Keep it up, You're Doing Just Fine!

If our President would like a quick 10-point or so boost to his declining poll numbers all he should do, instead of jetting off to Copenhagen for the climate control conference next week, is go on national television and announce he has decided not to attend the conference because of the recent release of thousands of e-mails casting doubt on the verity of global warming. He might also say he is reserving judgment on any future quotas or restrictions on carbon emissions until those doubts are satisfactorily dealt with.

The President won't do that of course. Since anthropogenic global warming is an article of faith for those on the left, he will go to Copenhagen and read soaring rhetoric off his Teleprompter in support of crippling restrictions on the world economy in the midst of a deep recession. He will receive acclamation from European elites for his stance along with hosannas from pathetic twits like this at the New York Times (note the breathtaking sneering by a soul desperately cognisant his job and "specialty" are in jeopardy) but among most of his and Congress' employers, the approval ratings will continue their inexorable trend downward.

So off you go, Mr. President: have a wonderful trip! And when you get back don't forget to resume thumping for socialized medicine; the Euros and the media will love you all the more for it. Pay no attention at all to what those ignorant rubes who who have to work for a living think. You have have nothing to worry about from them until next November.

Keep it up, You're Doing Just Fine!

If our President would like a quick 10-point or so boost to his declining poll numbers all he should do, instead of jetting off to Copenhagen for the climate control conference next week, is go on national television and announce he has decided not to attend the conference because of the recent release of thousands of e-mails casting doubt on the verity of global warming. He might also say he is reserving judgment on any future quotas or restrictions on carbon emissions until those doubts are satisfactorily dealt with.

The President won't do that of course. Since anthropogenic global warming is an article of faith for those on the left, he will go to Copenhagen and read soaring rhetoric off his Teleprompter in support of crippling restrictions on the world economy in the midst of a deep recession. He will receive acclamation from European elites for his stance along with hosannas from pathetic twits like this at the New York Times (note the breathtaking sneering by a soul desperately cognisant his job and "specialty" are in jeopardy) but among most of his and Congress' employers, the approval ratings will continue their inexorable trend downward.

So off you go, Mr. President: have a wonderful trip! And when you get back don't forget to resume thumping for socialized medicine; the Euros and the media will love you all the more for it. Pay no attention at all to what those ignorant rubes who who have to work for a living think. You have have nothing to worry about from them until next November.

New York Vignette

While standing on the corner of 57th Street and Seventh Avenue, waiting for the light to change, an elegant, mink-clad older woman wearing simple but tasteful jewelry approached me. She appeared to be in her late sixties and was quite attractive. She smiled, gave me a friendly greeting and informed me she was looking for extra income; she would be glad to entertain me in her home and further informed me, "I do fellatio."

I politely declined. She bid me a good evening, which I returned, and we went our separate ways.

New York Vignette

While standing on the corner of 57th Street and Seventh Avenue, waiting for the light to change, an elegant, mink-clad older woman wearing simple but tasteful jewelry approached me. She appeared to be in her late sixties and was quite attractive. She smiled, gave me a friendly greeting and informed me she was looking for extra income; she would be glad to entertain me in her home and further informed me, "I do fellatio."

I politely declined. She bid me a good evening, which I returned, and we went our separate ways.

The Convenience of Politics

Rhode Island Representative Patrick Kennedy is at it again, publicly complaining about Bishop Thomas Tobin's publicly responding to Kennedy's public attacks against Catholic bishops for their opposition to taxpayer funded abortions. Kennedy recently revealed Bishop Tobin, nearly three years ago, asked him (privately) to cease presenting himself for communion, a perfectly reasonable request since by his advocacy of abortion, a mortal sin, Kennedy has already excommunicated himself.

It is likely this brouhaha will lead to another chorus from the left deploring the "politicization" of abortion, notwithstanding those opposed to it do not regard it a political issue at all, rather a moral one. To the Catholic Church, and many others, opposition to the killing of the innocent, whether babes in the womb or adults in the street, can hardly be considered "political;" murder is murder regardless the venue and the Church of course forbids it.

