Sunday, January 31, 2010

Is This What Obama Means By Openness, Transparency and Lack of Partisanship?

Watch the video below to see why we desperatly need to have a change of personnel in Washington.

Did you note, by the way, that Murtha doesn't know simple math?  When asked if 1/6 of the chamber needs to be present, he replied only 1/5.  In other words, he said more needs to be present and actually further incriminated himself.  By the way - this is the fellow that "pope" Pelosi wanted to be Majority Whip.  Murtha was defeated, giving Pelosi a major defeat - not that Steny Hoyer is much better.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Montgomery County Council - Planned Parenthood CEO Testifies on Jan 25th

The Health and Human Services Committee of the Montgomery County Council received further testimony during the same session in which they offered their sorry excuse for an amended "gag" bill for the pregnancy centers.  One of those testifying was Dr. Laura Meyers, CEO of Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan DC.  Naturally she said that women need care from licensed medical practitioners.  She didn't say it, but we can believe that she had in mind Planned Parenthood of Metro DC!  This abortion center loses hundreds of dollars for each woman whom the pregnancy centers can reach.

On December 12th, I touched a bit on the "care from licensed medical pratitioners" that one young girl received at that very same Planned Parenthood.  Today I was reminded of an incident that almost happened at the University of Maryland last April.  The student union was planning to show a xxx-rated porn movie there.  Planned Parenthood staff were slated to give a presentation prior to the movie, to advise them about contraception, condoms, etc, and perhaps their abortion "services".  In other words, they were positioning themselves to profit off sexual misconduct of college kids who were about to become heavily aroused.  Fortunately the debacle was cancelled after state legislators threatened to cut off massive amounts of funding.  Dr. Meyers said of her PP's planned participation, "The organization agreed because it would be a chance to reach a population it doesn’t normally have access to."  Substitute the word "market" for "population" and I think you have a pretty good idea of how Planned Parenthood operates.

Let me share some very current insight into the depraved greed of Planned Parenthood of Metro DC.  I sidewalk counsel in front of their Silver Spring facility.  Today a couple went in.  The young lady was in tears.  She clearly was being coerced into that abortion by her very arrogant and abusive male companion.  I highly doubt that the Planned Parenthood staff gave a rat's behind about her wishes.  All they wanted was the money from the man.  Well, they got their dough and the young lady will now spend a lifetime in pain and regret.

Clearly Planned Parenthood has a vested financial interest in seeing to it that the legitimate activities of prolife pregnancy centers are hobbled, for the more that happens, the more blood money will flow into Planned Parenthood's coffers.  By no stretch of the imagination are they disinterested and altruistic little do-gooders.  Thus any testimony that they offer on this sort of legislation is worthless.

Manhattan Declaration Misses the Point, Per Dr. Charles Rice

Dr. Charles Rice, a professor emeritus of Notre Dame Law School and a renowned pro-life author has penned an article that eloquently states my objections to the Manhattan Declaration.  I urge one and all to read it

To recap my own objections (which can be reviewed by typing "Manhattan Declaration" into the search box), this so-called manifesto mentions most of the moral ills of our contemporary culture - except contraception!  This omission is so glaring and obvious that I cannot help but believe that it is deliberate.  The very acquiesence in this matter is nothing other than homage to the culture of death.  I will quote here from Dr. Rice's article: "The failure of MD, in its catalogue of legalized promotions of the “culture of death,” even to mention the entry by government into the business of subsidizing by contraception the rejection of new life, is inexcusable. Once that role of government was conceded, the other evils denounced by MD were predictable. Perhaps the purpose of MD was to put together a coalition of signers that would include proponents of public funding of contraception. If so, MD politicized and trivialized itself."

Some criticisms of my opinions have been:
1) "We've got to start somewhere!"  True, but we should still take care that the "somewhere" is truly a worthy starting point.  Take the analogy of weeding a garden.  What good does it do to simply rip off the stem and flower, but still leave the root?  If the root is left, you know very well that the weeds will be back very quickly.
2) "You're trash-talking a positive step."  All that demonstrates is that we've partaken of the "positive versus negative" kool-aid.  Instead of focusing on "postivie versus negative", we should be concerned with "truth versus falsehood", "accuracy versus inaccuracy".  The "positive versus negative" paradigm has more to do with people's subjective reactions to a given subject matter, rather than with the objective merits of the subject matter at hand.
3) "Look at all the Catholic/Christian/prolife famous people who've glommed onto the MD.  Can they all be wrong?  What famous person backs up your negative (that word again!) position?  Get with the program!"  With Dr. Rice's now-published opinion, I can now say "Voila!"  But - should that really matter?  Ladies and gentlemen, we will all answer to God individually for our actions.  We will not be able to tell Him, "But Mr. Prolife Bigshot said this was the silver bullet!"  We have to stand for ourselves - even if we stand alone.

By the way - aside from hearing of all the folks who've signed the MD (my name being absent!), I haven't heard of much real, tangible fruit from this thing.  Frankly, I don't think we'll hear much of it ever, but I'm open to being proven wrong.

Products of Global Warming!

In a gesture of magnanimity to all our liberal, pro-abortion, global warming dupes, I have given a new name to all the white stuff, e.g., snowflakes, that are falling outside my house at this very moment.  It is (drum roll, please!):



As I said, quite a few of these little "products" are falling, and on top of the remnant of the 20 inches of "products" that still remain from last month's ..uh.. "global warming event"  (we used to call them "blizzards").  Well, I'm glad we're in a global warming spate, because I'd hate to see what "global cooling" would be.  You remember that, don't you?  That was the chicken-little fad from a decade or two ago.  Hey, have some fun!  Go out and build a snowman, uh, I mean, "product-of-global-warming person"!

Friday, January 29, 2010

Montgomery County Council Puts Lipstick on a Rattlesnake

In the January 27th issue of the Gazette (page B-1 of the Gaithersburg edition and linked here), we read that Leventhal et al "amended" their "gag the pro-life centers" bill.  But.. did they really??

The very first sentence of this article is most revelatory of the Council's dubious motives.  It reads and I quote, "Anti-abortion pregnancy centers no longer are singled out under a bill being considered by the Montgomery County Council that requires pregnancy centers to warn women if they are not being advised by medical professionals."  Note that it says that the pregnancy centers "no longer are singled out."   That adverbial phrase "no longer" makes quite plain that at one time, they most certainly were singled out, and intentionally so.  I believe they still are, knowing this cabal.  Also note the use of this word "warn".  When I think of that word, I think of danger.  There's no danger posed by the pro-life centers.  All women who've walkded into the pregnancy centers in this county have walked out by their own power.  The same cannot be said for this county's abortion centers.  I of course speak of the Potomac Family Planning Center where Jennifer Hallner died as a result of the lack of proper medical equipment to revive her.  Dr. Earl McLeod was disciplined.  I wonder if part of the discipline required that he post a sign warning women of his chequered track record.  I suspect not.

