasons I won’t rehash here. But they did good with this statement.
As for the Episcoleft, they hate it being pointed out that their empress has no canonical clothes, but what can they do? These bishops are loyal to a fault and have made it very clear they aren’t going anywhere. And they are grounding their stand on the history and polity of the Episcopal Church. There’s really no credible and legitimate weapon with which to attack the Communion Partners.
Of course, that means the Presiding Heretic and her minions could get even more incredible and illegitimate.
This could get interesting.
For a more scholarly take on this, Leander Harding is a good start.
As my readers know, Communion Partner bishops supported by the Anglican Communion Institute signed a Statement on the Polity of the Episcopal Church that basically says, in a scholarly way, of course, “Hey Schori, who made you Presiding Empress?” It asserts quite convincingly that dioceses and their bishops, not the General Convention and its Presiding Heretic, are the chief authorities in the Episcopal Church, not the other way around. In case people miss that, Section III is titled “Dioceses Are Not Subordinate to a
Metropolitan or Central Hierarchy.”
Baby Blue has a good summary of the brouhaha surrounding this statement. It’s quite the soap opera complete with the Episcopal Left screaming and making asses of themselves. (That’s redundant, but anyway . . . ) As Christopher Johnson observes, this statement has struck a nerve.
I am pleasantly surprised by the statement myself. Heck, I’m shocked by it and by who signed it, including Bishop Wimberly of all people. I practically fainted when I saw his name. I guess he wants to make a statement on the way out. (He’s retiring.) Good for him. I did not think he and a number of the other bishops had it in them. I am glad to say I was wrong.
And, yes, I have to tip my hat to the Anglican Communion Institute as well. I was fed up with them long ago for reasons I won’t rehash here. But they did good with this statement.
As for the Episcoleft, they hate it being pointed out that their empress has no canonical clothes, but what can they do? These bishops are loyal to a fault and have made it very clear they aren’t going anywhere. And they are grounding their stand on the history and polity of the Episcopal Church. There’s really no credible and legitimate weapon with which to attack the Communion Partners.
Of course, that means the Presiding Heretic and her minions could get even more incredible and illegitimate.
This could get interesting.
For a more scholarly take on this, Leander Harding is a good start.
Labels: ACI, Communion Partners, Schori, The Episcopal Church
Thursday, April 23, 2009
And Now, Show Trials? UPDATED
Obama is letting more and more of his despicable totalitarian impulses show. Now he has opened the door to prosecution of those who approved waterboarding and other high pressure interrogation tactics against terrorism. The Wall Street Journal this morning has rightly dubbed Obama’s invitation as presidential poison. Legitimate disagreement over national defense policies, including difficult ethical decisions, is one thing. Criminalizing those disagreements is the noxious stuff of totalitarianism.
The people upon which Obama has declared open season were striving to do their jobs in protecting America from further terrorist attacks. And they succeeded, with the interrogation tactics playing an important role in that success.
(And, yes, I do think waterboarding terrorists was justified and ethical. Thousands of civilian lives were at stake. And terrorists, by targeting civilians, forfeit normal protections, such as the Geneva Convention.)
And now, a lightweight with messianic pretensions who can’t bring himself to stop campaigning and blaming all the world’s problems on his predecessors has opened the door to rewarding that service with show trials. It is disgusting and more worthy of the old Soviet Union and of third world dictatorships than of the United States of America.
What goes around comes around. Obama had best backtrack and fast. Or his poison will spread as the WSJ warns and backfire.
And show trials have a history of not going as planned in this country. Remember Oliver North?
----
UPDATE: Sen. John McCain, who has strenuously opposed enhanced interrogation techniques, warns against “witch hunts” worthy of “banana republics” that “prosecute people for actions they didn’t agree with under previous administrations.”
The people upon which Obama has declared open season were striving to do their jobs in protecting America from further terrorist attacks. And they succeeded, with the interrogation tactics playing an important role in that success.
(And, yes, I do think waterboarding terrorists was justified and ethical. Thousands of civilian lives were at stake. And terrorists, by targeting civilians, forfeit normal protections, such as the Geneva Convention.)
And now, a lightweight with messianic pretensions who can’t bring himself to stop campaigning and blaming all the world’s problems on his predecessors has opened the door to rewarding that service with show trials. It is disgusting and more worthy of the old Soviet Union and of third world dictatorships than of the United States of America.