It is people like Congressman Kennedy who politicize abortion and they do so because they have to: any "moral" arguments in abortion's favor are quickly reduced to a defense of homicide, the taking of a life to ameliorate ill effects that life may have on somebody else's. Even in this narcissistic age that appears monstrously selfish so a different ploy must be used. By wrenching abortion into the political sphere not only do Kennedy and company avoid sticky moral issues, they can also insist, by citing separation of church and state, the Catholic Church and other religious "extremists" stay out of a "political" matter.

To a 15-watt bulb like Congressman Kennedy that probably seems clever but to most Catholics, especially Bishop Tobin, it is galling and downright disingenuous. Kennedy would do better to consider the view of this liberal opponent of abortion:

While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

I share the confidence of those who feel that America is working to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. I also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society's problems -- an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

The abortion foe who wrote the above, in a letter to a voter (and who later, sadly, apostacized) was the Congressman's father, the late Senator Edward Kennedy.

The Convenience of Politics

Rhode Island Representative Patrick Kennedy is at it again, publicly complaining about Bishop Thomas Tobin's publicly responding to Kennedy's public attacks against Catholic bishops for their opposition to taxpayer funded abortions. Kennedy recently revealed Bishop Tobin, nearly three years ago, asked him (privately) to cease presenting himself for communion, a perfectly reasonable request since by his advocacy of abortion, a mortal sin, Kennedy has already excommunicated himself.

It is likely this brouhaha will lead to another chorus from the left deploring the "politicization" of abortion, notwithstanding those opposed to it do not regard it a political issue at all, rather a moral one. To the Catholic Church, and many others, opposition to the killing of the innocent, whether babes in the womb or adults in the street, can hardly be considered "political;" murder is murder regardless the venue and the Church of course forbids it.

It is people like Congressman Kennedy who politicize abortion and they do so because they have to: any "moral" arguments in abortion's favor are quickly reduced to a defense of homicide, the taking of a life to ameliorate ill effects that life may have on somebody else's. Even in this narcissistic age that appears monstrously selfish so a different ploy must be used. By wrenching abortion into the political sphere not only do Kennedy and company avoid sticky moral issues, they can also insist, by citing separation of church and state, the Catholic Church and other religious "extremists" stay out of a "political" matter.

To a 15-watt bulb like Congressman Kennedy that probably seems clever but to most Catholics, especially Bishop Tobin, it is galling and downright disingenuous. Kennedy would do better to consider the view of this liberal opponent of abortion:

While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.

I share the confidence of those who feel that America is working to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. I also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society's problems -- an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.

When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.

The abortion foe who wrote the above, in a letter to a voter (and who later, sadly, apostacized) was the Congressman's father, the late Senator Edward Kennedy.

Quid Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Behold what passes for logic from an international organization that serves no useful purpose and has much too much money (from Aggie Catholics):

The UN Can't Help It...

The United Nations can't help themselves. Years ago they sold an international peacekeeping identity for a radical political agenda. At the front of the agenda is abortion. Another item on their current agenda is global climate change. So, how do you wed these two together into a compelling story?

1 - Make climate change the cause of a great evil.
2 - Make the solution to the great evil abortion.

The result = climate change leads to prostitution, which would go away if abortion-on-demand was furthered, because it would reduce the number of people that stress the climate.

Read it all.

UPDATE: Thank you Daniel Muller for doing the proofing I should have done; this one really was just a typo, "I" being right next to "O." ("Uh-huh," I hear you say.)

Quid Quod Erat Demonstrandum

Behold what passes for logic from an international organization that serves no useful purpose and has much too much money (from Aggie Catholics):

The UN Can't Help It...

The United Nations can't help themselves. Years ago they sold an international peacekeeping identity for a radical political agenda. At the front of the agenda is abortion. Another item on their current agenda is global climate change. So, how do you wed these two together into a compelling story?

1 - Make climate change the cause of a great evil.
2 - Make the solution to the great evil abortion.

The result = climate change leads to prostitution, which would go away if abortion-on-demand was furthered, because it would reduce the number of people that stress the climate.

Read it all.

