.:[Double Click To][Close]:.

Video: Wisconsin labor protest and international socialism



A few quick things hit me about this video.


First, is it just me or are there a lot of slackers in this socialist movement?  Look at these folks, some of them clearly have an education, but have failed to put that education to a positive use.  Instead, they bitch and moan about who has what. To me it all seems like sour grapes run amok. They failed to capitalize on their talents, so they throw stones at those who are successful. 


My best friend's father, a Hindu who came to America with only $80 to his name and who now owns three drugstores, use to say; "if you cannot make money in America, you simply aren't trying hard enough".


Second, I am quite taken aback how the young man constantly misses the obvious. He said "they study history", yet how is it they missed the fact that socialism always fails?  The guy even ignores the power of capitalism behind selling his copy of the International Socialist Review!  Geez! 


Third, I have to wonder to any of these socialist ever stop to find out how some of these companies are started? Do they stop to consider the risks and sacrifices people have made to start their business? Does it even matter to them?


You can read the whole story behind this video here.


Via: Big Government

Always The Gentleman: WI State Rep. Gordon Hintz to female Republican "You are f'n dead"!



It looks like the Wisconsin Assembly has its very own Charlie Sheen. State Rep. Gordon Hintz, the Democrat bad boy of Wisconsin, earned his stripes by getting arrested in connection to a prostitution sting and then grandstanding on the Assembly floor.

In true Charlie Sheen fashion, Hintz shows he can be abusive to women too.

620 WTMJ: Last Friday.... after the Assembly voted to engross the Budget Repair Bill, Hintz turned to a female colleague, Rep. Michelle Litjens and said: "You are F***king dead!"
Hintz has since apologizes to Litjens:
An Oshkosh Assemblyman apologized to a colleague Monday for comments he made on the floor of the Assembly last week immediately following a vote on a contentious budget repair bill.
Rep. Gordon Hintz, D Oshkosh, apologized to Rep. Michelle Litjens, R-Winneconne, for shouting out an obscenity that included the words “you’re dead” that Litjens and other witnesses heard in the chaotic scene after Republicans approved the bill.
Litjens said she accepted the apology, but has asked the Assembly leadership to discipline Hintz.

Litjens is a good sport for only asking for discipline. She really should seek a restraining order because a loose cannon like Hintz has shown he has no self control.


How do crackpots like this guy get elected?


Via: Memeorandum
Via: Postcrescent.com
Via: 620 WTMJ

Scott Walker gives Fleebaggers 24 hours to return

Wisconsin governor Scott Walker has given the AWOL Democrats (Fleebaggers) 24 hours to get back to Wisconsin, so they can vote on his proposal or risk missing a debt restructuring deadline.


Call me a pessimist but I just don't see the Fleebaggers coming home for that.  Keep in mind that these Democrats are very beholden to the unions. One fifth of the campaign contributions the Fleebaggers receive comes from unions. So, if unions are willing to accept give backs and layoffs instead of touching collective bargaining, then I cannot see how a missed deadline will motivate these Fleebaggers.


If Public Policy Polling is correct, this long and drawn out standoff is taking a toll on Walker. I am sure the Fleebaggers are reading this poll as well and will be further motivated to stay away. 


Walker should have given this ultimatum on the first day the Fleebaggers fled and then pass the collective bargaining parts of the bill separately without the need for quorum.  Once the collective bargaining parts were passed there would be little reason for the Fleebaggers to stay away.


We will have to see how this all plays out, but I see don't see the Fleebaggers coming home.  


Via: Memeorandum
Via: Reuters
Via: Journal Sentinel
Via: Public Policy Polling

The work of Another

Pastoral ministry is not for the easily discouraged. I have been reflecting almost all day today about the investment-to-return ratio in ministry. It is not very great. In that way it bears a resemblance to blogging. Both require a lot of effort, at least if one tries to do them well, but do not immediately or even obviously bear a lot of fruit. Therefore, I am heartened that it is not about efficiency, which is not to say that I don't try to learn from my experiences and find ways of doing things better, I do.