Now here's a curious paragraph.  "Montgomery County has four anti-abortion pregnancy centers that originally were targeted by the bill, including the Rockville Pregnancy Center, which is a licensed medical clinic. The Rockville center would be excluded from both versions of the bill."  Besides the clear admission that the pro-life centers were targeted, the two sentences contradict each other.  The first sentence says that Rockville Pregnancy Center was in the Council's cross-hairs.  The second says that it wasn't.  During the hearings, there was considerable squirming about that question, particularly on the part of Trachtenberg.  You can hear some of that on previous posting of this blog.

So why does the Council want to pass this bill at all?  Jackie Stippich, director of Shady Grove Pregnancy Center, correctly states that no complaint has ever been lodged by a client - a real client that is, and not just some NARAL volunteer who obviously has her own bias.  Speaking of bias, plenty of it has been demonstrated on this blog.  Leventhal's statement regarding objections to this bill is a dismissive and condescending "They resent it."  Well, let's take a look at Leventhal's behavior during the December 1st hearings.  Please go to and see how he blatantly attempts to twist the testimony of a pregnancy center volunteer.  Earlier in the evening he pooh-poohed the idea of touring a pro-life center, stating that he wouldn't be presented with a fair picture of how one operates.  In other words, he called these good people liars.  But perhaps it is he who is not being up front about his own arguable conflicts of interests.  Quite frankly, the Gazette article is curiously silent about that matter as well.  However, let me elaborate below.

The Maryland NARAL puts on a fundraising gala every October, usually in Rockville.  Their lists of sponsors is online here.  There are lots of familiar names, including those of George Leventhal and Duchy Tractenberg.  Moreover, Tractenberg, who originally introduced the bill, is a past president of Maryland NOW.  Ladies and gentlemen, can we say "conflict of interest big time"?  I daresay we can.

This so-called "amended" bill is scheduled for a vote.  Please continue to contact the council here and tell them "NO".

Thursday, January 28, 2010

More Nonsense From Obama

Thanks to Les Femmes (see right sidebar) for pointing this out. 

Do you remember the line where he said, "That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions."  Well, go to the Les Femmes blog, where you'll see the bevy of lobbyists that Obama has placed in high positions.  The list goes on and on and on.  Is that "change we can believe in"?

On Nauseating Display Last Evening - The Audacity of Dopes

Last evening the Messiah Most Miserable delivered his first State of the Union address.  It was probably a tad more revealing than the more astute among the "culture of death" devotees would have wished.  One can read the text of the thing from the White House website

By the way - did anyone take notice of how Pelosi kept jumping out of her seat to applaud, like a jack-in-the-box?  Perhaps "pop goes the weasel" has quite a bit of meaning here!  Poor Biden!  Of course he had to drag his bones out of his chair to follow suit, as the cameras were turned on them.

For starters, I'd like to examine this snippet of the thing.  "So, no, I will not give up on trying to change the tone of our politics. I know it's an election year. And after last week, it's clear that campaign fever has come even earlier than usual. But we still need to govern.  To Democrats, I would remind you that we still have the largest majority in decades, and the people expect us to solve problems, not run for the hills. (Applause.) And if the Republican leadership is going to insist that 60 votes in the Senate are required to do any business at all in this town -- a supermajority -- then the responsibility to govern is now yours as well. (Applause.) Just saying no to everything may be good short-term politics, but it's not leadership. We were sent here to serve our citizens, not our ambitions. (Applause.) So let's show the American people that we can do it together. (Applause.)"

Let's examine the "tone of our politics", particularly in terms of the Hell Bill.  It's no secret that the Republicans have been locked out of any meaningful participation in terms of the construct of this thing.   Just today we read in the Washington Times how the House Republicans are practically pulling teeth to have the White House release records of meetings with health industry groups as they helped Democrats plop together this stinker of a bill.  It sounds like the "tone change" had better start in the White House.

He then chides the congressional Democrats for what he calls "running for the hills."  Actually, what the Messiah calls "running for the hills" is what they should have been doing all along - listen to the people who elected them.  What the President erroneously calls "solving problems" is actually disregarding the people and arrogating massive amounts of authority away from the people to Washington.  The recent elections sounded an alarm, one that the President arrogantly ignores as he demands that the Democrats fall on their swords to fulfill his lust for power.

Then he tells the Republicans that now that they've broken the supermajority (again, though, the people did that), they now "have the responsibility to govern".  What am I missing here?  Am I to believe that up until Scott Brown won Kennedy's old seat, that, in Obama's fondest dreams, the Republicans were to have no such responsibility or voice in Washington?  Did we just witness an inadvertent admission of the President of his not-so-secret desire for a puppet Congress?  Where, oh where, was all this "bipartisanship" that the Messiah promised us during his campaign?

It's getting late, and I must touch on other things.  More will be said on this most telling of talks.  I'll end by appending a youtube of an open letter that Rush Limbaugh sent to the Messiah in response to last night's debacle.

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Ecumenism - Handle With Care

Michael Voris of Real Catholic TV, in the video below, explains why Protestantism contains within itself the beginnings of the culture of death.  I ask you to watch this in its entirety.

He's speaking of the Protestant belief that he/she is his/her own authority when it comes to interpreting God's Word.  Well, with that comes umpteen million versions of morality.  I do remember hearing one story of Martin Luther, in his later years.  He wasn't too happy with some of the fruits of what he had done.  He remarked that he did what he did so he wouldn't have to deal with a pope, but found himself dealing with 200 "popes".  Well, now there's quite a few more.

Voris also hits on another imporant truth.  When the underpinnings of faith are undermined, so is morality.  Ladies and gentlemen, he is 100% correct.  Recall that it was a Protestant gathering, namely the 1930 Lambeth Conference, that opened the floodgates of contraceptives.  We know what's happened in the 80 years since then.

An important aside.  The pro-life apostolate does, in my opinion, operates within the realm of human rights, in which all people of good will can operate.  However, have you noticed that as that happens, quite a few of those Protestant people of good will come home to Rome?  I've never heard of anyone going in the opposite direction.

Big Bird Questions Mrs. Messiah!

I don't know where this came from, but it's good for a laugh!

Enjoy!  Don't take it too seriously!

Another Dimension To The Messiah's Week Of Misery

Yesterday I wrote about the Supreme Court decision that struck down in part the 2002 campaign finance "reform" laws.  In addition to ACORN and mainstream media no longer having a monopoly on political conversation, there's yet another reason why culture-of-death devotees are having snit-fits.  Lifesite News published this analysis.  I urge you to read it, but I'll point out a key point here.

Stare decisis is a principle that American jurisprudence had, up until now, religiously followed.  It holds that judges should follow precedent established by prior decisions.  Therefore, in the minds of many, the two twin decisions of January 22, 1973, namely Roe v Wade and  Doe v Balton were held to be law written in stone.  However, this week, Chief Justice Roberts wrote that stare decisis is "not in exorable command." 

"When considering whether to re-examine a prior erroneous holding, we must balance the importance of having constitutional questions decided against the importance of having them decided right," he continued, adding that “stare decisis is not an end in itself."

Pro-aborts see where this could head.  The Center for Reproductive Rights called this "terrifying."  Let that "terror" begin!