What goes around comes around. Obama had best backtrack and fast. Or his poison will spread as the WSJ warns and backfire.
And show trials have a history of not going as planned in this country. Remember Oliver North?
----
UPDATE: Sen. John McCain, who has strenuously opposed enhanced interrogation techniques, warns against “witch hunts” worthy of “banana republics” that “prosecute people for actions they didn’t agree with under previous administrations.”
Labels: McCain, Obama, show trials, terrorism
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Napolitano: Illegal Immigration “Is Not A Crime.”
DHS Head Napolitano apparently has been so busy going after us dangerous rightwingers – against the advice of her own civil liberties lawyers – that she not only is neglecting defending our borders, she doesn’t get that illegal immigration is crime:
And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.
With that attitude, no wonder the plague of illegal immigration and associated crimes greatly increased in Arizona while she was governor there, including Phoenix becoming the #2 kidnapping capitol of the world.
Now that she’s DHS head, that’s what all of us within a few hundred miles of the border have to look forward to. Oh joy.
I’d rather fire Napolitano myself.
And yes, when we find illegal workers, yes, appropriate action, some of which is criminal, most of that is civil, because crossing the border is not a crime per se. It is civil. But anyway, going after those as well.
With that attitude, no wonder the plague of illegal immigration and associated crimes greatly increased in Arizona while she was governor there, including Phoenix becoming the #2 kidnapping capitol of the world.
Now that she’s DHS head, that’s what all of us within a few hundred miles of the border have to look forward to. Oh joy.
I’d rather fire Napolitano myself.
Labels: immigration, Napolitano
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
TEC Diocese of Pennsylvania Sues Good Shepherd
The Episcopal Church is going after Good Shepherd Rosemont . . . again. And Good Shepherd has not picked a fight. Just the opposite.
“We approached the Diocese of Pennsylvania to seek an amicable solution. Now we are stunned to receive their response of aggression with the intent to terminate the life and mission of a diverse Christian community engaged in healing the sick, caring for the poor, and witnessing to the love of God as set forth in the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” Bishop Moyer said.
One would think that after years of a “bishop,” one Charles Bennison, who spouted heresy and covered up child abuse, The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Pennsylvania would have enough shame and enough class to take the out of a settlement and finally to leave Good Shepherd be.
One would think.
---
Hat tip to TitusOneNine.
“We approached the Diocese of Pennsylvania to seek an amicable solution. Now we are stunned to receive their response of aggression with the intent to terminate the life and mission of a diverse Christian community engaged in healing the sick, caring for the poor, and witnessing to the love of God as set forth in the Gospel of Jesus Christ,” Bishop Moyer said.
One would think that after years of a “bishop,” one Charles Bennison, who spouted heresy and covered up child abuse, The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Pennsylvania would have enough shame and enough class to take the out of a settlement and finally to leave Good Shepherd be.
One would think.
---
Hat tip to TitusOneNine.
Labels: The Episcopal Church
Monday, April 20, 2009
Colin Slee Proves He’s an Arse Fosters Christian Unity
The Very Rev. Colin Slee, Dean of Southwark issued the cathedral’s annual report on Easter. It included the following gems of his wisdom about peace and unity:
On the Bishop of Rochester, Dr. Nazir-Ali:
The Bishop of Rochester has just announced his resignation, whatever he may say, it is clearly a move towards a sectarian alternative church intentionally designed to create turbulence in the Anglican Communion.
What a nice send-off.
On those who boycotted Lambeth:
One reason why peace broke out at the Lambeth Conference was that the Puritan fringe stayed away, they boycotted the Conference – and they included the Bishop of Rochester, Lewes and Willesden in the UK. It is my view that any bishop who engaged in the boycott has placed himself outside full communion and his status as a bishop of the Anglian Church must be open to some debate.
Well, I see the Very Rev. Slee is very concerned about unity. He certainly is, umm, contributing to it and is grieved so many didn’t make it to Lambeth.
Oh, and GAFCON, you’re bullies. Just so you know, in Christian unity and love, of course.
