From Fox News:
"Scoring the team's only touchdown in a 35-6 loss is normally nothing to celebrate. But sometimes the touchdown counts as more than six points on the scoreboard.
In a high-school game in Snohomish, Wash. on Friday, the hometown Snohomish Panthers avoided a shutout in inspirational fashion as junior Ike Ditzenberger -- a 17-year-old with Down syndrome -- scored on a 51-yard touchdown run after entering the game for the first time with just 10 seconds remaining.
Opposing players and coaches of Lake Stevens were apprised of the play beforehand, dubbed "The Ike Special" by his team. According to the The Daily Herald (Everett, Wash.), the play resembles the final snap of each Snohomish practice as his Panthers teammates allow Ditzenberger to score each day. "
It was 45 seconds that was insignificant in the scope of the game, but I am sure led to a flow of tears from his parents and left a big impact on Ike's life and self esteem. Kudo's to the Coach and Opposing Coach for leaving the spartan element of football behind and seeing an opportunity for kindness and love.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Bastille Day 2010!
This was the best story of the day, maybe the month.Robert Rizzo, a city manager in the Los Angeles suburb of Bell, decided to give himself a $787,000 annual salary without taxpayer approval and get fat on the public trough. The per capita income of the people in his district that he was supposed to be representing is $24,800 a year.
Rizzo's hacks on the council provided Rizzo with 107 days of vacation and 36 sick days in 2008 as part of his cushy package.
Rizzo also gave himself two $80,000 personal loans as well.
Today, he and seven of his political minions were taken away in handcuffs this morning. Rizzo faces 53 charges of misappropriation of public funds.
It is a different day in America. The corrupt politicians have been put on notice and the exhausted and exploited peasants are coming with their pitchforks. Sic semper tyrannis!
Monday, September 13, 2010
Catholic Motherhood: Two Souls; One Heart
A great article from CNA. It is absolutely a must read for Catholic mothers, and every Catholic should get something out of this:
"September is the month of Our Lady of Sorrows. In his fourth meditation on the "Seven Sorrows of Our Lady," St. Alphonsus Liguori describes the pain, horror, and pity that the Blessed Virgin Mary experienced as she anticipated Christ's crucifixion, and encountered him on his way to Calvary:
All mothers feel the sufferings of their children as their own. Hence, when the Canaanitish woman entreated our Saviour to deliver her daughter from the devil that tormented her, she asked Him rather to pity her, the mother, than her daughter: "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David, my daughter is grievously troubled by a devil." But what mother ever loved her son as Mary loved Jesus?
Let us only imagine what a flame He must have enkindled in that pure heart of His holy Mother, void as it was of every earthly affection. In fine, the Blessed Virgin herself told Saint Bridget, "that love had rendered her heart and that of her Son but one." That blending together of Servant and Mother, of Son and God, created in the heart of Mary a fire composed of a thousand flames.
But the whole of this flame of love was afterwards, at the time of the Passion, ranged into a sea of grief, when Saint Bernardine declares, "that if all the sorrows of the world were united, they would not equal that of the glorious Virgin Mary." Yes, because, as Richard of St. Lawrence writes, "the more tenderly this Mother loved, so much the more deeply was she wounded." The greater was her love for Him, the greater was her grief at the sight of His sufferings; and especially when she met her Son, already condemned to death, and bearing His cross to the place of punishment.
The Blessed Virgin revealed to Saint Bridget, that when the time of the Passion of our Lord was approaching, her eyes were always filled with tears, as she thought of her beloved Son, whom she was about to lose on earth, and that the prospect of that approaching suffering caused her to be seized with fear, and a cold sweat to cover her whole body.
Saint Bonaventure, contemplating Mary on that night, says: "Thou didst spend it without sleep, and whilst others slept thou didst remain watching." In the morning the disciples of Jesus Christ came to this afflicted Mother, the one to bring her one account, the other another; but all were tidings of sorrow, verifying in her the prophecy of Jeremias: "Weeping, she hath wept in the night, and her tears are on her cheeks; there is none to comfort her of all them that were dear to her."
Mary goes with Saint John, and by the blood with which the way is sprinkled, she perceives that her Son has already passed. This she revealed to Saint Bridget: "By the footsteps of my Son, I knew where He had passed: for along the way the ground was marked with blood."
Alas, what a scene of sorrows then presented itself before her! the nails, the hammers, the cords, the fatal instruments of the death of her Son, all of which were borne before Him. And what a sword must the sound of that trumpet have been to her heart, which proclaimed the sentence pronounced against her Jesus! But behold, the instruments, the trumpeter, and the executioners, have already passed; she raised her eyes, and saw, O God ! a young man covered with blood and wounds from head to foot, a wreath of thorns on His head, and two heavy beams on His shoulders.
On the one hand she desired to behold Him, and on the other she dreaded so heart-rending a sight. At length they looked at each other. The Son wiped from His eyes the clotted blood, which, as it was revealed to Saint Bridget, prevented Him from seeing, and looked at His Mother, and the Mother looked at her Son. Ah, looks of bitter grief, which, as so many arrows, pierced through and through those two beautiful and loving souls.
The Mother would have embraced Him, as Saint Anselm says, but the guards thrust her aside with insults, and urged forward the suffering Lord; and Mary followed Him. Ah, holy Virgin, whither goest thou? To Calvary. And canst thou trust thyself to behold Him, who is thy life, hanging on a cross?
"We even pity wild beasts," as Saint John Chrysostom writes; and did we see a lioness following her cub to death, the sight would move us to compassion. And shall we not also be moved to compassion on seeing Mary follow her immaculate Lamb to death? Let us, then, pity her, and let us also accompany her Son and herself, by bearing with patience the cross which our Lord imposes on us.
Saint John Chrysostom asks why Jesus Christ, in His other sufferings, was pleased to endure them alone, but in carrying His cross was assisted by the Cyrenean? He replies, that it was "that thou mayest understand that the cross of Christ is not sufficient without thine."
"September is the month of Our Lady of Sorrows. In his fourth meditation on the "Seven Sorrows of Our Lady," St. Alphonsus Liguori describes the pain, horror, and pity that the Blessed Virgin Mary experienced as she anticipated Christ's crucifixion, and encountered him on his way to Calvary:
All mothers feel the sufferings of their children as their own. Hence, when the Canaanitish woman entreated our Saviour to deliver her daughter from the devil that tormented her, she asked Him rather to pity her, the mother, than her daughter: "Have mercy on me, O Lord, Thou Son of David, my daughter is grievously troubled by a devil." But what mother ever loved her son as Mary loved Jesus?
Let us only imagine what a flame He must have enkindled in that pure heart of His holy Mother, void as it was of every earthly affection. In fine, the Blessed Virgin herself told Saint Bridget, "that love had rendered her heart and that of her Son but one." That blending together of Servant and Mother, of Son and God, created in the heart of Mary a fire composed of a thousand flames.
But the whole of this flame of love was afterwards, at the time of the Passion, ranged into a sea of grief, when Saint Bernardine declares, "that if all the sorrows of the world were united, they would not equal that of the glorious Virgin Mary." Yes, because, as Richard of St. Lawrence writes, "the more tenderly this Mother loved, so much the more deeply was she wounded." The greater was her love for Him, the greater was her grief at the sight of His sufferings; and especially when she met her Son, already condemned to death, and bearing His cross to the place of punishment.
The Blessed Virgin revealed to Saint Bridget, that when the time of the Passion of our Lord was approaching, her eyes were always filled with tears, as she thought of her beloved Son, whom she was about to lose on earth, and that the prospect of that approaching suffering caused her to be seized with fear, and a cold sweat to cover her whole body.