Monday, January 25, 2010

A "Double-Agent" Board Member

St. Bonaventure University in up-state New York has on its board of trustees a woman of, shall we say, a "diversity" of experience with various boards.  I speak of Dr. Ellen E. Grant, a highly-placed social worker who currently sits on the St Bonaventure Board of Trustees.  However, her past experience includes a stint on the board of directors of Planned Parenthood of Western New York.  Such a chequered resume leads one to wonder how Bonaventure justified the bestowal of its highest award, the Gaudete Medal, upon her.

In making these statements, my focus of criticism is not so much on Dr. Grant as it is upon an institution that ostensibly has as its mission the impartation of Catholic truths and traditions.  One wonders how this can be.  A perusal of the website answers the question somewhat.  We see something called Spectrum, an on-campus organization that "not only seeks to promote the issues that affect the gay and lesbian community directly, but diversity issues as a whole, aiming for a greater all-around atmosphere of acceptance at St. Bonaventure University". (emphasis mine)  Moreover, it "looks to correct the large number of misconceptions people have about homosexuality and religion, and to raise awareness of how these misconceptions are formed."  I'm sure that one of those alledged "misconceptions" is the Church's teachings that homosexual inclinations are intrinically disordered, and that homosexual relations are sinful.  Well, misconception clearly exists, but not on the part of the Magisterium.  I'm pleased to see that there appears to be a pro-life group on campus.

Now here's the board of trustees.  Of the 32 members, I count 5 Franciscans; the rest are lay.  Do we see what happens when lay people take over an institution founded by religious?  The vision and charism of that institution often falls by the wayside - not to say that the religious in question are stellar paragons, but at least there's a better chance of adherence to that mission.  We saw that at Notre Dame, when a secular board invited the Messiah Most Miserable there last May to give a Performance Most Miserable.

Sunday, January 24, 2010

Lobby Against the CPC Strangulation Bill with This Tool

The Maryland Catholic Conference has a page dedicated to the fight against these attempts to strangle the pro-life pregnancy centers that seem to be popping up like kudzu all over the Free State.  It links to various documents (including the Washington Post article that opposes this measure).  Moreover, to the right is a link to the capwiz function that facilitates emails to all the Montgomery County Council members.  Please avail yourselves of it, and let others know of it, too.

Saturday, January 23, 2010

From the "Moms from Hell" Department

Just when you thought you've seen it all, you're proven wrong.  Such was my experience when I read this account of a Florida woman who forced her 16-year old daughter to take labor-inducing pills precisely to cause the death of her own grandson.  Mind you, the daughter wanted her baby boy!

After ingesting the pills, the daughter delivered the baby boy in the toilet.  She retrieved him and laid him on her bed.  He survived that ordeal.  He was breathing and moving when grandma-from-hell came and threw him in the trash!

The defense attorney had the chutzpah to claim that the woman did it "out of love for her daughter".  With "love" like that, who needs hatred?  She will serve 3 years on house arrest and 7 years probation after that.  Everyone seemed concered that if this woman were separated from her children, they'd be harmed.  Hello?  I think the truth here is that she remains a clear and present danger to her children - certainly her grandchildren.  The woman could have served 26 years in prison; she got off with a slap on her wrist.  But at least that little boy received some token modicum of justice.  That's a rarity, as I state below.

I'm a sidewalk counselor.  I see way too many parents drag their frightened, beaten-down daughters into that death trap known as Planned Parenthood.  Of course the "clinic escorts", those so-called "champions of choice" turn and look the other way while an obviously reluctant young girl has no choice whastsoever.

The Messiah Most Miserable Is, Well, Most Miserable!

Poor guy!  This week he just had some "change he can't believe in"!  First, he lost his supermajority in the Senate after the upset in Massachusetts.  Then the Supreme Court passed a ruling that removed restrictions on corporate political donations.  Those restrictions were clearly unconstitutional and needed to go.  However, President Barack HUSSEIN Obama is upset because now the grips of ACORN, Soros et al have some competition.

We can't allow ourselves to get heady and giddy about any of this.  But we can seize this momentum and run with it.

Friday, January 22, 2010

CPC Attack Bill On January 25th Agenda

The Health and Human Services Committee of the Montgomery County Council is scheduled to revisit their attempt to strangle the four pro-life pregnancy centers in the county.  The Council held a public hearing on the matter on Dec 1st.  I attended it and recorded it.  Between then and now I've been posting snippets of my recordings on this blog, as well as some analysis.  These can be found by putting "Montgomery County Council" in the search box.

The Catholic Standard online edition has two posts that are worthy of study.  One gives the text of the Maryland bishops' statement called "Set Out in Haste".  Ladies and gentlemen, I knew Maryland's abortion rate was higher than the national rate, but I didn't realize it was 38% higher.  We Marylanders should be ashamed.

The second highlights Birthright of Wheaton, directed by Carol Buchanan.  At the bottom, she notes that George Leventhal, chair of that HHS committee, cynically refused to visit a pregnancy center, stating that he would not get a candid view.  What Mr Leventhal failed to divulge is that he is a public supporter of NARAL.  That was brought out by one of my postings on this topic.

Please contact the Montgomery County Council and demand that they kill this bill.  Thank you.

Planned Parenthood Teaches Children to Inject Each Other with Contraceptives

Planned Parenthood has injected deadly meaning into the children's game called "playing doctor".   In Ecuador, they are instructing children as young as 11 years old to inject each other with Depo-Provera.  One of their vice presidents wrote an article in Global Health magazine bragging about it. 

Funny thing, though.  You can click on the "Global" link to try to read the actual article.  Then google "contraceptive ecuador".  You'll see a link that looks like the article.  It will take you to "Global Heath" - but I can't seem to find it!  If anyone else can, please advise via "comments".

At any rate, to expect that children can practice medicine on each other is irresponsible beyond belief.  But are we surprised?  We know full well that Planned Parenthood doesn't give a rat's ass about anyone's health - and their cavalier attitude is fully on display.

Someone did comment to me below and advised me that Lila Rose's group Live Action did copy that post to their blog before Global Health disingenuously removed it.  Bad little Global Health!  Bad little Planned Parenthood!  Naughty, naughty!  Did you really think you'd get away with it?  At any rate, here's the link, and many thanks to the individual who supplied it (I post it here so that the link will be live).

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Continuation of My Reply Under "Some Reactions" from Jan 20th

As I said, I believe an abstention from the MA vote would have been objectively wrong.  Of course I cannot presume to know interior motivations that might have impelled some to choose not to vote, so there's no way I can accuse anyone of sin; be assured, such was not my purpose.