In this interesting and ongoing discussion, a Church of England bishop, probably a part of the Puritan fringe, responds:
What, in Slee's words is "open to debate" is probably:
1. Does he know what Puritanism is, and why the three people he names are Anglicans, not Puritans?
2. Has he invented a new version of donatism? "If you don't attend a voluntary event that is by invitation, to which you can reply "yes" or "no", you are thereby held to be a schismatic"?
3. Has he any clue about what actually constitutes Anglicanism? Are we all to be in touchy feely liberal communion with the politburo of Southwark before we can be deemed to be acceptable?
Hooray for inclusivity - it's a pity that its loudest proponents don't have a clue what it is.
Indeed.
Cranmer also has some fun with this.
On the Bishop of Rochester, Dr. Nazir-Ali:
The Bishop of Rochester has just announced his resignation, whatever he may say, it is clearly a move towards a sectarian alternative church intentionally designed to create turbulence in the Anglican Communion.
What a nice send-off.
On those who boycotted Lambeth:
One reason why peace broke out at the Lambeth Conference was that the Puritan fringe stayed away, they boycotted the Conference – and they included the Bishop of Rochester, Lewes and Willesden in the UK. It is my view that any bishop who engaged in the boycott has placed himself outside full communion and his status as a bishop of the Anglian Church must be open to some debate.
Well, I see the Very Rev. Slee is very concerned about unity. He certainly is, umm, contributing to it and is grieved so many didn’t make it to Lambeth.
Oh, and GAFCON, you’re bullies. Just so you know, in Christian unity and love, of course.
In this interesting and ongoing discussion, a Church of England bishop, probably a part of the Puritan fringe, responds:
What, in Slee's words is "open to debate" is probably:
1. Does he know what Puritanism is, and why the three people he names are Anglicans, not Puritans?
2. Has he invented a new version of donatism? "If you don't attend a voluntary event that is by invitation, to which you can reply "yes" or "no", you are thereby held to be a schismatic"?
3. Has he any clue about what actually constitutes Anglicanism? Are we all to be in touchy feely liberal communion with the politburo of Southwark before we can be deemed to be acceptable?
Hooray for inclusivity - it's a pity that its loudest proponents don't have a clue what it is.
Indeed.
Cranmer also has some fun with this.
Labels: Church of England, GAFCon
Norm Coleman Should Fight Franken Election Theft
I’m a bit busy this morning. But I do want to chime in and agree with the WSJ editorial stating that Norm Coleman is right to fight Al Franken’s so far successful efforts to steal the Minnesota U. S. Senate election.
The vote count has been a complete mess with decision after decision favoring likely Franken votes over likely Coleman votes. Some have noted that Coleman’s lawyers just got out-lawyered by Franken’s. (Not that I recommend stooping to the level of Democrat election-stealing lawyers.) But that is beside the point. It is clear that in this election, Franken votes are “more equal” than Coleman votes. And as the Supreme Court has rightly ruled in Bush v. Gore, that is unconstitutional.
It is difficult to see how the counting mess can be undone. So I think the best outcome is a run-off election between Coleman and Franken. But I expect this will go down as yet another U. S. Senate seat stolen by the Democrats.
But Coleman is right to fight that.
The vote count has been a complete mess with decision after decision favoring likely Franken votes over likely Coleman votes. Some have noted that Coleman’s lawyers just got out-lawyered by Franken’s. (Not that I recommend stooping to the level of Democrat election-stealing lawyers.) But that is beside the point. It is clear that in this election, Franken votes are “more equal” than Coleman votes. And as the Supreme Court has rightly ruled in Bush v. Gore, that is unconstitutional.
It is difficult to see how the counting mess can be undone. So I think the best outcome is a run-off election between Coleman and Franken. But I expect this will go down as yet another U. S. Senate seat stolen by the Democrats.
But Coleman is right to fight that.
Labels: vote fraud
Friday, April 17, 2009
Video of Baptist Pastor Beaten by Border Patrol
This video of a Baptist pastor telling of being beaten by Border Patrol has gone viral already.
I don’t want to jump to conclusions without hearing both sides of the story. But this should be investigated and investigated darn well.
MORE: From another video of the pastor, it is clear that he goes through checkpoints with a massive chip on his shoulder. But again, I’m not going to jump to conclusions.
I don’t want to jump to conclusions without hearing both sides of the story. But this should be investigated and investigated darn well.