The Martyrdom of St. Stephen, by Pieter Paul Rubens

Look at Jesus' own ministry, it was not efficient, at least not until after His resurrection and Ascension, and the descent of the Holy Spirit, when it multiplied exponentially. This is why, as we were exhorted in yesterday's Gospel, to put everything we do at the service of bringing about God's reign. It is a matter of trust; the work of Another. It is not my work. I have merely been called to help as a laborer in the Lord's vineyard. I am certainly under no illusion that I am the best, or even the most diligent worker in the vineyard, let alone the most gifted. I am grateful beyond measure to be called to the work I have been given and I pray that I am a good steward of those gifts I have received, as meager as they might be.

Judged by any worldy criteria, we might well determine pastoral ministry isn't worth the effort.

Hill Poll: More Americans would blame Democrats for government shutdown

The Hill: Twenty-nine percent of likely voters would blame Democrats for a government shutdown, compared to 23 percent who would hold Republicans responsible, according to a new poll conducted for The Hill. [...]
Republicans have a substantial edge among independents: Thirty-four percent would blame Democrats, while only 19 percent would blame the GOP.
However, there are dangers for both parties, the poll indicates. A plurality of voters, 43 percent, would blame both Republicans and Democrats if the lights go out at midnight on March 5. Forty-five percent of respondents said neither party would benefit politically from a shutdown. 
I am rather surprised that the numbers are not stronger.  Despite the endless comparisons to the 1995 shutdown, the situation is completely different today.  Today, the nation is on the fast track to bankruptcy and many Americans know it.  Thus, Democrats refusing almost any cuts makes them look highly irresponsible.


Seeing so many Americans willing to blame both parties, tells me that Republicans have not done a good job telling Americans are true financial situation.  Again we need an adult to step forward and tell the nation the truth ...We're Broke!


Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

America's debt problem at a glance

Click to enlarge


Business Insider: This is the "income statement" of the United States in 2010.  "Revenue" is on the left.  "Expenses" are on the right.
Note a few things...
First, "Revenue" is tiny relative to "Expenses."
Second, most of the expense is entitlement programs, not defense, education, or any of the other line items that most budget crusaders normally howl about.
Third, as horrifying as these charts are, they don't even show the trends of these two pies: The "expense" pie is growing like gangbusters, driven by the explosive growth of the entitlement programs that no one in government even has the balls to talk about. "Revenue" is barely growing at all.
This is the sad state of America;s economic affairs.  I am sure our friends on the left will look at this chart and say we can easily balance the equation by raising taxes, especially corporate taxes which only account for 9% of the government's revenue.  But here is the rub, when it come to raising taxes the law of physics apply; for every action there is an equal yet opposite reaction. Raise the corporate tax rate and corporations will do one of two things a) pass on the tax to consumers with higher prices or b) flee to countries with lower tax rates (and take their jobs with them). Try raising personal income tax and you end up with less revenue in other areas (e.g. cigarette and gas taxes) because individuals have less money to spend.  Therefore, cutting spending becomes the logical thing to do.

From the chart on the right it is clear that entitlements is where the real money is.  Defense spending at 20% is nothing when compared to the combined 58% of entitlements.  Add to the fact that entitlement are growing at a much more rapid rate than defense, entitlements becomes the focal point for spending cuts.  The problem is that politicians have made entitlements into a sacred cow.  The other problem is that too many politicians (both right and left) have used growing entitlements as an election tool. By promising all sorts of "free" goodies, like "free" healthcare for kids or "free" prescription drugs for seniors, politicians have been exasperating the problem.

What is needed starting 2012 and forward, are politicians who have the guts to tell Americans that the "free" ride is over.  We need politicians who are adult enough to lay before us the stark choices to bring our financial house in order and that means a) start taxing more people (bye-bye progressive tax, hello flat tax), b) cut entitlements (good bye free rides) or c). a combination of both.

I invite you to see where Business Insider got the chart from it is Mary Meeker's presentation of America's financial statements called USA, Inc.