Evangelium Vitae doesn't say much (as far as I could find) about how citizens should vote for candidates.  Rather, what it does discuss are the moral guidelines that the legislators themselves must follow.  Some common sense would say that our responsibilities are similar.  One of the articles to which I alluded in my comment is a Voter Guide put out by EWTN.  Questions 8 and 10 seem most relevant to the MA situation, as they discuss recommended actions when all candidates are pro-abortion.  Note the obvious point made - that either one or the other will win the election.  Thus, no matter what happened Tuesday evening, a pro-abort was going to take Kennedy's seat.  Then Father says, "you should do your best to judge which candidate would do the least moral harm."  Ladies and gentlemen, while Brown is pro-abortion, he has also stated that he will oppose the Hell Bill.  We all know that this bill, if passed, will immensely increase abortion in our culture.  Moreover, our elderly and infirm would be placed in jeopardy.  Coakley was going to support this.  In light of this, is there really any question as to which candidate would do the least moral harm?  In light of this consideration, would it have been morally licit to abstain from voting for the candidate who stated that he would oppose the Hell Bill?  No.  Had Coakley won, would your abstention have contributed towards increased evil?  Yes. 

The EWTN "voters guide" was echoed by Bishop Robert Finn last year, when he stated "specifically we offered the example of two candidates who were permissive on abortion. We taught that, in such an instance, we should choose the candidate whose position will likely do the least grave evil, or whose position will do the most to limit the specific grave evil of abortion."

To sum up, does it not only make sense that when we have candidates whose life-stances are equally poor, that we have a positive moral obligation to exercise our powers as United States citizens to mitigate any damages and dangers to our brothers and sisters that would be posed by the more dangerous candidate?  How, in the face of what we knew about the MA elections, could it possibly have been morally legitimate to abstain from that vote?  When we cast our votes, intellect and reason must trump our otherwise-understandable emotional reactions to the candidates.  I cannot see how it wouldn't be a sin against the virtues of prudence, justice and charity to do otherwise.  If I am missing something, please advise.  I think it's good to have this conversation, as there might be similar situations next November.

To those Massachusetts readers who might have abstained from that vote, I have a question.  What tangible, measurable moral good did you achieve by your abstention?  What motivated your abstention?  I truly am interested, if you care to elaborate.  Thank you.

Wednesday, January 20, 2010

Virtual March for Life

Americans United for Life has launched an internet-based project that they've dubbed Virtual March for Life.  They've pitched it at those who cannot be in Washington on January 22nd for the actual March for Life.  It is done through the selection of "avators", something about which I need to study.

It has come under some criticism, however.  In a sense, I can understand the criticism.  I myself am a pro-life activist.  I firmly believe in Father Frank Pavone's statements in his flyer, "Our Media Is the Streets."  I link to it because I urge its close study.  For over 15 years, I've been in front of various abortuaries as a sidewalk counselor.  I've been involved in a number of street protests - and I've led some of them.  Last year,  or two ago, when something called the Red Envelope Project became quite the fad amongst some prolifers, I took strong issue with that.  In an exchange that I had with the founder, he flat out said that (paraphrased) "folks will not go into the streets, they will not write letters to the editor, but they will send an envelope.."  In other words, he was providing a cop-out.  If he had encouraged his followers to take the next step and become more active, I might have seen some worth to this project.  By the way - its website appears to be defunct; that's why there's no link.

Let's get back to the Virtual March for Life.  I ask you to look carefully at the main page.  If you look on the right side of that page, it offers the opportunity for a "virtual march" for those who cannot be in Washington.  Note that word cannot.  The unfortunate criticisms that I hear seem to indicate a belief that AUL is offering this venue for those who simply choose not to come to Washington.  As I look at this, it seems that AUL is offering this alternative for those who are honestly unable to come to Washington.  Now perhaps AUL might emphasize that point a bit better on their site and suggest local action, but still, a more-than-precursory glance at the page makes plain the intent of AUL.  Besides, I just cannot see Americans United for Life deliberately submarining Nellie Gray and her March for Life.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are going to have differences of opinions with each other, as good people will indeed disagree on things from time to time.  Let us be careful, though, to make certain that we are at least representing each other accurately.

Some Reactions to Scott Brown's Upset Victory

Ladies and gentlemen, thanks to secret agents and their concealed recording equipment, we have caught some very candid shots of the reactions of the Puppet-String Pullers of the Democrats.  Observe...

Yep!  They're in a tizzy!

Seriously, though, there are things to be considered.  Firstly, it is no secret that Scott Brown's "pro-life credentials" are non-existent.  While I rejoice at the election turnout, I'm more happy that Coakley lost than I'm happy that Brown won.  However, in order for the first to have happened, the second had to happen; let's not lose sight of that.

Folks, if this sort of thing can happen in liberal Massachusetts, it can certainly happen in more conservative areas of the country - and the leftists know this!  We need to keep up the momentum in all facets of pro-life activisim.  Too often pro-lifers have won a battle, then wrongly assumed that the war was won, returning to their isolated and oblivious existences.  No one can any longer allow themselves that luxury.  As a matter of fact, such apathy was never a morally valid attitude to take, as "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance".

What I say now is my opinion and may be controversial, but I believe it to be true.  We as Christians must understand that we have nothing in common with socialists and humanists.  Their whole mental and spiritual paradigm is atheistic (just go to their own websites if there's any doubt).  That means that the Catholic Church must stop trying to seek this mythical "common ground" with these folks (USCCB, are you reading this?).

We must also cease considering ourselves inextribly wed to the Republican Party.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the notion of a "third party" (by the way - I believe the Republican Party itself started as a "third party").  Evangelium Vitae teaches that we must vote for the candidate that is in the closest alignment with the Church.  Now when both candidates are pro-abortion (as in yesterday's MA race) we look to other factors; clearly sitting this race out would not have been a morally acceptable option.  Again, we must look at the facts and circumstances of each situation.

We've got our work cut out for us.  However, we now have a little more leverage, thanks be to God.

Tuesday, January 19, 2010

Scott Brown Wins Kennedy's Seat!

The Senate seat that was held by Ted Kennedy for over 40 years (and before that, by JFK himself), is now in Republican hands!  Brown, for all his acknowledged defects in terms of pro-life philosophy, has promised to oppose the Obamascare Hell Bill.  Moreover, the Republican count in the Senate is now 41.  The Democrats no longer have a filibuster-proof majority!

I'm sure this will send a loud, screeching signal to the rest of them on the Hill, that they may be put out to pasture should they continue to support the Hell Bill that most of them haven't even bothered to read.  (Gee whiz - I even provided a nice summary for them below).

Now let's push ahead to 2010.  More importantly, let's keep praying, interceding and proclaiming the truth to this sick world!

Sunday, January 17, 2010

Important Massachusetts Vote On January 19th

All the country is watching the Massachusetts election this coming Tuesday.  Martha Coakley was expected to be a shoe-in to fill Ted Kennedy's seat.  Thanks to the abominable antics of the Three Stooges (Obama, Reid, Pelosi) et al, Scott Brown is surging ahead in polls.

I realize Brown has made pro-abortion noises.  However, he and Coakley are the only two candidates on this ballot.  Evangelium Vitae would allow a vote to contain or minimize evil, if that's the only thing that can be done given specific circumstances.  Of overriding concern is that if Brown wins, Reid's fillibuster-proof majority is a thing of the past.  Do we see the Hell Bill implications of that?  In my humble opinion then, fellow Catholics, sitting out this particular election is NOT AN OPTION!

Legal/political disclaimer: Faithful Catholics of MD/DC Inc. is NOT a "501c" anything.  Therefore, politically speaking, we can say whatever we want.  Any lawyer-types looking to rake us over the coals, here's some advice - phhhft!!!