MORE: From another video of the pastor, it is clear that he goes through checkpoints with a massive chip on his shoulder. But again, I’m not going to jump to conclusions.
Labels: freedom
Obama’s Increasing Catholic Problem
A majority of Roman Catholics foolishly voted for Obama. But now Obama may be already foolishly alienating them.
My readers are well aware of the controversy over Notre Dame inviting him to give the commencement speech there. One can hardly blame Obama for accepting the invitation. Nor do I think it quite the disaster for Obama that Damian Thompson thinks. But there is no question that the episode is putting Obama’s extremist support of abortion in the spotlight.
What hasn’t been given as much attention is his persistence in wanting to appoint a pro-abortion Ambassador to the Vatican, creating an impasse between him and the Pope.
Leaving aside the morals of this matter, this is disrespectful to the Pope and just flat stupid politics on the part of Obama. Is Obama so pro-abortion that he can not show the Pope some respect by appointing a pro-life Ambassador to the Vatican? I haven’t noticed much pushback from Roman Catholics yet and for that Obama should be thankful. But he would be wise to back down . . . now.
Perhaps most polarizing of all is The White House having Christian symbols covered up for Obama’s economic speech at Georgetown. Shame on Obama and shame on Georgetown for kowtowing to the White House’s request.
In a way, I do hope Obama continues in his clueless and/or anti-Catholic ways. Maybe then many of those Catholics who voted for him will go to confession as they should.
My readers are well aware of the controversy over Notre Dame inviting him to give the commencement speech there. One can hardly blame Obama for accepting the invitation. Nor do I think it quite the disaster for Obama that Damian Thompson thinks. But there is no question that the episode is putting Obama’s extremist support of abortion in the spotlight.
What hasn’t been given as much attention is his persistence in wanting to appoint a pro-abortion Ambassador to the Vatican, creating an impasse between him and the Pope.
Leaving aside the morals of this matter, this is disrespectful to the Pope and just flat stupid politics on the part of Obama. Is Obama so pro-abortion that he can not show the Pope some respect by appointing a pro-life Ambassador to the Vatican? I haven’t noticed much pushback from Roman Catholics yet and for that Obama should be thankful. But he would be wise to back down . . . now.
Perhaps most polarizing of all is The White House having Christian symbols covered up for Obama’s economic speech at Georgetown. Shame on Obama and shame on Georgetown for kowtowing to the White House’s request.
In a way, I do hope Obama continues in his clueless and/or anti-Catholic ways. Maybe then many of those Catholics who voted for him will go to confession as they should.
Labels: Obama, Pope Benedict, Roman Catholics
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Napolitano Dances Around DHS Report
That Department of Homeland Security report smearing us dangerous rightwingers is the gift that keeps on giving. Now the entertainment is coming from Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s attempts to dance around the report. Yesterday, she stood by it. But today, she apologizes for it, sort of.
Not surprisingly, her dance isn’t getting good reviews. But I find it quite entertaining myself.
Not surprisingly, her dance isn’t getting good reviews. But I find it quite entertaining myself.
Labels: freedom, Napolitano, politics
Tea Party Report UPDATED
The Corpus Christi Tea Party yesterday was fun. It was well organized and well attended. And, yes, us dangerous rightwingers behaved ourselves.
Locally, the Caller-Times and Channel 10 gave it good coverage. But Channel 6 ignored it, at least on their 5pm broadcast. Typical of that tabloid TV news outlet.
The organizers did something smart – they had people sign in so they could get an accurate count. If I find out what the count was, I’ll post it here. Police estimated it between 500-1000. This isn’t a very political area, so that is impressive.
Numerous reports from tea parties around the nation may be found here.
-----
UPDATE: A conservative (and not in the political sense) and painstaking estimate has nationwide tea party attendance at over 250,000. And judging from his estimate for Corpus Christi of 500, this is likely an undercount.
UPDATE2: And the source, Nate Silver, has now acknowledged as much. His count is now well over 300,000.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Leftist Thugs Shut Down Free Speech at UNC
I no sooner warn of Leftist contempt of free speech when Leftist thugs at the University of North Carolina give a textbook example of the same.
Obama Criminalizing Dissent?