Herman Cain wins TEA Party straw poll at American Policy Summit in Phoenix


CNN: Cain, a conservative talk show host and former Godfather's Pizza chief executive, won the American Policy Summit's presidential live straw poll on Sunday.
Republican Rep. Ron Paul of Texas won the summit's online poll.The survey is a chance for conservative activists gathered on the last day of the Tea Party Patriots conference to name their favorite presidential picks.
Cain won nearly 22 percent of the nearly 1,600 votes cast. Paul won nearly half the votes cast by more than 2,300 online registered attendees. [...]
Following Cain in the live voting were: former Minnesota Republican governor Tim Pawlenty, with nearly 16 percent of the votes; Paul, with just over 15 percent; former Alaska Republican governor Sarah Palin, with just over 10 percent; former Massachusetts Republican governor Mitt Romney, with nearly 6.5 percent, and Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann, with just over 5.6 percent.
I am not surprised Cain won.  Cain, Pawlenty and Paul were all in attendance and out of the three, Cain is by far the most charismatic. When the primaries get underway, Cain will certainly be one to watch.  It will be fascinating watching bore snores like Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty trying to get attention with Herman Cain and Sarah Palin in the same arena.
I also hope this win helps to raise his profile and name recognition.
For those who missed Cain's remarks at the American Policy Summit, here is the video and for those interested in Pawlenty's remarks you can read them here.
Via: CNN
Via: Tim Pawlenty
Video h/t: The Right Scoop

Year A Eighth Sunday in Ordinary Time

Readings: Isa. 49:14-15 Ps. 63:2-3.6-9; 1 Cor. 4:1-5; Matt. 6:24-34

On what or whom do you rely? In who, or what, do you place your trust? Where is your hope? These are the questions today’s readings pose to each one of us. We all know the “right” answer, at least the one we’re supposed to give in church: “God,” we are tempted to blithely say; “I trust in God.” What you are urged to do today is turn that question inward by means of an examination of conscience to see if it is really true, to see if, in fact, you place your trust, that is, yourself- body, blood, soul, and humanity- in God, or whether, as Jesus bluntly says, you serve mammon. It is the difference between living in hope, or living in despair, which is ultimately the difference between life and death.

The criteria for arriving at a determination as to where you sit with regard to the question, In what or whom do I place my trust, are simple: How do I react when things go wrong, when things don’t go my way, when I am having what we call "A bad day"? Another measure is in what do I invest my time, talent, and resources in achieving? A follow-up question that helps in this discernment is do I often find myself worried, even anxious and sleepless, about how things will go, especially those things over which I have no control, but are nonetheless important to accomplishing what I am trying to achieve?

I recently read a New Yorker article about a prominent Hollywood Scientologist who very publicly broke with the Church of Scientology. From what I could glean about Scientology from the article, it seems to be mostly about applying certain techniques to life. I have no doubt that some of these techniques, what we now call "life skills," are very useful and perhaps even necessary for living. Many of the other Scientologists the author spoke to about their religion also took a very pragmatic view, meaning that they were not so much into the doctrines and worldview articulated by L. Ron Hubbard, Scientology’s founder, but in applying the methods they learned through their involvement with this church to their everyday lives. When looked at in this way, it is difficult, if not impossible, to see why it matters whether you belong to one religion or another. After all, you can learn much that is beneficial to living a healthier and happier life not only from Scientologists, but also from Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and certainly, here in Utah, from our LDS friends and neighbors.

Too often we view faith as a self-help program. Hence, if you are successful in all that you aim to achieve, if things are going well with you, it means that God is pleased with you. The reason God is pleased with you can only mean that you are doing things right. Conversely, the opposite holds true, when things are not going well, then God is displeased with you and, so, punishing you. My dear friends, this is not Christianity! It is the anti-thesis of what it means to follow Christ. Following Jesus Christ is not akin to signing up for a self-help program. Christianity is divine help, that is, divine mercy. Simply stated, Christianity, as we will profess in a few minutes, is about nothing else except the Son of God being born of the Virgin Mary "by the power of the Holy Spirit" and becoming man for us and "for our salvation."