Of Racists and Hypocrites

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid made quite the racist remarks a week or so ago regarding the skin color and dialect of Obama.  But what's that amongst cronies in crime?  Such behavior would have - and has - led to outcries for resignation for any Republican and/or conservative.  Do you remember Trent Lott situation?  If not, here's a refresher from World Net Daily.  The call for Trent's personal and professional lynching (and I do mean use of that term!) was demanded by the Messiah Most Miserable himself! So why does Obama now change his tune?  Besides his well-know hypocrisy (such as broken promises of transparency), Obama really does need Reid in there if his Hell Bill is to stand a snowball's chance.

Father Thomas Euteneuer of Human Life International had some succinct comments regarding the same.  I direct you to his broadcast here.

Saturday, January 16, 2010

New "Comments" Policy!

Anonymous comments are now allowed.  I still ask that common courtesy and respect for the Magisterium of the Church be observed, as I do reserve the right to refrain from publishing unsuitable comments.  Thanks for your interest, and I hope you find the information here helpful.

For Those Who Still Haven't Read the Obamascare Hell Bill (Especially Democrats on the Hill)

Here is a well-done synopsis of the House bill.

To the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the state Catholic conferences (particularly the Maryland Catholic Conference) - the time is long overdue to take off your rose-colored glasses, start smelling the coffee, stop appeasing your socialist buddies and oppose this monstrosity!

Celebrity Cruises Sinks in Politically Correct Capitulation

Celebrity Cruises used to offer Sunday and even daily Masses aboard its cruise ships.  Well, in the latest manifestation of the last acceptable bigotry, they have announced that they will not feature that service except over Christmas and Easter.  It seems that they had to deal with "negative feedback" from non-Catholic passengers.  One must wonder just what was the nature of their gripes?  Were they being forced to attend Masses?  Here is a report from Father Z's blog.  Spero News carries this statement by Bill Donohue.

Catholics are urged to remove Celebrity Cruises from their lists of choices when evaluating vacation options.  In fact, that may not be an option, as Celebrity Cruises will render it impossible for the Catholic passenger to fulfull his/her Sunday obligation.

Friday, January 15, 2010

Coakley's Candidacy Needs Emergency Care!

(Note: the following is a parody!)

News Flash!  Senate Democrat Candidate Martha Coakley taken to emergency room!

Ambulance personnel rush her in on a stretcher.
Triage doctor: "What happened?"
EMT: "Well, Ms. Coakley was busy inserting both feet in her mouth, as she usually does.  However, this time she got stuck in that position.  Her spine is all curved in a ball, and both feet are still in her mouth, gagging her!"
Triage doctor: "I'm afraid it's terminal.  We'll have to, well, you know..:"
Coakley: "Mffmph!!  Glakkp!!"  (translation) "What the &*&## are you saying?"
Triage doctor:  "Yes, those are the guidelines from the Federal Office of Foot-In-Mouth Syndrome, instituted by the Messiah Most Miserable himself when Obamacare went into effect.  It's just not cost-effective to remove her feet and to allow greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to cause global warming."
EMT (nervously looking around): "Shush!  You better be careful what you say!"
Triage doctor: "Oh, that's not a problem anymore.  Thanks to the soon-to-be-belated Senator here, we're not bothered by all those right-wing, Christian prolife nuts who carry on and on about the sacredness of life.  Now we can carry on as only Government is God.  Don't worry, Ms Coakley - it's quite a painless process."
Coakley: "Mfffph!!  Glaph!!  Snort!!" (as she is wheeled away to who-knows-where)
Triage doctor: "Thank you, Senator, for making all this possible!"

(end parody)

Does the above seem ridiculous?  There is a tiny ring of truth to this, as the hopefully soon-to-be-defeated candidate publicly opined that those who object to abortion and contraception should not work in hospital emergency rooms.  Read the interview.  Frankly, if I ever have occasion to visit the emergency room in less-than-ideal physical condition, I would very much want to have a pro-life physician attending me, lest the above scenario be something more than a farce.

Medjugorje - Can Good Come From Evil?

It happens all the time, doesn't it?  For example, look at the conversion of St. Paul and the events leading up to that.  It's commonly held that the prayers of St. Stephen facilitated Saul's conversion.  Now we know that at the time, Saul was having Christians murdered, and Stephen was one of them.  Good came from evil there.  But did that render Saul's murderous activities good?

I've no doubt that Timothy experienced God's grace there.  The fact is that I was originally a believer in the Medjugorje apparitions myself, and they were instrumental in getting me to take the Sacraments more seriously.  However, as I read more about the apparitions (and I mean by that books that were sympathetic to the apparitions), I noticed that things weren't quite right all the time.  There were little "zingers" that were truly off-the-wall.  For instance, one of the girls asked the apparition what it was to be holy.  The apparition pointed out an example to the girl; the example happened to be a Moslem woman.  Now it's very likely that the Moslem lady was leading an upright, moral life.  However, because she never received Christian baptism, there was no sanctifying grace - and thus, true holiness was impossible.  Some might say that the young girl might not have known to make that distinction.  That might be true, but if the apparition were truly the Blessed Mother, she would have known better.  I might add that at the time, Mother Teresa was still alive.  Why would not the apparition have pointed her out as a clear example of a holy woman?

There's something else in Timothy's comment that should lead us to be wary of this apparition and any similar thing.  He asks, "Would the bishop have preferred that I have not found my way home to Catholicism and converted?"  Earlier he stated that without Medjugorje he would not have experienced conversion.  Here we see a trap of confining God's grace to specific occurrences.  I'm sure that if there was no apparition, that God would have found some avenue to communicate His grace to Timothy, as He cannot be constrained to external circumstances.  In what do we put our faith?  Is it in Christ and His Church, with the Sacraments and revealed doctrine, or in an apparition that is at best, only private revelation?

In my earlier posting, I didn't mention all the problematic things.  I didn't mention that at least one of the disciplined Francisians fathered a child while promoting the apparition.  I didn't mention that most of the visionaries are living in gated communities; I remember when they were swearing up and down that the apparition wanted them to be in religious life.  The bishop has a duty to consider all facts of this manifestation, and all its fruits.  Timothy, I rejoice that you've come home.  However, had the apparition never come to pass, He would have found a way to reach you, as He would have done for me.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

More Rotten Fruits of Medjugorje?

His Excellency Ratko Peric, bishop of Mostar (in which Medjugorje is located) has asked that no pilgrimages be made to the site of the alleged apparitions.  When Vienna's Christoph Cardinal Schonborn made a "personal visit" to the region, Bishop Peric issued a rebuke.  There does seem to be a spate of dissident bishops barging into other bishops' dioceses these days!

You can see more details, as well as the complete text of Bishop Peric's statement at this Catholic News Agency link.  I will point out some salient points.  First, it is within the purview of the local ordinary to rule on the validity of an alleged apparition.  That has not yet happened in this case; thus it was presumptuous of the cardinal to speak of the apparition as valid.  Second, the apparition seems to be siding with several dissident Franciscans of the area who have been disciplined/suspended by both the bishop and their superiors; can anyone really imagine the Blessed Mother sticking her finger in the eye of her Son's bishops?