UPDATE: Thank you Daniel Muller for doing the proofing I should have done; this one really was just a typo, "I" being right next to "O." ("Uh-huh," I hear you say.)

Order Before the Easter Vigil and Get This Matching Thurible Absolutely Free!

This is not from the Onion.



There is much noise on the Internets whether or not this is a joke. It is, I am positive, but will entertain opposing views.

Order Before the Easter Vigil and Get This Matching Thurible Absolutely Free!

This is not from the Onion.



There is much noise on the Internets whether or not this is a joke. It is, I am positive, but will entertain opposing views.

Show Trial

Attorney General Eric Holder was grilled recently over his decision that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and four others will be tried in a Federal Courtroom in lower Manhattan rather than by military tribunal.

Senators of both parties also pressed Mr. Holder to say what would happen if Mr. Mohammed or another detainee considered to be a dangerous terrorist was acquitted on a technicality or given a short sentence. Mr. Holder has said he will direct prosecutors to seek a death sentence in the Sept. 11 case.

Other Justice Department officials have said that even if Mr. Mohammed is acquitted, the Obama administration will keep him locked up forever as a “combatant” under the laws of war. But Mr. Holder largely sidestepped such questions, instead simply asserting that he was confident that Mr. Mohammed would be convicted.

“Failure is not an option,” Mr. Holder said.

This is remarkable coming from the Attorney General of the United States (Columbia, Law '76), his assuring us even if Mohammed is found not guilty he will still be locked up forever but not to worry, he will be found guilty, never mind the vagaries of juries. The President (Harvard, Law '91), in fact, has already adjudicated this case before trial. Since the accused earlier offered to plead guilty before a military tribunal (he craves "martyrdom" [sic]), the only purpose in trying Mohammed in court rather than tribunal is is to appease the ACLU and others on the left who refuse to consider an attack by foreigners that killed 2700 Americans an act of war.

So far the President's vast legion of dupes in New York have remained largely silent over this cynical and calculated decision by his Attorney General; the One's messianic status remains intact and they don't want to criticize. However, as lower Manhattan becomes an armed fortress, as Mohammed's trial (as is predicted) drags on for years and as the sense of fear in the pit of the stomachs of those who live in the city, which only disappeared a few years back, returns, the faith of the President's disciples in Manhattan and elsewhere will surely be put to the test unless they are clever enough to find a way to blame even those enormities on George W. Bush.

Show Trial

Attorney General Eric Holder was grilled recently over his decision that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the accused mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, and four others will be tried in a Federal Courtroom in lower Manhattan rather than by military tribunal.

Senators of both parties also pressed Mr. Holder to say what would happen if Mr. Mohammed or another detainee considered to be a dangerous terrorist was acquitted on a technicality or given a short sentence. Mr. Holder has said he will direct prosecutors to seek a death sentence in the Sept. 11 case.

Other Justice Department officials have said that even if Mr. Mohammed is acquitted, the Obama administration will keep him locked up forever as a “combatant” under the laws of war. But Mr. Holder largely sidestepped such questions, instead simply asserting that he was confident that Mr. Mohammed would be convicted.

“Failure is not an option,” Mr. Holder said.

This is remarkable coming from the Attorney General of the United States (Columbia, Law '76), his assuring us even if Mohammed is found not guilty he will still be locked up forever but not to worry, he will be found guilty, never mind the vagaries of juries. The President (Harvard, Law '91), in fact, has already adjudicated this case before trial. Since the accused earlier offered to plead guilty before a military tribunal (he craves "martyrdom" [sic]), the only purpose in trying Mohammed in court rather than tribunal is is to appease the ACLU and others on the left who refuse to consider an attack by foreigners that killed 2700 Americans an act of war.

So far the President's vast legion of dupes in New York have remained largely silent over this cynical and calculated decision by his Attorney General; the One's messianic status remains intact and they don't want to criticize. However, as lower Manhattan becomes an armed fortress, as Mohammed's trial (as is predicted) drags on for years and as the sense of fear in the pit of the stomachs of those who live in the city, which only disappeared a few years back, returns, the faith of the President's disciples in Manhattan and elsewhere will surely be put to the test unless they are clever enough to find a way to blame even those enormities on George W. Bush.