It is important to point out that in today’s Gospel Jesus is not telling us to remain passive in the face of reality. He does not teach us to do nothing in the expectation that God will provide. Far less does he judge those whose daily reality is a struggle to survive, who must work hard every day, all day just to provide life’s necessities. So, what is His point? His point seems to be that when your whole attention is centered on bringing about God’s reign in and through everything you do, then those of us who have enough are not obsessed with acquiring more, in the belief that he who dies with the most toys wins. After all, it is a point of fact, quite apart from any theological gloss, that he who dies with the most toys still dies. I have yet to see a U-Haul in a funeral motorcade. Of course, part of what is required in bringing about God’s reign means working towards a more equitable distribution of the earth’s bounteous resources.

In his encyclical Populorum Progresso, which still stands, almost forty-five years after its promulgation, as a prophetic statement, especially in light of the growing inequity of income distribution, both in the United States and throughout the world, Pope Paul VI, quoted St. Ambrose to the effect that by giving from your surplus, "You are not making a gift of what is yours to the poor man, but you are giving him back what is his. You have been appropriating things that are meant to be for the common use of everyone. The earth belongs to everyone, not [only] to the rich" (par. 23). Or, as Fred G. Sanford once explained why he took towels and ashtrays from an expensive hotel he stayed in, "The Bible says, 'the meek shall inherit the earth' and, well, you have start somewhere." In short, Jesus teaches that neither obsessive anxiety about subsistence nor fixating our desires on accumulating more and more material things have a place in God’s kingdom. However, the Lord is not ever content to leave His listeners merely with a neat little moral lesson.

In everything He says, He bids you, "Follow me." From this summons arises our question, Where to? The only honest answer, as His first disciples discovered to their dismay, is "To the Cross." This is especially important to remember as we begin preparing for Lent. He bids each of you to follow Him every day through the circumstances you face. He calls you to live the irreducible paradox that only by dying to yourself will you truly live. Perhaps a more concrete way of posing the question with which I began is to ask, When He summons you to the Cross, do you follow, or hesitate? A moment of hesitation makes all the difference in the world because in many circumstances, given the paradoxical nature of His call, it is easy to justify not following.

It is only by trusting Him, in His promise that even should your own mother forget you, He will not forget you, that you can follow Him when He tells you to "seek first the kingdom of God" in things big and small (Isa. 49:15; Matt. 6:33). He promises you that if you seek first to establish God’s reign in all your endeavors, then "all these things will be given you besides" (Matt. 6:33). It is only by living in this self-emptying way, in the awareness of your destiny, that you will come to see that, indeed, "Sufficient for a day is its own evil," which, in turn, protects you from all anxiety as you wait in joyful hope for His glorious return, through which will mark the realization of God’s reign (Matt. 6:34).

Maine's Governor to push for Right-to-Work law

Politico: In an interview at the National Governors Association, the Republican praised Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and couched his own proposal in the language of liberty loved by tea partiers.
"He's got a big challenge, and quite frankly, once they start reading our budget they're going to leave Wisconsin and come to Maine because we're going after right to work," LePage told POLITICO.
"I believe that the Declaration of Independence says 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,'" he said. "Whenever someone forces me to do something against my will, they're infringing upon my freedoms and my liberties. And that's what I think we're doing in Maine when we have fair share, which means that you are required to belong to a union, you're required to pay dues but you don't want to participate. I find that to be against everything the United States of America stands for."
LePage was unsure about the feasibility of passing right-to-work legislation.
Good luck with that Governor LePage.  Maine is still a very liberal state and the Republicans there might as well be Democrats.  Unions will come down on LePage like a ton of bricks because he is focusing on one of the key ways unions retain power.

I don't see much success for Maine becoming a Right-to-Work state, but if handled correctly the debate should be useful for the national conversation and to expose some of union's strong arm tactics.

Video: Union protester foams at the mouth (literally)

I had no idea Chris Matthews had a brother.
Breitbart TV: Chicago played host to a union thug rally with plenty of lefty kooks screaming about the white-supremacist GOP. 