Here's a third point, one of which I was not aware until now.  I know that some of the rebel Franciscans have seized control of some of the parishes there.  I did not know that they invited an "old Catholic" (schismatic) "archbisop" to "confirm" hundreds of young people there.  Does any fruit smell rotten?

Ladies and gentlemen, we have the Sacraments.  We have the teaching Magisterium.  Why chase after these things?  We know what we must do to live as serious Catholics.  Do we want to go to a place of sublime holiness?  You cannot do better than going to your nearest Catholic Church, with the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament.

Healing and Reconciliation After Abortion

In today's Catholic Standard is a column by Archbishop Donald Wuerl that is, in my opinion, an excellent summary of the Church's outreach to women who have aborted their children.  His Excellency makes plain the crucial and pivotal role that the Sacrament of Reconciliation has in making the post-abortive woman whole again, as it removes the blight of the mortal sin and allows grace to flow back into her.  Their is also the role of Project Rachel, a post-abortive healing ministry.  Several of my friends have been directors of the Project Rachel in Archdiocese of Washington.

I echo the Archbishop's call to anyone who has been involved in an abortion - get immediately to Confession and have that deadly burden removed from your soul.  After that, receive Our Lord in Holy Communion.  Do take part in Project Rachel.  God bless you.

Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Petition to Drop Charges Against the Notre Dame 88

You'll recall from last May that Notre Dame University, a FORMERLY Catholic institution, sullied itself by inviting the Messiah Most Miserable to give the commencement address and to receive an "honorary" (using the term "honor" laughingly) degree.

Eighty-eight prolife activisits, at various times and locations during that period, were arrested for giving pro-life witness.  Most of the arrests occurred on campus, and were done with the approval, if not the actual mandate, of Father Jenkins, the University president.  While he now claims that he does not have the legal authority to have the charges dropped, common sense dictates that a request from him to do so would have great bearing on the matter and would most likely result in dismissal.  Reasonable people can conclude that the courts would rather not be bothered with a myriad of tresspass cases, and would most likely welcome the request for dismissals so they could move onto other matters.

The Thomas More Society, Human Life International and Lifesite News have drawn up an online petition to ask that Father Jenkins request dismissal of the charges.  We link to that petition here and ask that you sign it, and to please advise those whom you know to sign it as well.  Thank you.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Wise Words from Two Ex-Leftists, Part 2

Here's part 2, with the hard truth at the end.

Wise Words from Two Ex-Leftists, Part 1

Watch very closely these two videos (both in this post and the next)  of David Horowitz and Pat Caddell.  They've both been left-wing activists and see very clearly what the left is doing to this country, to Christianity and civilization.  Note carefully what they have to say about "environmentalism", "social justice", etc.  Note the roles that Alinsky, ACORN, Soros et al have played in the background (of couse, with ACORN, that also means Catholic dollars). Pay very close attention to the second video, particularly towards the end and what Caddell has to say.  He's right.  We as Christians and conservatives are much too concerned about being the "nice guys" and avoiding conflict.  That's probably why the Republican party has well earned the moniker "Stupid Party", why too many prolifers wince at the usage of realistic depictions of abortion and why we don't hear of the realities of sin, judgment and hell from the pulpit.  Here goes:

You may well need to watch these several times to understand what these men have witnessed first-hand.

Monday, January 11, 2010

Obama Honoree Says "God Should Repent"

You read that correctly!  On June 17th, 2009, the Messiah Most Miserable presented to Frank Kameny, a gay activist, the official White House pen after enacting an executive order to give domestic benefits to some federal employees.  A week later, Obama told him, "we're proud of you, Frank".

Kameny wrote in a letter to Peter LaBarbera of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality, "Your God is clearly a sinful homophobic bigot...Your God is a sinner."  The link above can take you to the entire diatribe.

Of course Mr Kameny has it precisely ass-backwards.  He, like all of us, will one day stand before God's judgment throne, where "every knee shall bow".  If he hasn't repented of his arrogance and blasphemy by then, what will be his eternal fate?  Let us pray that Kameny, and all who wallow in gross sin, be moved to repentance before it's too late.

Only within the past week did I install that counter to November of 2012.  You just read another reason why we look forward to that day, and to next November as well.  However, I'm sure other reasons will make their prsence known in the meantime.

Miep Gies - Requiescat in Pace

Miep Gies, the last of the Gentile protectors of Anne Frank and her family, passed away today at the age of 100 years.  She was the secretary of Otto Frank who helped hide him and his family in some unused rooms of the business office.  Later, when the Gestapo took away the family, it was Mrs. Gies who found and hid Anne's diary.  When Otto returned from concentration camp (the lone survivor of the hidden Jewish group) after the war, she gave to Otto his daughter's diary.  Here is a video of her relating that scene (turn on the captions to get the English translation).

She, her husband and some others were true heros who did not seek accolades for the aid they extended.  Oh, by the way - Mrs. Gies was Roman Catholic.  God rest her soul.

Holy Father Puts Environmentalism in Perspective

This post from England's Society for the Protection of the Unborn Child expounds upon an address given by His Holiness today.  He reminded his audience that human welfare is the purpose of environmental concerns as he said, "If we wish to build true peace, how can we separate, or even set at odds, the protection of the environment and the protection of human life, including the life of the unborn? It is in man’s respect for himself that his sense of responsibility for creation is shown. As Saint Thomas Aquinas has taught, man represents all that is most noble in the universe (cf. Summa Theologiae, I, q. 29, a. 3)."  He is obviously pointing to the inherent contradictions of those who espouse "concern for the earth" while blithely advocating for the slaughter of the pinnacle of God's creation.

I've encountered such dichotomy.  Once an animal-rights actvist came to my door to solicit donatons.  I asked him what his position was on abortion.  He replied that the reduction of the human population was "the only chance that other species would have to survive."  After I explained why I would not give one red cent in brief but blunt terms, I closed my door.

Last summer we read how Warren Hern, a late-term abortionist, referred to man as a "malignant eco-tumor" destroying the earth, which he calls the "host organism".  Naturally he's working feverishly to ensure that such destruction doesn't occur (while swelling his pockets with blood money). 

The pantheistic roots of this mental slop are obvious.  At any rate, we are the true stewards of God's creation who worship the Creator and protect His littlest creations.

Obamascare Hell Bill Set to Music

I hope some governmental trolls who search for "fishy things" take a close look at this and understand why they might want to update their resumes (not to say that governmental bureaucrat jobs are at all resume enhancers).   Here's hoping that the backlash will go all the way down into local levels (that means, you Montgomery County Council members and some in Baltimore City).

For added measure, here's another one to contemplate!

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Update on Diocese of Evreux

I reported this past Monday on the situation in the French Diocese of Evreux.  My friends at Fratres have an update and it is good news indeed!  The nuncio to France, Archbishop Luigi Ventura (just recently appointed by Pope Benedict XVI) has apparently instructed Bishop Nourrichard to back off and let the good Father Michel function in his parish in peace. 