Saint Bonaventure, contemplating Mary on that night, says: "Thou didst spend it without sleep, and whilst others slept thou didst remain watching." In the morning the disciples of Jesus Christ came to this afflicted Mother, the one to bring her one account, the other another; but all were tidings of sorrow, verifying in her the prophecy of Jeremias: "Weeping, she hath wept in the night, and her tears are on her cheeks; there is none to comfort her of all them that were dear to her."
Mary goes with Saint John, and by the blood with which the way is sprinkled, she perceives that her Son has already passed. This she revealed to Saint Bridget: "By the footsteps of my Son, I knew where He had passed: for along the way the ground was marked with blood."
Alas, what a scene of sorrows then presented itself before her! the nails, the hammers, the cords, the fatal instruments of the death of her Son, all of which were borne before Him. And what a sword must the sound of that trumpet have been to her heart, which proclaimed the sentence pronounced against her Jesus! But behold, the instruments, the trumpeter, and the executioners, have already passed; she raised her eyes, and saw, O God ! a young man covered with blood and wounds from head to foot, a wreath of thorns on His head, and two heavy beams on His shoulders.
On the one hand she desired to behold Him, and on the other she dreaded so heart-rending a sight. At length they looked at each other. The Son wiped from His eyes the clotted blood, which, as it was revealed to Saint Bridget, prevented Him from seeing, and looked at His Mother, and the Mother looked at her Son. Ah, looks of bitter grief, which, as so many arrows, pierced through and through those two beautiful and loving souls.
The Mother would have embraced Him, as Saint Anselm says, but the guards thrust her aside with insults, and urged forward the suffering Lord; and Mary followed Him. Ah, holy Virgin, whither goest thou? To Calvary. And canst thou trust thyself to behold Him, who is thy life, hanging on a cross?
"We even pity wild beasts," as Saint John Chrysostom writes; and did we see a lioness following her cub to death, the sight would move us to compassion. And shall we not also be moved to compassion on seeing Mary follow her immaculate Lamb to death? Let us, then, pity her, and let us also accompany her Son and herself, by bearing with patience the cross which our Lord imposes on us.
Saint John Chrysostom asks why Jesus Christ, in His other sufferings, was pleased to endure them alone, but in carrying His cross was assisted by the Cyrenean? He replies, that it was "that thou mayest understand that the cross of Christ is not sufficient without thine."
Saturday, September 11, 2010
September 11, 2010: The Calling of Our Time
A few days after our country was attacked, on Sept. 14, President Bush came to a national cathedral in Washington D.C., and gave what I believe was the greatest speech of his Presidency. It received very little accolades from the press, probably too many references to God. It is a very worthwhile read on this 9th anniversary.
"We are here in the middle hour of our grief. So many have suffered so great a loss, and today we express our nation's sorrow. We come before God to pray for the missing and the dead, and for those who loved them. On Tuesday, our country was attacked with deliberate and massive cruelty. We have seen the images of fire and ashes and bent steel.
Now come the names, the list of casualties we are only beginning to read:
They are the names of men and women who began their day at a desk or in an airport, busy with life.
They are the names of people who faced death and in their last moments called home to say, be brave and I love you.
They are the names of passengers who defied their murderers and prevented the murder of others on the ground.
They are the names of men and women who wore the uniform of the United States and died at their posts.
They are the names of rescuers -- the ones whom death found running up the stairs and into the fires to help others.
We will read all these names. We will linger over them and learn their stories, and many Americans will weep.
To the children and parents and spouses and families and friends of the lost, we offer the deepest sympathy of the nation. And I assure you, you are not alone. Just three days removed from these events, Americans do not yet have the distance of history, but our responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil.
War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others; it will end in a way and at an hour of our choosing. Our purpose as a nation is firm, yet our wounds as a people are recent and unhealed and lead us to pray. In many of our prayers this week, there's a searching and an honesty. At St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York, on Tuesday, a woman said, "I pray to God to give us a sign that He's still here."
Others have prayed for the same, searching hospital to hospital, carrying pictures of those still missing. God's signs are not always the ones we look for. We learn in tragedy that His purposes are not always our own, yet the prayers of private suffering, whether in our homes or in this great cathedral are known and heard and understood. There are prayers that help us last through the day or endure the night. There are prayers of friends and strangers that give us strength for the journey, and there are prayers that yield our will to a Will greater than our own.
This world He created is of moral design. Grief and tragedy and hatred are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end, and the Lord of life holds all who die and all who mourn.
It is said that adversity introduces us to ourselves. This is true of a nation as well. In this trial, we have been reminded and the world has seen that our fellow Americans are generous and kind, resourceful and brave.
We see our national character in rescuers working past exhaustion, in long lines of blood donors, in thousands of citizens who have asked to work and serve in any way possible.
And we have seen our national character in eloquent acts of sacrifice:
Inside the World Trade Center, one man who could have saved himself stayed until the end and at the side of his quadriplegic friend.
A beloved priest died giving the last rites to a firefighter.
Two office workers, finding a disabled stranger, carried her down 68 floors to safety.
A group of men drove through the night from Dallas to Washington to bring skin grafts for burned victims.
In these acts and many others, Americans showed a deep commitment to one another and an abiding love for our country.
Today, we feel what Franklin Roosevelt called, "the warm courage of national unity." This is a unity of every faith and every background. It has joined together political parties and both houses of Congress. It is evident in services of prayer and candlelight vigils and American flags, which are displayed in pride and waved in defiance. Our unity is a kinship of grief and a steadfast resolve to prevail against our enemies. And this unity against terror is now extending across the world.
America is a nation full of good fortune, with so much to be grateful for, but we are not spared from suffering. In every generation, the world has produced enemies of human freedom. They have attacked America because we are freedom's home and defender, and the commitment of our Fathers is now the calling of our time.
On this national day of prayer and remembrance, we ask Almighty God to watch over our nation and grant us patience and resolve in all that is to come. We pray that He will comfort and console those who now walk in sorrow. We thank Him for each life we now must mourn, and the promise of a life to come.
As we've been assured, neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities, nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth can separate us from God's love. May He bless the souls of the departed. May He comfort our own. And may He always guide our country.
God bless America."
"We are here in the middle hour of our grief. So many have suffered so great a loss, and today we express our nation's sorrow. We come before God to pray for the missing and the dead, and for those who loved them. On Tuesday, our country was attacked with deliberate and massive cruelty. We have seen the images of fire and ashes and bent steel.
Now come the names, the list of casualties we are only beginning to read:
They are the names of men and women who began their day at a desk or in an airport, busy with life.
They are the names of people who faced death and in their last moments called home to say, be brave and I love you.
They are the names of passengers who defied their murderers and prevented the murder of others on the ground.
They are the names of men and women who wore the uniform of the United States and died at their posts.
They are the names of rescuers -- the ones whom death found running up the stairs and into the fires to help others.
We will read all these names. We will linger over them and learn their stories, and many Americans will weep.
To the children and parents and spouses and families and friends of the lost, we offer the deepest sympathy of the nation. And I assure you, you are not alone. Just three days removed from these events, Americans do not yet have the distance of history, but our responsibility to history is already clear: to answer these attacks and rid the world of evil.
War has been waged against us by stealth and deceit and murder. This nation is peaceful, but fierce when stirred to anger. This conflict was begun on the timing and terms of others; it will end in a way and at an hour of our choosing. Our purpose as a nation is firm, yet our wounds as a people are recent and unhealed and lead us to pray. In many of our prayers this week, there's a searching and an honesty. At St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York, on Tuesday, a woman said, "I pray to God to give us a sign that He's still here."