Could someone please give this guy a napkin!


Via: Breitbart TV

Ho Hum: National Union Protests Not So Impressive

MoveOn.org and labor unions staged national protest today.  They were successful at putting quite a few boots on the ground in Madison, WI, but elsewhere, eh.
Legal Insurrection: Protests in support of Wisconsin public sector unions were organized by MoveOn.org and labor unions today.
Promoters, such as David Dayen at Firedoglake, were predicting a million-person turnout nationwide.  But reports as of 7:00 E.S.T. today make clear that other than in Madison, Wisconsin, the crowds were sparse.
The turnout in Madison was sizable, with estimates ranging from 50-70,000, which included protesters bused in from other states.  (Dayen is trying to pump the crowd estimate to over 100,000.) But elsewhere, the crowds numbered only in the hundreds or low thousands.
In Washington, D.C., only about 500 people showed up (go to link for good photos of crazy signs). (Note, WaPo says 1000.)
In Columbus, OH, where you would expect a big crowd given a similar controversy, only "several thousand" people protested.  
Other head counts, based on news reports, include: Boston (1000), Portsmouth, N.H. (few hundred), Augusta, ME (small crowd), New York City ("several thousand"), Chicago (1000), Miami (100), Austin (several hundred), Chicago (1000); Lansing, MI (2000), Nashville (hundreds), Los Angeles (2000), Richmond, VA (300), Denver (1000); Frankfurt, KY (several hundred), Jefferson City, MO (several hundred), Harrisburg, PA (several hundred).  
While I don't have a complete count, based on these numbers from some major cities and labor states, total protesters nationwide (excluding Madison) likely totaled under 100,000 combined. [MORE]
I am not surprised that the numbers failed to materialize. The reason why the left has trouble getting people to come out is because the left is comprised of grievance groups. There are minority groups, women's groups, gay groups, unions etc.  Each group has their own grievance and it is hard to get them fired up over someone else's grievance (in this case unions). Despite the left's best efforts to paint union's grievances as the middle classes' grievances, it simply isn't true and everyone knows it. 

The TEA Parties on the other hand have an over arching theme of reigning in government.  Under that theme, you will find all sorts of other conservative groups, neocons, social conservative, pro-lifers, etc.

Unfortunately for the left, the over arching theme for all of their grievance groups would be "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" and that would be absolutely unsightly to display in public.

Below are some pictures from the protests in North Carolina sent to me by one of my readers.  They include both the pro-union protesters and the TEA Party protesters (click to enlarge).









Video: Hideaway in Rockford, Il.



Rockford's tourism board is wasting no time capitalizing on the Fleebagger craze.  Now that is what I call capitalism!


Via: Memeorandum
Video h/t: Hot Air

Somethings never change: Aide quits Rahm Emanuel's transition team due to ethics violations

Remember the early days of the Obama administration and the parade of tax cheats and crooked politicians? Well, it seems like Rahm Emanuel has brought that habit with him back to Chicago.
Chicago Tribune: A veteran politician Rahm Emanuel named to his mayoral transition team resigned her high-level state job last summer and paid a fine for conducting political business on state time, according to a newly filed ethics report.
Judy Erwin, a co-chair of Emanuel's mayoral campaign, said late Friday night that she would resign her new post on his transition team after the Tribune contacted her and the campaign. She said she hadn't informed Emanuel of the ethics violation.
Erwin, the former executive director of the Illinois Board of Higher Education, admitted using her office e-mail and phone while working on a campaign committee for presidential candidate Barack Obama, using staff resources to plan her trip to the 2008 Democratic National Convention and engaging in campaign fundraising activity while on the job, the state's Executive Ethics Commission ruled in a decision filed Feb. 16.
The ethics commission said she cooperated with the investigation by the executive inspector general, reimbursed the state, agreed to pay a $4,000 fine and promised to never work for the state again. She resigned Aug. 15.
That was a very short promise.  If Chicago thought it was going to get real Hope and Change from Team Rahm, they are in for a rude awakening.  Read the rest of the story for cozy nexus between Judy Erwin and the Obama administration.