The “Rightwing Extremism” report from Obama’s Department of Homeland Security that I took on yesterday should not be looked upon in isolation. As Andrew McCarthy reminds us, it is part of a pattern – a pattern revealing the impulses of Obama and his supporters towards attacking free speech and criminalizing dissent to his agenda.
I noted this pattern even well before the election of the Chosen One . . . repeatedly. And I’ve seen again and again the Left’s contempt for free speech and for the rule of Constitutional law. For them, free speech and the Constitution are to be given lip service, of course, but are in reality to be disposed of when it gets in the way of their agenda.
I know my saying so may offend. And I know there are left of center people who do respect our Constitution and its freedoms. But I’ve watched the Left for too many years. Believe me when I say they are not to be trusted to respect our Constitutional freedoms.
And now one of them is President.
The DHS report will not be the last attack on legitimate dissent from the Obama Administration.
I noted this pattern even well before the election of the Chosen One . . . repeatedly. And I’ve seen again and again the Left’s contempt for free speech and for the rule of Constitutional law. For them, free speech and the Constitution are to be given lip service, of course, but are in reality to be disposed of when it gets in the way of their agenda.
I know my saying so may offend. And I know there are left of center people who do respect our Constitution and its freedoms. But I’ve watched the Left for too many years. Believe me when I say they are not to be trusted to respect our Constitutional freedoms.
And now one of them is President.
The DHS report will not be the last attack on legitimate dissent from the Obama Administration.
It’s Tea Party Day!
Today, in over 300 locations, thousands of Americans (including this one) will gather to protest the looting of productive Americans by an oppressive and arrogant Washington D. C. and its enablers. Good summaries of the Tea Party movement may be found here and here.
A word of warning to those attending the tea parties -- there are active efforts to discredit them. Please be careful not to inadvertently feed those efforts. We are right to be angry, but keep your anger well within wisdom. (Yes, I do need to remind myself of that.)
By the way, those who think tea party protesters are in the tank for the Republican Party need to think again. I personally know that many of them are every bit as upset at Republicans for failing them as they are at Democrats for looting them. Both parties had better listen and listen good today.
A word of warning to those attending the tea parties -- there are active efforts to discredit them. Please be careful not to inadvertently feed those efforts. We are right to be angry, but keep your anger well within wisdom. (Yes, I do need to remind myself of that.)
By the way, those who think tea party protesters are in the tank for the Republican Party need to think again. I personally know that many of them are every bit as upset at Republicans for failing them as they are at Democrats for looting them. Both parties had better listen and listen good today.
Labels: freedom, tea parties
ANCA and GAFCON Bishops Meeting in London
This is being done rather quietly, but seven primates of GAFCON and eight bishops of the Anglican Church in North America are now meeting in London behind closed doors.
Interesting. Certainly among their discussions must be the hoped for recognition of ANCA as a new Anglican province. Many of my erudite readers will have noticed that the latest enormities from The Episcopal Church are giving even more credence for the necessity of that.
Interesting. Certainly among their discussions must be the hoped for recognition of ANCA as a new Anglican province. Many of my erudite readers will have noticed that the latest enormities from The Episcopal Church are giving even more credence for the necessity of that.
Labels: GAFCon, new province, The Anglican Church in North America
Tuesday, April 14, 2009
Obama’s Feds Targeting “Rightwing Extremists” UPDATED
It has been oft said that it’s not paranoia if they really are out to get you.
With that in mind, consider a document from the Department of Homeland Security entitled “Rightwing Extremism.”
And if you are – let’s see – upset about the past election or the economy, strongly opposed to abortion or to uncontrolled immigration or to gun control or just don’t like Obama, i. e. “are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use,” then you might be one of those dangerous “rightwing extremists.”
Oh, and if you are too far right of center for Obama’s tastes, you are a hater, too:
Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
Wow. I share Michelle Malkin’s amazement at this government document.
This report begs the question of why was it produced. I don’t expect a knock on the door from the Feds tomorrow, but I am scratching my head trying to find a legitimate reason for this smear job of a report produced by the Obama feds. We know from history that when totalitarian regimes smear political opponents or other unwanted groups, political repression and worse is on the way. So what is the purpose of this piece of government-produced propaganda?
Meanwhile, I intend to join other “rightwing extremists” for a tea party tomorrow. If you live in the U. S., there is likely one near you. Come join us. Maybe you’ll be filmed by Obamatrons doing surveillance on dangerous rightwingers.