Others have prayed for the same, searching hospital to hospital, carrying pictures of those still missing. God's signs are not always the ones we look for. We learn in tragedy that His purposes are not always our own, yet the prayers of private suffering, whether in our homes or in this great cathedral are known and heard and understood. There are prayers that help us last through the day or endure the night. There are prayers of friends and strangers that give us strength for the journey, and there are prayers that yield our will to a Will greater than our own.
This world He created is of moral design. Grief and tragedy and hatred are only for a time. Goodness, remembrance and love have no end, and the Lord of life holds all who die and all who mourn.
It is said that adversity introduces us to ourselves. This is true of a nation as well. In this trial, we have been reminded and the world has seen that our fellow Americans are generous and kind, resourceful and brave.
We see our national character in rescuers working past exhaustion, in long lines of blood donors, in thousands of citizens who have asked to work and serve in any way possible.
And we have seen our national character in eloquent acts of sacrifice:
Inside the World Trade Center, one man who could have saved himself stayed until the end and at the side of his quadriplegic friend.
A beloved priest died giving the last rites to a firefighter.
Two office workers, finding a disabled stranger, carried her down 68 floors to safety.
A group of men drove through the night from Dallas to Washington to bring skin grafts for burned victims.
In these acts and many others, Americans showed a deep commitment to one another and an abiding love for our country.
Today, we feel what Franklin Roosevelt called, "the warm courage of national unity." This is a unity of every faith and every background. It has joined together political parties and both houses of Congress. It is evident in services of prayer and candlelight vigils and American flags, which are displayed in pride and waved in defiance. Our unity is a kinship of grief and a steadfast resolve to prevail against our enemies. And this unity against terror is now extending across the world.
America is a nation full of good fortune, with so much to be grateful for, but we are not spared from suffering. In every generation, the world has produced enemies of human freedom. They have attacked America because we are freedom's home and defender, and the commitment of our Fathers is now the calling of our time.
On this national day of prayer and remembrance, we ask Almighty God to watch over our nation and grant us patience and resolve in all that is to come. We pray that He will comfort and console those who now walk in sorrow. We thank Him for each life we now must mourn, and the promise of a life to come.
As we've been assured, neither death nor life nor angels nor principalities, nor powers nor things present nor things to come nor height nor depth can separate us from God's love. May He bless the souls of the departed. May He comfort our own. And may He always guide our country.
God bless America."
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Archbishop Sheen on Antique Road Show
I joke with my wife I know I am getting old because I am finding myself watching the Antique Road Show more and more. Just a few years back my preference was watching contestants eat live scorpions on Fear Factor, but with the demands of 4 children I now need a more peaceful intake of viewing on my down time.Last week they ran an older show on one of the weekend editions. Here is a great story about Archbishop Sheen and a little Iowan girl. Now 60 years old, the woman on the show reflected back to her childhood in 1953:
"I was in the Brownie Scouts. And we had moved from Chicago, and mother had packed the Brownie uniform. We had found the dress, but not the hat. So every day, I came home from school saying, "Mother, have you found the hat yet?" This went on for several months, and every day, it was, "No, I haven't found the hat." So one night, I was watching Bishop Sheen on “Life is Worth Living,” black-and-white TV, and I saw his hat. And I ran into the kitchen, and I said, "Mother, I found my Brownie hat." And she said, "Well, where is it?" Because she was very relieved. I said, "Well, Bishop Sheen stole it." And she thought that was so funny that she wrote him a letter explaining the story. But she changed it slightly and didn't tell him that I said he stole it, that he had it, or he took it. So for Christmas, he inscribed [his zuccheto/skull cap], "To Frances, God Love You-- Fulton J. Sheen," and sent it to me as a Christmas present."
For those of you dying to know, the zuccheto was appraised for between $2,000-$4,000.
It has definitely been an Archbishop Sheen stretch for me lately. Here is a little Catholic trivia: Archbishop Sheen's baptized name was Peter John Sheen. Fulton was his mother's maiden name and became the Archbishop's preference.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Best of VCR: American Pro-Life Hall of Fame Inaugural Class
Originally Posted Sept. 22, 2008:
I recently had an idea for a post. My concept was that if an American Pro-Life Hall of Fame existed, who would be the inaugural class? Who would be the first five people to be honored based on the last 30+ years of the pro-life cause? The most influential individuals involved with the cause?
The guidelines would be that an eligible person for election would have to be American born and have exposure at a national level. To come up with this list, I spoke with someone whom I believe is a leading authority on the pro-life cause, and its history, in America. We bounced ideas off each other, and came up with the following list of whom we would select as the inaugural class trying to cover the multi-facets of the cause and our society:
Scientific Community:
Bernard Nathanson: A founding member of NARAL and responsible for 75,000 abortions during his OBGYN career, Nathanson’s heart and views were converted as ultrasound became more sophisticated. He became a leading voice in the vanguard of the pro-life cause. His VHS video, The Silent Scream, was widely distributed in the early 1980’s where he gave a detailed window to the womb showing the viability of the baby and the horror of the abortion procedure.
Legislative Community:
Henry Hyde: A congressman who represented the 6th district of Illinois. Author of the Hyde Amendment that in 1976 prevented federal funds being used for abortion. With this signed legislation, he became the first person to register a victory against the Roe v. Wade decision. For over 30 years Hyde was a stalwart for the defense of unborn children on Capitol Hill.
Public Activist:
Randall Terry: Founded Operation Rescue in 1987. Arrested over 40 times for civil disobedience at abortion clinics across America. Terry and his organization provided the activist wing of the pro-life movement an existence and created havoc for the abortion industry saving thousands of babies. Served as a spokesman for the Terri Schiavo family.
Religious Community:
Cardinal John O’Connor: One of the strongest pro-life voices for the Catholic Church in America in the past 30 years. The Archbishop of the Diocese of New York City for 16 years and made the pro-life cause a cornerstone of the Diocese. Told any woman who was thinking of an abortion to come to him personally and he will get her help to her keep her baby. Caused fits for Catholic politicians Mario Cuomo and Geraldine Ferraro and their political deflection that they're "personally opposed to, but publically in support of abortion" stating this view was morally unacceptable.
Media Community:
Patrick Buchanan:
For over 40 years represented an unyielding pro-life voice in Republican administrations, print and television media. For seventeen years, appeared on Crossfire and defended and explained the pro-life position to America. Flanked George H.W. Bush in a 1992 Presidential run causing him to strengthen his social conservative positions. Gave one of the defining pro-life speeches in memory stating we are in a "cultural war for the soul of America," at Republican National Convention the same year.
A few notes of interest with this list. Although religious affiliations were not a consideration while compiling this list, all five listed ended up being Catholic. Nathanson and Terry converted. Some of the above listed did have problems within their personal lives but we have to give them their due in the pro-life cause.
Please understand this is one opinion of who should be honored. In no way do I want to take away from acknowledging anyone’s pro-life efforts or dedication to our cause . There were so many other names mentioned in the discussion (honorable mentions) including: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Rush Limbaugh, Fr. Frank Pavone, Ronald Reagan, Sam Brownback, Alan Keyes, Judie Brown, Gov. Robert Casey, Dr. Carolyn Gerster, Rev. Billy Graham, Fr. Weslin, Joan Andrews, etc…
I would love to hear if you think we got it right, or anyone else’s list.
I recently had an idea for a post. My concept was that if an American Pro-Life Hall of Fame existed, who would be the inaugural class? Who would be the first five people to be honored based on the last 30+ years of the pro-life cause? The most influential individuals involved with the cause?