This situation has drawn much international interest and I would think this bodes well worldwide.  Some of my fellow bloggers have closed with "Deo Gratias".  Amen to that, but I'll also add "Merci Deu"!

Why Is A Pederast Bishop Being Honored?

I agree with my friens at Catholic Citizens of Illinois that it is an utter travesty that the Cathedral of St. John is honoring former Archbishop Rembert Weakland by featuring a bronze statue of him along with various Saints as though he's a protector of children.  According to this report, nothing could be further from the truth - per Weakland's own written memoirs!

This is nothing less than a slap in the face, a spit in the eye, salt in the wounds of every boy who has been harmed either by Weakland himself or by the priests for whom he covered up.  Can you just imagine the human carnage wrecked by these predators, not only upon the boys but upon their families and those who did come to their defense?

Scroll down the CCI link to get contact information for Archbishop Listecki and ask how on earth he could let such mockery continue.  He can stop it.

Montgomery County Council - Testimony From Painful Experience

Some of the more heartbreaking testimonies were from those women who had abortions and wished that they had encountered a crisis pregancy center before their most tragic decisions. 

Please listen to this clip.  First you'll hear Dr. Jennifer Todd speak in support of the strangulation bill.  You'll hear her repeat incessantly how much harm "barriers" can do to women who need medical (not prenatal!) care.  The implication, of course, is that the information offered by the pregnancy centers constitutes "barriers" to the women, if not the very presence of the centers themselves.

After Todd, you'll hear Maria Brazda (pictured above) share her sad story and how she wishes there was such a "barrier" in her life thirty years ago, a "barrier" that might have shown her another way than the abortion that she had.  You'll also hear how she treasured her time as a volunteer at Shady Grove Pregnancy Center, and her high regard for its director, Jackie Stippich.  She makes a point of relating how the women who had come to Shady Grove from Planned Parenthood reported that they were given no information at the Planned Parenthood regarding fetal development.  Ms. Brazda decided herself to go to a NARAL office nearby to ask them if they relayed any details about fetal development.  When she asked the question, she was immediately escorted out the door; it seems that she was physically thrown out.  So much for "compassionate care" on the part of abortion providers! 

Now mind you, the same folks who seemed to have bodily evicted Ms Brazda from their office have deemed over half of the Council members as "partners of choice!"  Isn't that just - well - special??

Friday, January 8, 2010

Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Verified Yet Again!

Dr. Louise Brinton, the U.S. National Cancer Institute whose 2003 workshop opined that "abortion is not associated with breast cancer risk" has reversed her position.  She has so stated in an April 2009 study of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.  More detals can be found here while the study abstract can be found here.

All throughout the December 1st Council hearings, the pro-abortion proponents of the cpc strangulation bill bloviated about how the pregnancy centers were spreading "false information" about increased breast cancer risks.  One of them had the laughable chutzpah to cite National Abortion Federation as a supposedly unbiased source of information.  It now turns out that Dr. Brinton et al are corroborating the information being presented by the pregnancy centers.  It now turns out that the abortion centers are the ones who may well be promulgating incorrect information about the abortion/breast cancer relationship.  However, if they dared to tell the truth about that, they'd stand to lose abortion revenues, wouldn't they?  But isn't that what this attempt to stifle pregnancy centers is about?   The protection of the abortionists' money flow at the expense of women and babies?

Listen to Bishop Vasa!

Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, Oregon has recently offered an excellent synopsys of the medicinal remedy of excommunication.  He did so in a column in his diocese's official newspaper, the Catholic Sentinel.  He states two reasons for excommunication: "It is intended primarily as a means of getting the person who is in grave error to recognize the depth of his error and repent. A second reason, while somewhat secondary but no less important, is to assure the faithful who truly are faithful that what they believe to be the teaching of the Church is true and correct." Furthermore, he states, "Allowing their faith to be shaken or allowing them to be confused when Catholics publicly affirm something contrary to faith or morals, seemingly without consequences, scandalizes and confuses the faithful." 

Take a close look at that last sentence.  He isn't so much saying that dissident Catholics are causing scandal as much as he's saying that the refusal to discipline dissident Catholics is itself a cause for scandal.

I urge all to study it closely.  Moreover, I urge all bishops to heed Bishop Vasa's wise words.  I urge them strongly to put aside all considerations of politics, money and power that are only temporal and to do their duties as Shepherds.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

After Signing Their CPC Hate Bill, Baltimore's Mayor Compelled to Resign!

Remember last month, when I speculated why Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon was in such a rush to sign their cpc strangulation bill?  Refresh your memories here.  I stated the very real possibility at that time that Her Honor (?) might be removed from office and/or imprisoned for stealing. 

Read this update that just came out today.  It appears that some deals have been cut.  While she's not going to prison, she is leaving office.  There are more conditions, listed in that article.  I needn't re-elaborate them here.  However, I will point out that pro-abortion sympathies, that is, callousness towards unborn babies lead to immorality in other facets of life.  I believe in this instance the mayor was misappropriating money meant for needy children.  Makes sense, doesn't it?  If she'll turn her back on the unborn, why not on those who are just a few years older?

We certainly see this sort of scenario being played out in Washington, don't we?  With this pregnancy center strangulation attempt, who knows what corruption lurks in Rockville?  I think we've already seen evidence of that.

Lawyers Testify at Montgomery County Council Hearings

We will listen to the testimony of Kim Fiorentino, an attorney who highlights some violations of the US Constitution First Amendment that are inherent in the Council's attempt to suppress the pro-life pregnancy centers.  She points out that the Constituion prohibits viewpoint-coerced speech.  She then goes on to state that there is no compelling interest to enact this legislation, as no harmful activity on the part of the pregnancy centers has been demonstrated.  I suppose the Councilmembers/"Partners of Choice" have different perspectives, as the pregnancy centers, every time they snatch a mother and child from the clutches of the abortionists, put pains in the purses of the abortionists, and thus in the coffers of NARAL, who undoubtedly receives many a blood-money donation from these abortionists.  Please listen to Ms. Fiorentino's testimony here.

We now hear from Ann O'Connor.  A little bit earlier, Councilwoman Duchy Trachtenberg, the primary sponsor of this bill (and a former NOW official) made the claim that Rockville Pregnancy Center would be exempt from this regulation, due to its retention of trained medical volunteers.  Ms. O'Connor makes plain in her testimony that the language of this regulation still renders RPC vulnerable.   Did Ms. O'Connor expose a bit of double-talk?  Please form your own opinion as you listen to her testimony here.

Monday, January 4, 2010

Another Musical Moment to Brainwash Our Kiddies!

Ok, all you governmental trolls who search our blogs for "fishy things"!  Here's a gem to take back to the National Education Assinine - uh, I mean - Association so that they can properly enlighten our children as to the wonders of Big Brother!

You can find more of Tim Hawkins's videos on his website.

Real Catholicism Arises in Diocese of Evreux - Despite Its Bishop

My colleague at the Fratres blog have made known a very interesting situation in the above-named diocese in France.  Please read the article.