-----
MORE: If you think I’m hard on this report, you should read HotAir’s take. I heartily agree that the DHS report is an “attack on normal political dissent.”
UPDATE: The backlash against the report has already begun. The American Legion has written Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano a little note.
With that in mind, consider a document from the Department of Homeland Security entitled “Rightwing Extremism.”
And if you are – let’s see – upset about the past election or the economy, strongly opposed to abortion or to uncontrolled immigration or to gun control or just don’t like Obama, i. e. “are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use,” then you might be one of those dangerous “rightwing extremists.”
Oh, and if you are too far right of center for Obama’s tastes, you are a hater, too:
Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
Wow. I share Michelle Malkin’s amazement at this government document.
This report begs the question of why was it produced. I don’t expect a knock on the door from the Feds tomorrow, but I am scratching my head trying to find a legitimate reason for this smear job of a report produced by the Obama feds. We know from history that when totalitarian regimes smear political opponents or other unwanted groups, political repression and worse is on the way. So what is the purpose of this piece of government-produced propaganda?
Meanwhile, I intend to join other “rightwing extremists” for a tea party tomorrow. If you live in the U. S., there is likely one near you. Come join us. Maybe you’ll be filmed by Obamatrons doing surveillance on dangerous rightwingers.
-----
MORE: If you think I’m hard on this report, you should read HotAir’s take. I heartily agree that the DHS report is an “attack on normal political dissent.”
UPDATE: The backlash against the report has already begun. The American Legion has written Homeland Security Secretary Napolitano a little note.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Labour Sleeze (and Obama?)
Now that Holy Week is past, I can reveal my fascination with the revelation of the sordid plans of Labour operative Damian McBride and the backfiring of said plans. Here is a good summary of the plot so far, but a google will reveal numerous stories. The now famous Guido Fawkes’ blog that blew the cover on this is here.
So far, the slightly silly efforts of Labourites to dismiss all this are not going over very well.
Don’t be surprised if the same sort of episode happens in the Obama administration someday. In spite of his untrammeled cool wonderfulness, the Dear Leader chose Rahm Emanuel to be his Chief of Staff. Now Mr. Emanuel has a well-earned reputation of being an attack dog – and that is putting it politely, believe me. And already the Obama Administration has a pattern of going after “enemies” such as Rush Limbaugh and Jim Cramer. (And Cramer is actually an Obama supporter.)
At the same time, there is no question that many of Obama’s supporters not only have a conscious but are idealistic. (Yes, I will give them that much credit.) There is also no question that Mr. Emanuel has earned a few enemies. Combine all that, and you get a likely scenario: Mr. Emanuel overreaches in smearing opponents, and an Obama supporter with a conscious or an Emanuel enemy with a grudge blows the cover on him.
You heard it here first.
Will said episode then backfire on Obama as the current UK episode seems to be backfiring on PM Gordon Brown? Let’s hope so. Those who knowingly appoint scumbags to important positions deserve every bit of the consequences of doing so.
So far, the slightly silly efforts of Labourites to dismiss all this are not going over very well.
Don’t be surprised if the same sort of episode happens in the Obama administration someday. In spite of his untrammeled cool wonderfulness, the Dear Leader chose Rahm Emanuel to be his Chief of Staff. Now Mr. Emanuel has a well-earned reputation of being an attack dog – and that is putting it politely, believe me. And already the Obama Administration has a pattern of going after “enemies” such as Rush Limbaugh and Jim Cramer. (And Cramer is actually an Obama supporter.)
At the same time, there is no question that many of Obama’s supporters not only have a conscious but are idealistic. (Yes, I will give them that much credit.) There is also no question that Mr. Emanuel has earned a few enemies. Combine all that, and you get a likely scenario: Mr. Emanuel overreaches in smearing opponents, and an Obama supporter with a conscious or an Emanuel enemy with a grudge blows the cover on him.
You heard it here first.
Will said episode then backfire on Obama as the current UK episode seems to be backfiring on PM Gordon Brown? Let’s hope so. Those who knowingly appoint scumbags to important positions deserve every bit of the consequences of doing so.