The guidelines would be that an eligible person for election would have to be American born and have exposure at a national level. To come up with this list, I spoke with someone whom I believe is a leading authority on the pro-life cause, and its history, in America. We bounced ideas off each other, and came up with the following list of whom we would select as the inaugural class trying to cover the multi-facets of the cause and our society:
Scientific Community:
Bernard Nathanson: A founding member of NARAL and responsible for 75,000 abortions during his OBGYN career, Nathanson’s heart and views were converted as ultrasound became more sophisticated. He became a leading voice in the vanguard of the pro-life cause. His VHS video, The Silent Scream, was widely distributed in the early 1980’s where he gave a detailed window to the womb showing the viability of the baby and the horror of the abortion procedure.
Legislative Community:
Henry Hyde: A congressman who represented the 6th district of Illinois. Author of the Hyde Amendment that in 1976 prevented federal funds being used for abortion. With this signed legislation, he became the first person to register a victory against the Roe v. Wade decision. For over 30 years Hyde was a stalwart for the defense of unborn children on Capitol Hill.
Public Activist:
Randall Terry: Founded Operation Rescue in 1987. Arrested over 40 times for civil disobedience at abortion clinics across America. Terry and his organization provided the activist wing of the pro-life movement an existence and created havoc for the abortion industry saving thousands of babies. Served as a spokesman for the Terri Schiavo family.
Religious Community:
Cardinal John O’Connor: One of the strongest pro-life voices for the Catholic Church in America in the past 30 years. The Archbishop of the Diocese of New York City for 16 years and made the pro-life cause a cornerstone of the Diocese. Told any woman who was thinking of an abortion to come to him personally and he will get her help to her keep her baby. Caused fits for Catholic politicians Mario Cuomo and Geraldine Ferraro and their political deflection that they're "personally opposed to, but publically in support of abortion" stating this view was morally unacceptable.
Media Community:
Patrick Buchanan:
For over 40 years represented an unyielding pro-life voice in Republican administrations, print and television media. For seventeen years, appeared on Crossfire and defended and explained the pro-life position to America. Flanked George H.W. Bush in a 1992 Presidential run causing him to strengthen his social conservative positions. Gave one of the defining pro-life speeches in memory stating we are in a "cultural war for the soul of America," at Republican National Convention the same year.
A few notes of interest with this list. Although religious affiliations were not a consideration while compiling this list, all five listed ended up being Catholic. Nathanson and Terry converted. Some of the above listed did have problems within their personal lives but we have to give them their due in the pro-life cause.
Please understand this is one opinion of who should be honored. In no way do I want to take away from acknowledging anyone’s pro-life efforts or dedication to our cause . There were so many other names mentioned in the discussion (honorable mentions) including: Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Rush Limbaugh, Fr. Frank Pavone, Ronald Reagan, Sam Brownback, Alan Keyes, Judie Brown, Gov. Robert Casey, Dr. Carolyn Gerster, Rev. Billy Graham, Fr. Weslin, Joan Andrews, etc…
I would love to hear if you think we got it right, or anyone else’s list.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Archbishop Sheen Vintage TV Clip: "Is One of Your Titles, "Servant of God?"
Here is an archive film that I found last night. Archbishop Sheen was a guest on "What's My Line." It was an early television game show where the panel wore blindfolds and plays "20 questions" to try to eventually deduct who is the guest on the show.
A few things here to notice:
1) How loved Sheen was. The audience applauds for close to 20 seconds when they see it is him, and the first panel guest mentions, "it is the most solid round of applause I have heard in a long time." To put this in some perspective, the Archbishop received a 19 second round of applause when on the show; Joe DiMaggio received a 17 second round of applause when on the show.
2) His humility. When the same panelist asks, "Are you a familiar figure in public life," Sheen answers... "A little bit." Remember he had one of the highest ranking shows on television at the time.
3) How playful the archbishop can be, speaking French to throw off the panel. We also see the personal side of Sheen. How much he enjoys the "weekly on television and non-profit???" comment. And his quick wit telling the same panelist after he won money, "It's profit!"
4) He instructs to send his earnings to leper colonies.
5) At the end one of the panelist even kisses his ring. Wouldn't see that today.
This is a time capsule of a time when Catholicism in America was held in high esteem by even non-believers.
Enjoy!
A few things here to notice:
1) How loved Sheen was. The audience applauds for close to 20 seconds when they see it is him, and the first panel guest mentions, "it is the most solid round of applause I have heard in a long time." To put this in some perspective, the Archbishop received a 19 second round of applause when on the show; Joe DiMaggio received a 17 second round of applause when on the show.
2) His humility. When the same panelist asks, "Are you a familiar figure in public life," Sheen answers... "A little bit." Remember he had one of the highest ranking shows on television at the time.
3) How playful the archbishop can be, speaking French to throw off the panel. We also see the personal side of Sheen. How much he enjoys the "weekly on television and non-profit???" comment. And his quick wit telling the same panelist after he won money, "It's profit!"
4) He instructs to send his earnings to leper colonies.
5) At the end one of the panelist even kisses his ring. Wouldn't see that today.
This is a time capsule of a time when Catholicism in America was held in high esteem by even non-believers.
Enjoy!
Saturday, August 28, 2010
We Could All Use a Miracle Right About Now, Couldn't We?
Today I was determined to find good news out there. It seems lately every headline posted at Yahoo or Google is depressing, as our country seems to be more adrift. I was determined to find a story to give everyone a quick Faith shot in the arm. It took quite a bit of searching, but I found such a story that was not even carried by English-speaking media outlets.As we Americans are very familiar with, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (or ALS/Lou Gehrig’s Disease) is a horrible disease which gives its recipients very little hope. Sadly, only one in five people who are given this diagnosis live more than 5 five years. 50 percent of them do not make it 3 years.
By 2005, an Italian woman, Antonietta Raco (pictured), was completely paralyzed due to this disease and was resolved that this disease would run its course on her. In August of 2009, her body was completely free of the disease. What happened in between you ask? A pilgrimage to Lourdes, France.
Her prayers at Lourdes were not for self healing. She asked God to take her life in His hands. She asked the Lord to not have her last days mirror a recent highly publicized euthanasia case. She also prayed for a young girl in her village who shared her disease and her fate.
“I felt the presence of someone else [in the healing pool] that held me by the neck; I tried to turn around, but nobody was there. I felt a great pain in the legs, then a relief."
"It was at that moment when I heard to my left, a beautiful female voice, soft, tender, light," she said. “I never heard anything like it; I was relieved by the mere fact that I could actually physically hear her voice." The Woman said, 'Do not be afraid, do not be afraid!”
Upon examining Raco, Dr. Chio, her physician for the past 4 years, was quoted saying, “…from the standpoint of the medical literature, there has never been a case of regression for this disease.” He was surprised and said, "I am left speechless,'" Raco recalled.
I often think of an explanation for miracles that I once heard that resonated with me. The explanation was that a main purpose of a miracle is to remind us all who is really in control and still remains all powerful over science, nature, physics, perceptions, academia and our low-level realities. As humans we become standardized to the ways of the world and trapped in its secular thinking. Miracles drive a bulldozer through this default thinking.
Some links we all could use:
Here is a list of people who were cured at Lourdes. This is the official document, the Catholic Church is the most critical review on any reported cure. Ms. Raco has not been added yet.
Here is a link to get your prayer requests delivered to the Grotto at Lourdes.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Mother Teresa: A Beauty of God!
When ever I read about you, Mother, I realize what a poor Catholic I am. Here is a worthwhile piece by Fr. Raymond de Souza:
"...In 1952, Mother Teresa found a woman dying in the streets, half-eaten by rats and ants, with no one to care for her. She picked her up and took her to the hospital, but nothing could be done. Realizing that there were many others dying alone in the streets, Mother Teresa opened within days Nirmal Hriday (Pure Heart), a home for the dying. In the first 20 years alone, over 20,000 people were brought there, half of whom died knowing the love of the Missionaries of Charity. Nirmal Hriday is where one dying man, lying in the arms of Mother Teresa after being plucked from the gutters and bathed and clothed and fed, told her, “I have lived like an animal, but now I am dying like an angel.”