The local pastor, Fr. Francis Michel, in my humble opinion, is a hero - a pastor in the true sense of the word.  He is simply being faithful to the dictates of Pope Benedict's Motu Proprio.  It is the local bishop, in his attempt to quash the Traditional Mass, who is at odds with the Magisterium.  The priests owe their obedience to the local bishop as the bishop is in union with Rome.  If the bishp is opposing Rome, the priest may diverge from the bishop, lest that priest find himself at odds with Rome.  I'm no theologian nor canon lawyer, but what I just said seems to be only logical.  At any rate I congratulate Father Michel and his parishioners.

CCHD Shenanigans Again!

A press release from the American Life League reveals that the Archdiocese of San Francisco's CCHD has "investigated" the San Francisco Organizing Project (a PICO affilate) and thinks it's worthy to receive the hard-earned money of local Catholics.  They want to expand children's access to "health care".  In other words they want to make available to children contraception and abortion.

Perhaps they are thinking that because our attention is focused on the Obama Hell Bill, that they can resume their profligate funding of leftist organizations?  I thank the Good Lord that ALL is alert to them.

Sunday, January 3, 2010

County Council Hearings - Sometimes the Truth Hurts!

Please study this photo carefully.  The man testifying is Bob Nelson, with whom I have worked in the past.  He makes a number of excellent points; you can listen to him HERE.

Of particular note, though, is the woman sitting behind him, wearing the striped shirt and glasses.  She is wearing a NOW sticker so you can guess what her perspective is.  My camcorder was already full, and I didn't have my other camera ready at the time, but at one point she was so displeased with what Bob had to say that her fingers were literally in her ears!  I truly regret that I was not prepared to capture that telling scene!  Even here you can see that she is quite disconcerted, maybe on the verge of a migraine.  Perhaps it's because Bob 1) questioned the Council's fixation on pro-life centers while ignoring real health problems 2) pointed out that the pro-life centers provide real service to women while not charging Montgomery County one red cent.

One thing that Bob pointed out is that the Washington Post, a generally pro-abortion publication, took the Council to task for its obviously one-sided approach to the matter in their November 23rd editiorial.  Perhaps, though, that could only be expected when over half of the Council members are "partners of choice" according to NARAL.

Saturday, January 2, 2010

A Freudian Slip at the County Council Hearing?

In one of my first reports, I showed the clip of Roger Manno having great difficulty admitting the truth that a pregnany woman is pregnant with a baby.  So we see how pro-abortion folks can have difficulty vocalizing simple truth.

On the flip side of that strange coin, we will now see how sometimes they inadvertently blurt out the truth that they are assiduously trying to deny.  We wonder if that might have been the case when Fran Porter, presidient of Montgomery County NOW testified.  Once again I point out that I took my recordings in the cafeteria, where the bulk of that audience was pro-life.  You'll hear us chuckle when Ms. Porter refers to young women as "valuable", then quickly correct herself to say "vulnerable".  Might she be admitting (albeit inadvertently) what we knew all along - that they see young women merely as cash cows?  I leave you to form your own opinion as you listen to THIS.

Friday, January 1, 2010

Continuation of Reports on Montgomery Council Hearing Regarding CPC Sabatogue Attempt

I hope that everyone has had a happy new year celebration.  With that, it's time to turn our attention to pro-life battles that face us, particularly in Montgomery County.  I've written before on the open County Council hearing that occurred on December 1st.  By no means did I have time to report and comment on all the proceedings.  However, the votes on the Obama Hell Bill occupied our attention. 

Now we must refocus on the protection of Maryland pregnancy centers.  The Health and Human Services Committee, chaired by George Leventhal (D-at large) is scheduled to revisit the matter on January 25th.  We need to make the council aware of our displeasure at this bill, and remind them all that their jobs are vulnerable in the upcoming 2010 elections this autumn.

The Dec 1st hearing was quite lengthy, so much so that my camcorder could not hold all of it.  When the disk filled up, I resorted to my digital voice recorder and my cell phone camera.  From these I'll be presenting clips, and not necessarily in chronological order.  In fact, what I present now is the very last testimony, and some rather troubling behavior by the chair of the HHS committee, George Leventhal.  The lady whom you'll hear first is Ms Linn (not sure of the spelling), a peer counselor at the Rockville Pregnancy Center.  She relates how her clients told her of being exploited at Planned Parenthood.  One woman told Ms Linn that PP staff held her down and forced her to abort.  Leventhal questioned her - no, not questioned her.  He tried to twist the counselor's words around to make it seem that Ms Linn was telling the client that Planned Parenthood would abuse her.  As you listen to the testimony (and I'd advise you to play it as many times as you need), you'll hear that Ms Linn is simply relating what she heard from her client, not what she told her client.  Leventhal tries to twist it to make it appear that Ms Linn told this to the client.  (Does a member of the Montgomery County Council not know the difference between "heard" and "told"?)  Also notice that Leventhal doesn't direct this challenge directly to Ms Linn; he directs his question to the pro-life attorney (Ann O'Connor) who testified immediately before Ms Linn; he wouldn't even let Ms Linn speak for herself.  I regret that when they both did eventually reply, that their replies were way too reticent and demure.  (Also Ms O'Connor was barely audible)  They should have directly challenged Leventhal on what could charitably be called his "selective listening" problem.

And now, please click on THIS to hear the exchange.

Do you notice how Leventhal kept repeating that he was "sincerely trying to get an answer"?   I've learned over the years to assume that when someone protests how "sincere" they are, that I should take such assertions with copious grains of salt.  By the way - I've pointed out in earlier postings that most of the Montgomery County Council members were listed as sponsors on NARAL's "Evening of Chocolate" fundraiser program.  Notice that Leventhal is a "Partner of Choice".  That brings up another point.  Did you notice how in the beginning of his tirade, Leventhal said he wouldn't bother to visit a crisis pregnancy center because he didn't trust that he would get a truthful sense of their actual operations?  With all that's been revealed, I think we can most likely say that even if Leventhal did visit a pregnancy center, that perhaps his report would be negatively biased, since he clearly demonstrated his refusal to even echo back properly and truthfully what all plainly heard.  Perhaps Mr Leventhal is too much a "Partner of Choice".

Liberation Theology = Sophistry for Libertines

My colleague at "A Washington DC Catholic" (see "my blog list" at the right) linked to a good article at Catholic Exchange on the so-called "Liberation Theology".  I urge its study.  I too am hopeful that this poisonous mindset is in its demise, but its death throes are still strong.  Witness Fr Michael Pleager, the Obama lackey of Chicago who stumped for the Messiah Most Miserable and who paraded around in Jeremiah Wright's excuse for a church.

Every now and then, these "liberation theology" priests poke their heads out of the woodwork.  It's getting to be that I can almost smell them coming; it truly is something in their swagger.  At any rate, the damage that they have wrecked is considerable, and will take some time to clean up.

I too have much hope for the younger priests.  Pray for them, though.  I've seen more than one attempt by their higher-ups to quash them under thumb.  To protect those priests, I can go no further into detail.   If they can hold firm, they will eventually replace the liberation theology hacks.