Labels: Labour, Obama, politics, UK
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
The Collect for Wednesday in Holy Week
ASSIST us mercifully with thy help, O Lord God of our salvation; that we may enter with joy upon the meditation of those mighty acts, whereby thou hast given unto us life and immortality; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.
When I prayed this collect this morning, it struck me how appropriate it is for Wednesday in Holy Week. With the Triduum beginning tomorrow evening, we are about to enter the time of the year when we most focus on the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
And who is adequate for such holy things? I most certainly am not. And I need and want God’s help as I seek to remember and mediate on these most holy and loving acts of Christ. Lord, assist us mercifully with thy help, indeed!
May the Lord indeed assist you as you seek to observe Holy Week and the Triduum in a worthy manner.
When I prayed this collect this morning, it struck me how appropriate it is for Wednesday in Holy Week. With the Triduum beginning tomorrow evening, we are about to enter the time of the year when we most focus on the Passion, Death, and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.
And who is adequate for such holy things? I most certainly am not. And I need and want God’s help as I seek to remember and mediate on these most holy and loving acts of Christ. Lord, assist us mercifully with thy help, indeed!
May the Lord indeed assist you as you seek to observe Holy Week and the Triduum in a worthy manner.
Labels: Holy Week, liturgy, prayer
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
First Thoughts on the ACNA Constitution
As promised, I gave the proposed constitution for the Anglican Church in North America a good looking over.
I am impressed! As far as I can see, it says everything that needs to be said. In fact, I was thinking while I was reading it, “You know, they need to spell out the procedure for expulsion for that will be necessary someday. Look how vagueness in that regard has contributed to the mess in the Anglican Communion.”
Then, sure enough, towards the end, there was procedure clearly spelled out.
While the Constitution says what needs to be said, it does not say what should not be said. Namely, it allows plenty of wiggle room for all sorts of orthodox Anglicans, from incense-addled Anglo-Catholics to allergic-to-incense evangelicals, such as in the areas of church councils, sacraments, and the 39 Articles. That’s important. I want all of these faithful orthodox to be appreciated and comfortable members of the ANCA.
I haven’t read the canons yet. But I give a big thumbs up to the proposed constitution.
Again, the documents in question may be found here.
I am impressed! As far as I can see, it says everything that needs to be said. In fact, I was thinking while I was reading it, “You know, they need to spell out the procedure for expulsion for that will be necessary someday. Look how vagueness in that regard has contributed to the mess in the Anglican Communion.”
Then, sure enough, towards the end, there was procedure clearly spelled out.
While the Constitution says what needs to be said, it does not say what should not be said. Namely, it allows plenty of wiggle room for all sorts of orthodox Anglicans, from incense-addled Anglo-Catholics to allergic-to-incense evangelicals, such as in the areas of church councils, sacraments, and the 39 Articles. That’s important. I want all of these faithful orthodox to be appreciated and comfortable members of the ANCA.
I haven’t read the canons yet. But I give a big thumbs up to the proposed constitution.
Again, the documents in question may be found here.
Labels: The Anglican Church in North America
Monday, April 06, 2009
Holy Week Housekeeping
I rejoice in the beginning of Holy Week. Two notes concerning that:
1. Please pray for those in Italy going through a passion of their own due to the earthquake there.
2. I will be more selective (and considerably less snarky) in my posting this week.
1. Please pray for those in Italy going through a passion of their own due to the earthquake there.
2. I will be more selective (and considerably less snarky) in my posting this week.
ACNA Canons Comment Period
The Anglican Church in North America has published a complete set of provisional canons to be acted upon by the Leadership Council on April 24th and 25th. There is now a comment period (for those in the ACNA I presume) through April 23rd.
The announcement and the links to said canons may be found here.
And, yes, I do intend to give these a good examination.
The announcement and the links to said canons may be found here.
And, yes, I do intend to give these a good examination.
Labels: The Anglican Church in North America
Friday, April 03, 2009
Obama Youth Funds for ACORN
Think the concern out there that Obama Youth funding will be used to funnel money to ACORN and other Leftist groups is just paranoia?
Think again. In the Senate, Sen. David Vitter offered an amendment to prohibit such funds from going to ACORN. The amendment was voted down 53-43.
This is but one aspect of the Obama regime’s contempt for your conscience. Do you object to abortion, ACORN, and other leftisms? Too bad. You are going to pay for them anyway.