...She then came to be feted in the glamour capitals, receiving dozens of awards. In 1979, she received the Nobel Peace Prize, at that time still a prestigious award. When given the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1985, the plaque described her as the “saint of the gutters.” There have been others who have risen from the gutters to receive such awards, but she was the only one who went back to the gutters to live.
Mother Teresa knew that the true good cannot be found in systems or plans, no matter how clever or efficient, but in a person. She was not against the work of welfare agencies, but remarked that welfare was for a purpose, albeit a noble one, whilst love was for a person. Mother Teresa offered love. When criticized by those who accused her of not going to the root causes of problems, she would simply remind them what the true root cause was. “The greatest disease today is not leprosy or tuberculosis, but rather the feeling of being unwanted, uncared for and deserted by everybody,”
...Mother Teresa never played to the crowd who wished to obscure the Gospel and reduce her to a humanitarian celebrity. She spoke out against abortion as the “greatest destroyer of peace” when in Oslo at the Nobel ceremony, and shocked the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington when she reminded them of the Christian tradition on the immorality of contraception.
...The world only knew her as diminutive and wizened, with a slight stoop and gnarled hands. Yet all who met her found her beautiful, for her eyes sparkled and her smile radiated joy.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger once wrote that ultimately the Church has only two things to offer to the world for the credibility of the Gospel of Jesus Christ: the beauty of her art and the lives of her saints. Mother Teresa captivated the whole world, becoming a patron saint of a difficult century. Like a great masterpiece of sacred art, she was indeed something beautiful for God."
Amen, Fr. de Souza, Amen. Happy 100th Mother, pray for us!
"...In 1952, Mother Teresa found a woman dying in the streets, half-eaten by rats and ants, with no one to care for her. She picked her up and took her to the hospital, but nothing could be done. Realizing that there were many others dying alone in the streets, Mother Teresa opened within days Nirmal Hriday (Pure Heart), a home for the dying. In the first 20 years alone, over 20,000 people were brought there, half of whom died knowing the love of the Missionaries of Charity. Nirmal Hriday is where one dying man, lying in the arms of Mother Teresa after being plucked from the gutters and bathed and clothed and fed, told her, “I have lived like an animal, but now I am dying like an angel.”
...She then came to be feted in the glamour capitals, receiving dozens of awards. In 1979, she received the Nobel Peace Prize, at that time still a prestigious award. When given the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1985, the plaque described her as the “saint of the gutters.” There have been others who have risen from the gutters to receive such awards, but she was the only one who went back to the gutters to live.
Mother Teresa knew that the true good cannot be found in systems or plans, no matter how clever or efficient, but in a person. She was not against the work of welfare agencies, but remarked that welfare was for a purpose, albeit a noble one, whilst love was for a person. Mother Teresa offered love. When criticized by those who accused her of not going to the root causes of problems, she would simply remind them what the true root cause was. “The greatest disease today is not leprosy or tuberculosis, but rather the feeling of being unwanted, uncared for and deserted by everybody,”
...Mother Teresa never played to the crowd who wished to obscure the Gospel and reduce her to a humanitarian celebrity. She spoke out against abortion as the “greatest destroyer of peace” when in Oslo at the Nobel ceremony, and shocked the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington when she reminded them of the Christian tradition on the immorality of contraception.
...The world only knew her as diminutive and wizened, with a slight stoop and gnarled hands. Yet all who met her found her beautiful, for her eyes sparkled and her smile radiated joy.
Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger once wrote that ultimately the Church has only two things to offer to the world for the credibility of the Gospel of Jesus Christ: the beauty of her art and the lives of her saints. Mother Teresa captivated the whole world, becoming a patron saint of a difficult century. Like a great masterpiece of sacred art, she was indeed something beautiful for God."
Amen, Fr. de Souza, Amen. Happy 100th Mother, pray for us!
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Bubbalicious, "No Please... It's Not My Place to Speak... Well, O.K. Only For a Minute..."
Here is a very interesting column by Howard Fineman stating that where Democratic incumbents are terrified of being seen with Obama, Bill Clinton is stepping in to the rescue. This solution give these incumbents the power of a Presidential fundraiser, but not the baggage of being seeing with a completely incompetent and unpopular President.
What really is happening here, in the nuances, is that the Clintons are taking back control of the Democratic Party (he who controls the purse strings in politics...). They have given Barack enough time to have fun. The Clintons are also building IOU's for when Hillary challenges Obama for the 2012 Democratic Presidential nomination.
Here is Fineman's take:
"...According to Democratic polls, Democratic Senate candidates are doing much better in the horse race of the campaign than Obama is doing in overall popularity in most states. In Missouri, for example, Obama’s approval rating is 36 percent, but Democratic Senate candidate Robin Carnahan is only a couple of points behind Republican Roy Blunt.
So into the top-of-the-ticket, presidential-level campaign void has (happily) stepped Bubba, as charming as ever, as sharp as ever at stating his case to voters. Plans are still “up in the air, but expect to see him out quite a bit,” says his spokesman, Matt McKenna.
...And when Clinton is “out” there, don’t expect him to fill his speeches with personal praise of Barack Obama. As a lawyer and salesman, Clinton knows that touting Obama as The One is a nonstarter given the president’s plummeting job-approval numbers. But permit me a moment of Machiavellian thinking to suggest that Clinton loves to be in a situation in which he has to make the Democrats’ case by damning with faint praise a man whose campaign he once dismissed as a “fairy tale.”
I always love listening to Bill Clinton. If you listen carefully, you can see all the gears in motion: he makes himself clear to people who bother to take him seriously. So what is he saying? That this president has “done a better job than he has gotten credit for so far.” (Which is not the same thing as saying that Obama has done a good job)."
The UK tabloid rag the Globe reported that Bill Clinton only has 6 months to live ;) , but boy is he going out doing what he loves: being the center of attention and being seen as selfless and benevolent despite his political motives!
What really is happening here, in the nuances, is that the Clintons are taking back control of the Democratic Party (he who controls the purse strings in politics...). They have given Barack enough time to have fun. The Clintons are also building IOU's for when Hillary challenges Obama for the 2012 Democratic Presidential nomination.
Here is Fineman's take:
"...According to Democratic polls, Democratic Senate candidates are doing much better in the horse race of the campaign than Obama is doing in overall popularity in most states. In Missouri, for example, Obama’s approval rating is 36 percent, but Democratic Senate candidate Robin Carnahan is only a couple of points behind Republican Roy Blunt.
So into the top-of-the-ticket, presidential-level campaign void has (happily) stepped Bubba, as charming as ever, as sharp as ever at stating his case to voters. Plans are still “up in the air, but expect to see him out quite a bit,” says his spokesman, Matt McKenna.
...And when Clinton is “out” there, don’t expect him to fill his speeches with personal praise of Barack Obama. As a lawyer and salesman, Clinton knows that touting Obama as The One is a nonstarter given the president’s plummeting job-approval numbers. But permit me a moment of Machiavellian thinking to suggest that Clinton loves to be in a situation in which he has to make the Democrats’ case by damning with faint praise a man whose campaign he once dismissed as a “fairy tale.”
I always love listening to Bill Clinton. If you listen carefully, you can see all the gears in motion: he makes himself clear to people who bother to take him seriously. So what is he saying? That this president has “done a better job than he has gotten credit for so far.” (Which is not the same thing as saying that Obama has done a good job)."