In The Land of Make Believe or How to Get Big Hits to Your Blog

You all know that Clifton B loves watching the traffic at Another Black Conservative soar.  I watch my Sitemeter like a hawk.


Since I was forced to take some time off from my blogging, my site stats have been less than stellar and forget about getting on Memeorandum.  In the words of Sam from The Last Tradition: Memeorandum is treating me like an ugly stepchild. 


However, there is a way to get my totals sky high again. Simply make up a story that liberals will love.  One blogger did exactly that and is now rocking the top thread on Memeorandum.


This blogger concocted a story that Scott Walker was asked to leave a restaurant in Madison, WI.  The lefties ate it up like it was Manna from Heaven!  Unfortunately, a blogger decided to dig a little deeper and the story is looking like a complete hoax.  


Even though the story is false, this lefty blogger is still pulling in the traffic on Memeorandum.  Like Troglopundit, I want my own thread on Memeorandum too. So here goes my false story of the day: Sarah Palin and Scott Walker have a secret love child, and here is the picture to prove it.




Now give me the hits damn it!


Via: Memeorandum
Via: Mind Spring
Via: Fire Dog Lake
Via: Bagger Blogger
Via: Troglopundit

"Repay no one evil for evil"

Having posted last night about Cardinal George's desire to make hearing confessions an important part of his ministry after his retirement from being the archbishop of Chicago, this morning I encountered something via Quaerere Deum on the absolute necessity to forgive. The brief piece, which originated on Desert Wisdom, is about a Russian monk, Elder Sampson Sievers, who passed back in 1979. Like Dostoevsky's remarkable Elder Zosima in The Brothers Karamazov, Elder Sampson was a spiritual father to many. I guess the best equivalent in the West would be a spiritual director, often conceived of, from the Celtic tradition, as a soul-friend. However, the relationship between a person and her/his spiritual father is a different, deeper kind of relationship. It doesn't take on the kind of pragmatic "let's get down to business" character that seems to comprise a lot of what passes for spiritual direction in the efficient West.

The post on Desert Wisdom says that Elder Sampson "was a man well-equipped to speak on the subject of forgiveness. As a young novice monk, he was arrested by the Communist authorities, shot in a mass execution, and thrown into a common grave. By Divine Providence he survived the shooting, and was pulled out of the grave still breathing by his brother monks and nursed back to health. Later he was arrested again and spent nearly twenty years in Communist concentration camps. But he never held onto bitterness and resentment: He completely forgave both his executioners and his torturers. In his later years, when he was serving as a spiritual father to many people, he was especially tough when his spiritual children refused to forgive someone, even for some petty annoyance. He said: 'I’ve always concluded: this means that they still have not gotten the point, that the whole secret, that all the salt of Christianity lies in this: to forgive, to excuse, to justify, not to know, not to remember.'"

I find this both beautiful and troubling. The reason I find it troubling is the exhortation not to remember evil and even to justify evil. I see why I should not dwell on on evil. I even see that to forgive means, to some extent, to excuse evil, but do I really have to both forget and justify evil? Given his experience, Elder Sampson's teaching cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand. There was a conversation I participated in last week about the absolute need for one who follows Christ to forgive as Jesus taught us in last Sunday's Gospel, and He demonstrated by praying for those who killed Him even as the were nailing Him to the Cross: "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father" in the recognition that God "makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust" (Matt.5:43-56).

It is undeniable that we are to pray for our enemies and love those who persecute us. This falls into the category of easy to say, difficult to live. However, what about really egregious things? In no way do we realize that, unlike our blessed the Lord, we are not yet perfect as our Father heaven is perfect than when it comes to the need to forgive. As Elder Sampson directed, forgiving requires at least excusing evil, if not justifying it or forgetting it. Forgiveness, certainly for truly evil acts deliberately committed, as well as very often for trifling things, must be a choice, but it requires grace, too. I believe that this grace takes the form of remembering how much we need God's mercy, Jesus Christ (i.e., "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us"). Nonetheless, we sometimes first have to pray for the grace to pray for another, to truly desire the best for him/her. For many who have been gravely harmed by another this is a process, a two steps forward and one step back proposition (or even one step forward and two steps back, depending on the day). The need to forgive, to be merciful because God has given us mercy, always, inevitably, and necessarily brings up the issue of justice.