Waiting for the Outrage

Our President when

asked about those who find it offensive that [Khalid Sheikh] Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime...

“I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.

Those of a certain age will remember this headline and the ensuing furor from outraged liberals.

Waiting for the Outrage

Our President when

asked about those who find it offensive that [Khalid Sheikh] Mohammed will receive all the rights normally accorded to U.S. citizens when they are charged with a crime...

“I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him,” Obama told NBC’s Chuck Todd.

Those of a certain age will remember this headline and the ensuing furor from outraged liberals.

Which Side are You On?

The President is drawing the line: a tough choice is coming up for liberal Catholics.

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Top Obama advisor David Axelrod on Sunday confirmed what pro-life advocates already suspected would happen. He said President Barack Obama will work with congressional Democrats to remove the abortion funding ban the House approved in its version of the government-run health care bill.

Axelrod says that, because the Stupak amendment allegedly goes beyond the status quo under the Hyde amendment (which bans abortion funding under Medicaid), Obama will make sure the amendment is yanked during the conference committee.

Which Side are You On?

The President is drawing the line: a tough choice is coming up for liberal Catholics.

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Top Obama advisor David Axelrod on Sunday confirmed what pro-life advocates already suspected would happen. He said President Barack Obama will work with congressional Democrats to remove the abortion funding ban the House approved in its version of the government-run health care bill.

Axelrod says that, because the Stupak amendment allegedly goes beyond the status quo under the Hyde amendment (which bans abortion funding under Medicaid), Obama will make sure the amendment is yanked during the conference committee.

The Vatican Reconsider Music

From Chiesa:

Great Roman Polyphony Returns to Saint Peter's

Not in a concert, but in a Mass. It will be conducted by Domenico Bartolucci, the most brilliant interpreter of Palestrina's music alive today. He was removed as head of the Sistine Chapel choir twelve years ago, but now, with Pope Benedict, has finally been rehabilitated...

Among the arts to be represented in the Sistine Chapel next Saturday, November 21, at the highly anticipated meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, music is perhaps the one that has suffered the most from the divorce that has taken place between artists and the Church.

The distress in music has been the first to afflict the Church. Because while the masterpieces of Christian painting, sculpture, and architecture still remain accessible to all, even if they are ignored and misunderstood, great music literally disappears from the churches if no one performs it anymore.

The return of real music, properly performed, to Holy Church is as welcome as the return of Latin; majesty with Magisterium.

The Vatican Reconsider Music

From Chiesa:

Great Roman Polyphony Returns to Saint Peter's

Not in a concert, but in a Mass. It will be conducted by Domenico Bartolucci, the most brilliant interpreter of Palestrina's music alive today. He was removed as head of the Sistine Chapel choir twelve years ago, but now, with Pope Benedict, has finally been rehabilitated...

Among the arts to be represented in the Sistine Chapel next Saturday, November 21, at the highly anticipated meeting with Pope Benedict XVI, music is perhaps the one that has suffered the most from the divorce that has taken place between artists and the Church.

The distress in music has been the first to afflict the Church. Because while the masterpieces of Christian painting, sculpture, and architecture still remain accessible to all, even if they are ignored and misunderstood, great music literally disappears from the churches if no one performs it anymore.

The return of real music, properly performed, to Holy Church is as welcome as the return of Latin; majesty with Magisterium.

My Kind of Blog...

is this new one called Barchester, which makes the modest claim of being the "most fatuous tenth-rate entertainment ever devised by man." Who can argue with that? Thus far the blog has concerned itself with putative Anglo-Catholics who ♥ Geneva, brain-dead liberals and Fred Mertz's pants; worthy subjects all. Watch out, they take no prisoners.

My Kind of Blog...

is this new one called Barchester, which makes the modest claim of being the "most fatuous tenth-rate entertainment ever devised by man." Who can argue with that? Thus far the blog has concerned itself with putative Anglo-Catholics who ♥ Geneva, brain-dead liberals and Fred Mertz's pants; worthy subjects all. Watch out, they take no prisoners.