The UK tabloid rag the Globe reported that Bill Clinton only has 6 months to live ;) , but boy is he going out doing what he loves: being the center of attention and being seen as selfless and benevolent despite his political motives!
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Denis Dillon: A Profile in Courage
This week a pro-life hero was laid to rest.Denis Dillon was the Nassau County District Attorney for 31 years and one of the most non-wavering, public pro-life voices on Long Island over the past few decades.
During the week, he revolutionized the District Attorney’s office and provided such a progressive standard that eventually countless DA offices across our country adopted his way of doing things. He had one of the highest conviction rates in the country.
On weekends, he would be a pro-life activist by often partaking in public pro-life demonstrations setting a golden example on how public servants did not have to abandon their convictions.
Long Island’s newspaper, Newsday, took many cheap shots at him over the years because of his convictions and he was persecuted for his Catholic Faith.
New York State Justice Arthur Diamond remembered Denis at his funeral Mass with a story:
“Days before former Nassau District Attorney Denis Dillon would stand for re-election one year, Dillon's longtime friend Arthur Diamond offered him some unsolicited advice.
"Stop hitting so hard on the anti-abortion issue," Diamond remembered telling Dillon, a devout Catholic. "It's hurting you politically."
Dillon paused, then said, "I love you, Artie, but I can't worry about this election. I have to worry about what happens to me long after this election," [Blogger Note: meaning when he met God].
There have been many quotes in Denis’ eulogies that were taken from the St. Thomas More (patron saint of lawyers) movie, A Man for All Seasons. But Denis, I believe you did meet God and it was a welcoming embrace because as stated in this great movie, “[God] will not refuse one who is so blithe to go to him."
"May the angels lead you into paradise: may the martyrs receive you at your coming, and lead you into the holy city, Jerusalem. May the choir of angels receive you, and with Lazarus, who once was poor, may you have everlasting rest.”
For more of a biography of this great man, click here:
Friday, August 13, 2010
Charles Krauthammer: "...no Mosque at Ground Zero."
Charles Krauthammer has a very compelling column today on the controversy of building a mosque at Ground Zero. I, being a New Yorker impacted by 9/11 -- while also be a huge proponent of the Freedom of Religion, go back and forth on the issue, so this piece was a worthwhile read for me:
"A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).
When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there [Blogger Note: and the first responders who sacrificed their lives there trying to save others] -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.
That's why Disney's 1993 proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition that feared vulgarization of the Civil War. It's why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It's why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.
And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place; it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign.
...Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and onetime imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists?
...Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.
Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims. Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi -- yet despite contemporary Germany's innocence, no German of goodwill would even think of proposing a German cultural center at, say, Treblinka.
Which makes you wonder about the goodwill behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy "an accessory to the crime" of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, "I'm not a politician. . . . The issue of terrorism is a very complex question."
America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.
These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero."
"A place is made sacred by a widespread belief that it was visited by the miraculous or the transcendent (Lourdes, the Temple Mount), by the presence there once of great nobility and sacrifice (Gettysburg), or by the blood of martyrs and the indescribable suffering of the innocent (Auschwitz).
When we speak of Ground Zero as hallowed ground, what we mean is that it belongs to those who suffered and died there [Blogger Note: and the first responders who sacrificed their lives there trying to save others] -- and that such ownership obliges us, the living, to preserve the dignity and memory of the place, never allowing it to be forgotten, trivialized or misappropriated.
That's why Disney's 1993 proposal to build an American history theme park near Manassas Battlefield was defeated by a broad coalition that feared vulgarization of the Civil War. It's why the commercial viewing tower built right on the border of Gettysburg was taken down by the Park Service. It's why, while no one objects to Japanese cultural centers, the idea of putting one up at Pearl Harbor would be offensive.
And why Pope John Paul II ordered the Carmelite nuns to leave the convent they had established at Auschwitz. He was in no way devaluing their heartfelt mission to pray for the souls of the dead. He was teaching them a lesson in respect: This is not your place; it belongs to others. However pure your voice, better to let silence reign.
...Religious institutions in this country are autonomous. Who is to say that the mosque won't one day hire an Anwar al-Aulaqi -- spiritual mentor to the Fort Hood shooter and the Christmas Day bomber, and onetime imam at the Virginia mosque attended by two of the 9/11 terrorists?
...Location matters. Especially this location. Ground Zero is the site of the greatest mass murder in American history -- perpetrated by Muslims of a particular Islamist orthodoxy in whose cause they died and in whose name they killed.
Of course that strain represents only a minority of Muslims. Islam is no more intrinsically Islamist than present-day Germany is Nazi -- yet despite contemporary Germany's innocence, no German of goodwill would even think of proposing a German cultural center at, say, Treblinka.
Which makes you wonder about the goodwill behind Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf's proposal. This is a man who has called U.S. policy "an accessory to the crime" of 9/11 and, when recently asked whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, replied, "I'm not a politician. . . . The issue of terrorism is a very complex question."
America is a free country where you can build whatever you want -- but not anywhere. That's why we have zoning laws. No liquor store near a school, no strip malls where they offend local sensibilities, and, if your house doesn't meet community architectural codes, you cannot build at all.
These restrictions are for reasons of aesthetics. Others are for more profound reasons of common decency and respect for the sacred. No commercial tower over Gettysburg, no convent at Auschwitz -- and no mosque at Ground Zero."
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Barack Obama's Persona Part II; The Academic
In following the point from a previous post that I believe Barack Obama is emotionally voided, I believe the second major component of his persona is that he is completely entrenched in the academic mindset.
Academia is a place where concepts and theories are king, where unrealistic concepts never have to be put to the fire to test their validity. It is a place where elite educators congratulate themselves on producing written thoughts on paper and theory lectures and not tangible measurements of creation and achievement.
For 12 years, Barack Obama served as a college professor at the University of Chicago Law School. This decade of academic mindset became thoroughly entrenched in him and is present even to this day. Even Liberal talking heads currently mention his press conferences have more of a tone of a college professor lecturing his class than anything else.
It should surprise no one that Barack Obama came from Academia. Do you ever wonder why there are so many Liberals in academia? It is not because they all decide one day to all be professors. It is because they gravitate to one of the only few places left in the world where they can exist with their failed, non-real world ideologies and get paid handsomely.
In contrast, however, academics will also shoot a proposal down based on their bravado academic reputations that prevent them from seeing possibilities. In 1965, Fred Smith turned in a term paper to his Yale professor that dealt with the concept on having centralized distribution hubs for a national package delivery company. So a package would go from New York City down to Memphis to be sorted; then back to the final destination across the river in Paramus, NJ. The paper received a “C” from his academic college professor stating it was implausible. Fred Smith had the last laugh though; he went on to found Federal Express.
To give you a real life story of mine comparing academia to real world, upon completing my Masters Degree I knew four different ways to determine a break-even selling price on a product to a customer; the exact price where a company selling a product does not make profit, but does not lose money either. At my first real job I was posed with a problem that Wal-Mart told my company that we needed to sell our product to them at a 20% loss, or we would lose their $80 million dollar business. I was completely a deer frozen in the headlights. I knew the text book instruction on how to figure out a break-even, but did not have real world experience to take it to the next level, or even understand there was a next level, in deciding whether we should sell something at a loss. I needed some real world experience to catch up with my education.
In the business world, if you say something completely foolish or wrong you are beaten to a pulp by upper management who are protecting their turf, and you probably do not get promoted. If you throw out an idea on the table, that you haven’t thought through thoroughly, it will be a feeding frenzy exposing all the holes in your suggestion. So you learn to think about every objection that could be brought up and all the real world considerations. Abraham Lincoln once said when he debated someone he would spend one-third the prep time thinking about what he would say, and two-thirds his prep time thinking what his opponent would say.