I his encyclical Spe Salvi, Pope Benedict reflects deeply on justice and mercy. I think he lays things out more clearly than does Elder Sampson: mercy cannot cancel out the demands of justice:


"To protest against God in the name of justice is not helpful. A world without God is a world without hope (cf. Eph 2:12). Only God can create justice. And faith gives us the certainty that he does so. The image of the Last Judgement is not primarily an image of terror, but an image of hope; for us it may even be the decisive image of hope. Is it not also a frightening image? I would say: it is an image that evokes responsibility, an image, therefore, of that fear of which Saint Hilary spoke when he said that all our fear has its place in love. God is justice and creates justice. This is our consolation and our hope. And in his justice there is also grace. This we know by turning our gaze to the crucified and risen Christ. Both these things—justice and grace—must be seen in their correct inner relationship. Grace does not cancel out justice. It does not make wrong into right. It is not a sponge which wipes everything away, so that whatever someone has done on earth ends up being of equal value. Dostoevsky, for example, was right to protest against this kind of Heaven and this kind of grace in his novel The Brothers Karamazov. Evildoers, in the end, do not sit at table at the eternal banquet beside their victims without distinction, as though nothing had happened" (par. 44).

We cannot neglect weighty matters, that is, our stance towards thos who deliberately commit truly evil acts. Take as an example our opposition as Catholics to the death penalty: I can’t fail to recognize the point-of-view of someone who has had a spouse, a parent, a sibling, a child, a near and dear friend who was brutally murdered and accept their very human response to such an occurrence, which often, at least initially, sees justice as an eye-for-an-eye and tooth-for-a-tooth. We must help them see that result of such a stance, particularly in the face of evil, only has the effect, as Tevye, from Fiddler on the Roof, sagely observed, of leaving everyone blind and toothless.

In recently counseling someone who is dealing with the rape and murder of someone close to him, he told me about how a close friend had mocked his opposition to the death penalty and his faith by saying to him about the murderer: "I guess you can look forward to shaking hands with that bastard in heaven." The scandal of Christianity is that, while this is not a certainty, it is a possibility. Further, it is a possibility we are called to help bring about. This is how we help accomplish God's purpose, assisting in the divine work of bringing life from death. It is hard work, indeed!

In light of these provocations, as a Christians, let us recognize how far our hearts from are from where they need to be, from where we want them to be (if we are serious about being Jesus' disciples). In order to do so, we have to be reassured of what the Holy Father teaches us; with God there is justice, even for those who ultimately recognize their need for divine mercy. This is no different from what St. Paul wrote a long time ago:

"Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, 'Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.' To the contrary, 'if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.' Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" (Rom. 12:17-19- ESV).

Newt Gingrich plays the impeachment card



Sounds like Newt has been listening to Rush Limbaugh lately.  Rush made the same analogy of how the left would react to President Palin the other day.  That aside, the idea of impeaching Obama over not defending DOMA in court is nothing more than a pure fantasy.  With a split Congress and weak knee Republicans all over the place, anything short of Obama giving all our nation's secrets to the Chinese will not lead to impeachment.


I also find talk like this very distracting for 2012. Just like Obama's birth certificate and his religion, the impeachment issue only muddies the waters and fires up Obama's base.  Obama is very beatable in 2012 for the simple fact that the nation simply cannot afford his wild and irresponsible spending.  


In 2012 all that is needed to defeat Obama is someone who can deliver this message crystal clear and then stand up to the blast furnace of hate the left is sure to project.  Newt Gingrich is simply incapable of both. So, to those conservatives who might be swayed by Newt's impeachment talk, take Newt's own advice and shrug it off.


Via: Memeorandum
Via: Newsmax
Via: The Right Scoop

Where do the most important conversations happen?