All the more reason to go Galt.
Think again. In the Senate, Sen. David Vitter offered an amendment to prohibit such funds from going to ACORN. The amendment was voted down 53-43.
This is but one aspect of the Obama regime’s contempt for your conscience. Do you object to abortion, ACORN, and other leftisms? Too bad. You are going to pay for them anyway.
All the more reason to go Galt.
Labels: ACORN, freedom, going Galt, Obama
Thursday, April 02, 2009
BREAKING: Vincent Nichols New Archbishop of Westminster
Multiple sources report Vincent Nichols will announced tomorrow as the new Archbishop of Westminster.
I share in the rejoicing of my UK Roman Catholic friends who feared a less suitable selection.
I share in the rejoicing of my UK Roman Catholic friends who feared a less suitable selection.
Labels: Roman Catholics, UK
Obama Bows to Saudi King
I don’t intend to say much about it or to inflame passions about it (as I expect others to do), but expect to hear a lot in the future about Obama’s rather deep bow to King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. It wouldn’t surprise me to see this in political ads, too.
If a private citizen wishes to bow deeply to the Saudi king, that’s fine, and I don’t have a problem with that. But for a President of the United States so to bow to King Abdullah or to just about any head of state? That is not his place. As much as I might not like it, he’s representing the United States. When he bows, he’s practically making us as a country bow or at least giving the appearance of the same.
Obama should not have done that. And he may eventually pay a political price for it.
If a private citizen wishes to bow deeply to the Saudi king, that’s fine, and I don’t have a problem with that. But for a President of the United States so to bow to King Abdullah or to just about any head of state? That is not his place. As much as I might not like it, he’s representing the United States. When he bows, he’s practically making us as a country bow or at least giving the appearance of the same.
Obama should not have done that. And he may eventually pay a political price for it.
Labels: Obama
The REAL Truth Behind Bible Stories
Ever wonder about some of those Bible stories? Well, The Truth can now be told about the real cause of many Bible miracles.
Space aliens.
-----
Hat tip to certain impious boys at my parish.
Space aliens.
-----
Hat tip to certain impious boys at my parish.
Labels: humor
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Outrage: Lover of Abortion New Episcopal Divinity School Dean
I’ve reduced my posting on the Episcopal Church because its apostasy is a done deal and because it has become so absurd, it has gone beyond satire. Reductio ad absurdum doesn’t work when one reaches absurdity already.
But I don’t think I’ve said “Anathema!” to that “church.”
I think it might be time so to do. For the new Dean of the Episcopal Divinity School is a lover of abortion:
And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.
These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.
That’s it. The sooner God throws that evil “church” on the ash heap of history along with its cousin Molech worship the better. Yeah, sure there are still orthodox Christians in The Episcopal Church. The Rotary Club can say the same . . . and has more decency.
And, please, let’s cut the pro-choice cover-up for people who are really pro-abortion. And using the pulpit to call abortion a “blessing” is about as pro-abortion as you can get.
But even that perhaps is not as pro-abortion and anti-choice as advocating taxpayer funding of abortion like . . . our Dear Leader.
But I don’t think I’ve said “Anathema!” to that “church.”
I think it might be time so to do. For the new Dean of the Episcopal Divinity School is a lover of abortion:
And when a woman becomes pregnant within a loving, supportive, respectful relationship; has every option open to her; decides she does not wish to bear a child; and has access to a safe, affordable abortion – there is not a tragedy in sight — only blessing. The ability to enjoy God’s good gift of sexuality without compromising one’s education, life’s work, or ability to put to use God’s gifts and call is simply blessing.
These are the two things I want you, please, to remember – abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Let me hear you say it: abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done. Abortion is a blessing and our work is not done.
That’s it. The sooner God throws that evil “church” on the ash heap of history along with its cousin Molech worship the better. Yeah, sure there are still orthodox Christians in The Episcopal Church. The Rotary Club can say the same . . . and has more decency.
And, please, let’s cut the pro-choice cover-up for people who are really pro-abortion. And using the pulpit to call abortion a “blessing” is about as pro-abortion as you can get.
But even that perhaps is not as pro-abortion and anti-choice as advocating taxpayer funding of abortion like . . . our Dear Leader.
Labels: abortion, Obama, The Episcopal Church