Academia is different however. You have a tenure certificate in your hand that protects your livelihood from mistakes and stupidity.
This was definitely the environment from where Barack Obama emerged from.
Our President announced that he would close down Gitmo, a great in-theory-promise to his left-wing supporters. Then after blurting this out, he realized that no state or country wanted to take any of the prisoners and there were legitimate reasons why Gitmo existed. A very bad promise in reality, only half thought through. He was congratulated by the academics on this idea before the operation of this project imploded. Academia vs. Real World.
There are countless examples of Obama not thinking about what he was saying. “Spread the Wealth”, No business trips to Las Vegas, the Special Olympics gaff on the late show, etc… All these show why the teleprompter is so valuable to him.
Obama’s stimulus package is completely borne from academia. It is based on all theories that will not work in the real world. You can’t spend your way out of a recession. Ask FDR who policies failed for 10 years eventually needing the industrial production of WWII to get us out of the Great Depression. Do we really think America will be on the road to recovery with a $13 Trillion debt? Taxes and inflation will have to follow this. If you make the rich and corporations pay more taxes to pay for this, they will only constrict their expenses, read cut jobs, that the middle and lower class people need resulting in even less consumer dollars - - extending the recession. It is a vicious cycle.
One story that you should read is how they increased taxes on the wealthy in Maryland believing this would increase their government coffers. The wealthy moved out of Maryland and took all their tax revenue with them and now Maryland has less tax revenue than when they started. Academia vs. the real world. This solution made so much sense up on the chalk board...
Bill Frezza had a great column stating that the $700 Billion bailout resulted in one million jobs. Doing the math, it cost us $787,000 per job creation. Frezza points out that Obama’s White House Economics advisers are all academic professors who never worked in the business world:
"They never had to meet a payroll. They never had to raise money to fund their businesses from skeptical investors. They never bet their life savings on their own business judgment. They never had to scramble to pay off a banker who called in a loan. They never had to decide whether to take a calculated risk to expand their workforce hoping to take market share from a fierce competitor. .. They never had to manage a reduction in force, explaining to employees that their jobs have been eliminated because the tax and regulatory burdens imposed by some new law forced them to cut costs. They never lost business to a government-subsidized competitor whose cost of capital was vastly lower than theirs. They never had to grease the palms of politicians offering constituent services to resolve a bureaucratic hangup caused by the labyrinthine government approvals these selfsame politicians inflict on many businesses. They never had to deal with a missed sales forecast caused by an economy so roiled by capricious and uncertain fiscal policy that frightened customers were holding back orders. They never had to deal with a key supplier that unexpectedly went bankrupt because their source of credit dried up as dollars got sucked out of the commercial economy into government debt... They never had to stand up in front of disappointed investors to explain why they lost money that had been entrusted to them. And you can be sure that none of them ever fell on their face and had to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and decide whether it was worth going through all of the joys described above to take another shot at building a business from scratch.
Go read their biographies. Do Christina, Austan, and Cecilia appear to you to be contributing members of the productive economy? Do you see any evidence that they've spent even a fraction of their careers creating jobs? What do you think qualifies these people to work as high level apparatchiks of a governing class determined to manage the businesses of others?
All three have Ph.D.'s from fancy universities. They are prize winning experts in macroeconomics. To have come this far you can bet that they are ambitious, articulate, well connected, and brilliant. Yet when the Council of Economic Advisers did its calculations to determine the number of jobs saved by the stimulus, they shamelessly counted assets and totally ignored liabilities.
… No, these people and those that appointed them are cunningly smart. It's we who are the fools for listening to them. Long after these experts return to their sinecures in academia to train another generation of economists on the wisdom of central planning and Keynesian pump priming, it's we and our children and our grandchildren who will be paying the price.”
So it is somewhat sad, we are left with a country with such major, serious problems, and a President who does not have the real world, tangible experience to fix them. He doesn’t even know where to start with his chalk in hand.
Academia is a place where concepts and theories are king, where unrealistic concepts never have to be put to the fire to test their validity. It is a place where elite educators congratulate themselves on producing written thoughts on paper and theory lectures and not tangible measurements of creation and achievement.
For 12 years, Barack Obama served as a college professor at the University of Chicago Law School. This decade of academic mindset became thoroughly entrenched in him and is present even to this day. Even Liberal talking heads currently mention his press conferences have more of a tone of a college professor lecturing his class than anything else.
It should surprise no one that Barack Obama came from Academia. Do you ever wonder why there are so many Liberals in academia? It is not because they all decide one day to all be professors. It is because they gravitate to one of the only few places left in the world where they can exist with their failed, non-real world ideologies and get paid handsomely.
In contrast, however, academics will also shoot a proposal down based on their bravado academic reputations that prevent them from seeing possibilities. In 1965, Fred Smith turned in a term paper to his Yale professor that dealt with the concept on having centralized distribution hubs for a national package delivery company. So a package would go from New York City down to Memphis to be sorted; then back to the final destination across the river in Paramus, NJ. The paper received a “C” from his academic college professor stating it was implausible. Fred Smith had the last laugh though; he went on to found Federal Express.
To give you a real life story of mine comparing academia to real world, upon completing my Masters Degree I knew four different ways to determine a break-even selling price on a product to a customer; the exact price where a company selling a product does not make profit, but does not lose money either. At my first real job I was posed with a problem that Wal-Mart told my company that we needed to sell our product to them at a 20% loss, or we would lose their $80 million dollar business. I was completely a deer frozen in the headlights. I knew the text book instruction on how to figure out a break-even, but did not have real world experience to take it to the next level, or even understand there was a next level, in deciding whether we should sell something at a loss. I needed some real world experience to catch up with my education.
In the business world, if you say something completely foolish or wrong you are beaten to a pulp by upper management who are protecting their turf, and you probably do not get promoted. If you throw out an idea on the table, that you haven’t thought through thoroughly, it will be a feeding frenzy exposing all the holes in your suggestion. So you learn to think about every objection that could be brought up and all the real world considerations. Abraham Lincoln once said when he debated someone he would spend one-third the prep time thinking about what he would say, and two-thirds his prep time thinking what his opponent would say.
Academia is different however. You have a tenure certificate in your hand that protects your livelihood from mistakes and stupidity.
This was definitely the environment from where Barack Obama emerged from.
Our President announced that he would close down Gitmo, a great in-theory-promise to his left-wing supporters. Then after blurting this out, he realized that no state or country wanted to take any of the prisoners and there were legitimate reasons why Gitmo existed. A very bad promise in reality, only half thought through. He was congratulated by the academics on this idea before the operation of this project imploded. Academia vs. Real World.
There are countless examples of Obama not thinking about what he was saying. “Spread the Wealth”, No business trips to Las Vegas, the Special Olympics gaff on the late show, etc… All these show why the teleprompter is so valuable to him.
Obama’s stimulus package is completely borne from academia. It is based on all theories that will not work in the real world. You can’t spend your way out of a recession. Ask FDR who policies failed for 10 years eventually needing the industrial production of WWII to get us out of the Great Depression. Do we really think America will be on the road to recovery with a $13 Trillion debt? Taxes and inflation will have to follow this. If you make the rich and corporations pay more taxes to pay for this, they will only constrict their expenses, read cut jobs, that the middle and lower class people need resulting in even less consumer dollars - - extending the recession. It is a vicious cycle.
One story that you should read is how they increased taxes on the wealthy in Maryland believing this would increase their government coffers. The wealthy moved out of Maryland and took all their tax revenue with them and now Maryland has less tax revenue than when they started. Academia vs. the real world. This solution made so much sense up on the chalk board...