Because I was praying and thinking about, as well as planning for Lent this afternoon, something I read in an interview that John Allen did with Cardinal George back in early January struck me. In his response to Allen's question about what he would like to do after his retirement as archbishop of Chicago, Cardinal George responded by first stating that he would like to resume hearing confessions because he missed doing so as a bishop. "The conversations that take place in the sacrament of reconciliation are the most important conversations on the face of the planet. There you meet a soul in the presence of God ... I would very much like to make that ministry a large part of my life."

Why bother? Republican's two week spending bill

Democrats are sounding very happy with the Republicans two week spending bill that includes $4 billion in microscopic spending cuts.
ABC News: The GOP’s latest proposal – a two-week spending bill with $4 billion in cuts – was designed to be hard for Democrats to resist because it is full of cuts they had already supported. For instance, the Republicans’ plan included $1.24 billion in cuts proposed by President Obama in his 2012 budget and about $2.7 billion in cuts to earmarks that both parties have already renounced.
“The American people want the government to stay open and they want us to cut spending,” Speaker of the House John Boehner said in a statement. “These stop-gap measures are only necessary because the Democrats who run Washington failed to pass a budget, failed to stop the spending binge that’s threatened job growth, and failed to lead.”
The House will come back into session on Monday and is expected to complete debate and vote on the two-week extension on Tuesday. Boehner predicted they would pass it in short order and called on Senate Democrats to follow suit.
“Once the House passes our second continuing resolution early next week, I’m hopeful Senator Reid will quickly hold a vote on our short-term proposal so we can ensure the government remains open and that we’re addressing the need to cut spending to create a better environment for job growth,” Boehner, R-Ohio, said.
Judging from their response to the GOP’s plan, it’s clear Democrats are indeed warming up to it. Case in point: now they’re using words like “encouraged” and “moving closer” and “good idea.”
First, I hope TEA Party Republicans throw a monkey wrench into this foolish and unnecessary plan.  Second, of course Democrats love the idea.  It includes all the the cuts they wanted and they will act like the $4 billion cut is a $4 trillion cut, then two weeks later we will be right back to where we were with the $61 billion cuts.  
The words "We're broke" should have been falling out of every Republican's lips from November 3rd. Had they done that, Democrats' foot dragging on cutting spending would look like the dangerously irresponsible behavior it is.
Republicans need to stop being fearful about a government shutdown. This is not 1995. Conservatives have resources to break through the media filter and explain that during a government shutdown, the government doesn't really shutdown.
Too bad Scott Walker and Chris Christie cannot give testosterone injections to the Republican leadership.
See what others are saying about this plan on Memeorandum.

Everything old is new again: Democrats propose "lockbox" for Social Security

Continuing on their path of irresponsibility, Senate Democrats want to resurrect another old and failed idea for Social Security ... Al Gore's Lockbox.
The Hill: Senate Democrats want to put the Social Security trust fund in a lockbox and insulate it from a broader budget-cutting package designed to reduce the national deficit.
It’s a revival of the concept that former Vice President Al Gore (D) made famous when he sparred with George W. Bush over a proposal to invest a portion of Social Security funds in the private market.[...]
Leading Senate Democrats say Social Security reform should not be part of a deficit reduction package under negotiation.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who is at the center of bipartisan talks, said he wants to prolong the solvency of Social Security to 75 years. Under its current setup, the program is projected to pay 100 percent of benefits for the next 26 years.
But Conrad does not want Social Security to be part of a broader proposal to reduce the $1.6 trillion federal deficit. [MORE]
This isn't serious thinking. Spendthrift Congress members are expert lock pickers and have raided Social Security funds in the past.  Nothing about this proposal would stop it in the future.  Furthermore, trying to balance our budget without addressing Social Security is a fantasy.  Everyone knows that Social Security is one of the big three items blowing a whole in our budget.  It simply cannot be left out of the equation.

The left love to accuse Republicans of being the party of No Ideas, yet time and time again, Democrats prove themselves to be the Party of Failed Old Ideas.