Bill Frezza had a great column stating that the $700 Billion bailout resulted in one million jobs. Doing the math, it cost us $787,000 per job creation. Frezza points out that Obama’s White House Economics advisers are all academic professors who never worked in the business world:
"They never had to meet a payroll. They never had to raise money to fund their businesses from skeptical investors. They never bet their life savings on their own business judgment. They never had to scramble to pay off a banker who called in a loan. They never had to decide whether to take a calculated risk to expand their workforce hoping to take market share from a fierce competitor. .. They never had to manage a reduction in force, explaining to employees that their jobs have been eliminated because the tax and regulatory burdens imposed by some new law forced them to cut costs. They never lost business to a government-subsidized competitor whose cost of capital was vastly lower than theirs. They never had to grease the palms of politicians offering constituent services to resolve a bureaucratic hangup caused by the labyrinthine government approvals these selfsame politicians inflict on many businesses. They never had to deal with a missed sales forecast caused by an economy so roiled by capricious and uncertain fiscal policy that frightened customers were holding back orders. They never had to deal with a key supplier that unexpectedly went bankrupt because their source of credit dried up as dollars got sucked out of the commercial economy into government debt... They never had to stand up in front of disappointed investors to explain why they lost money that had been entrusted to them. And you can be sure that none of them ever fell on their face and had to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and decide whether it was worth going through all of the joys described above to take another shot at building a business from scratch.
Go read their biographies. Do Christina, Austan, and Cecilia appear to you to be contributing members of the productive economy? Do you see any evidence that they've spent even a fraction of their careers creating jobs? What do you think qualifies these people to work as high level apparatchiks of a governing class determined to manage the businesses of others?
All three have Ph.D.'s from fancy universities. They are prize winning experts in macroeconomics. To have come this far you can bet that they are ambitious, articulate, well connected, and brilliant. Yet when the Council of Economic Advisers did its calculations to determine the number of jobs saved by the stimulus, they shamelessly counted assets and totally ignored liabilities.
… No, these people and those that appointed them are cunningly smart. It's we who are the fools for listening to them. Long after these experts return to their sinecures in academia to train another generation of economists on the wisdom of central planning and Keynesian pump priming, it's we and our children and our grandchildren who will be paying the price.”
So it is somewhat sad, we are left with a country with such major, serious problems, and a President who does not have the real world, tangible experience to fix them. He doesn’t even know where to start with his chalk in hand.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
My Top Americans that Liberals Hate the Most
The Editors of Townhall.com put out a "Top 100 Americans that Liberals Hate the Most" List. Here is their Top 10:
1-Glen Beck
2-Sara Palin
3- Rush Limbaugh
4- George W. Bush
5-Ann Coulter
6-Michelle Malkin
7-Tea Party Members
8-Dick Cheney
9-Bill O'Reilly
10-Michelle Bachmann
Now, I think they are giving Glen Beck way too much credit. Liberals see him as an emotional flake, not overly threatening. I mean this guy pauses in the middle of a show, directs his head to the covering camera and starts his eyes tearing up for dramatic purposes.
I also noticed on this list there are many people who are involved with Town Hall magazine that seem to rank higher than they should. I really don't think the ACLU stays up at night thinking about Michelle Malkin who is number 6 on the list.
Here is my real list of who Liberals really "hate" the most in order. I also go inside the Liberal mindset to show you how they perceive these people to give you a little insight on how Liberals think:
1- Sarah Palin- There is a very-old skit on Abbott and Costello where Lou Costello tries to ask directions to the Susquehanna Hat Company. Upon mentioning this company to any pedestrians passing by, the pedestrians become totally enraged beyond measure for some incomprehensible reason and start lashing out. Whala... the” Sara Palin Affect” with Liberals, need I say more? Liberals see Palin as a bumpkin, air-head who is foolin' (you betcha') everyone in regard to her intelligence and abilities. They don’t understand why everyone can’t see her for what she obviously is in their eyes. Then there is that whole Elitist vs. common man thing, and a woman who welcomed a Down Syndrome baby into her life. It is total rage!
2-George W. Bush – The poor guy has been lying on the couch,watching sports and barbecuing for the last 18 months and he is still blamed for every societal ill there is. He was even mentioned as being responsible for the Gore divorce and the Gulf leak. Way too funny. Liberals see GW as a irresponsible frat boy who stole an election and could care less about any of their opinions when he ran the country. Liberals hate being ignored or having their pseudo-intellects dismissed. They also firmly believe that he tricked us into the Iraq war, despite almost every member of Congress voted for it.
Recently, Sienna College polled 238 professors/presidential scholars on the greatest and worst Presidents in history. These academics, read Liberals, put GW at 39, fifth from the bottom with the likes of Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan. Obama came in as 15th overall. Obama was also ranked 8th as most intelligent - although he's not looking to bright lately. All of this is one more piece of evidence that academia is in la-la land, and not tapped into or respected by the real world. GW is in good company, though. Bill Clinton (who was impeached) beat Ronald Reagan (who won the Cold War) on the list as well.
3-Dick Cheney – Liberals see him as the Evil Emperor to GW Bush’s Lord Vader. They believe that GW was not smart enough to run the country by his own wits, so Liberals are convinced that Cheney called all the shots; pulled all the strings. Kinda’ like Sinatra in Vegas. They kinda’ see him like the old, bald, grouchy puppets in the balcony of the Muppet Show who is miserable and heckles everyone. They think of him as a war monger because of his prior role as Secretary of Defense. Throw in his fortune was made from Big Oil, he is deserving of number 3 most hated.
4- The Roman Catholic Church - Townhall.com names an organization on their list, the Tea Party, but the Catholic Church in America is far more hated than the Tea Party. Some would argue this should be number one on the list. Liberals know that the Church is the last bastion of unwavering morality in the world. Her teachings completely conflict with every self-centered lifestyle that Liberals want to have without a ping of conscience. I will bet my life on where the Catholic Church will stand on abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research five centuries from now. I could not do this with any other religious, political, social or ethical organization, and Liberals know this as well.
5- Ann Coulter - Is seen as obnoxious, loud, rude and without class, and that's just how her fellow Conservatives view her.
6-Newt Gingrich – Liberals see Gingrich similar to how the right sees Nancy Pelosi. Some extreme wacko swinging on the fringe of ideology completely not in touch with any reality. They see him as a hypocrite, family value guy who left his wife when she was sick, actually validity in this charge.
7-Justice Antonin Scalia – The Town Hall polls put Clarence Thomas ahead of Scalia, but I believe Scalia is hated more than Thomas by Liberals. First off, Scalia has been infuriating them for longer. Thomas is seen as a misdirected African-American. Thomas is always civil and soft spoken to his credit, though. Scalia is cutting and bluntly honest. When asked who was the one Liberal he disliked the most, he answered, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg…” So much for harmony in the workplace. He once rebutted a lawyer arguing a capital punishment case with, "Where does it say the death penalty has to be painless?" There is nothing that Liberals hate more than a Conservative who is razor sharp and can destroy all their emotional arguments easily with facts and intellect. The ACLU does lose sleep over Scalia.
8-Mark Levin – I think if you gave the Obama administration a choice to take one Conservative talk show host to take off the air… It would not be Rush, nor Sean Hannity, nor Glen Beck nor Bill O’Reilly. It would be Mark Levin. Levin met the dawning of the Chosen One’s euphoric Presidency with his best selling, wet-blanket book “Liberty and Tyrrany.” He is also the most cutting, the highest I.Q. and the most inciting of all the talk show hosts. The other hosts would be very careful about calling Obama a socialist openly for fear of lawsuit. Levin screams it before every commercial break and dares the lawsuit with “That's right… I said it!” There is nothing more than Levin would like than to be sued for slander by the Obama administration, and explain to the world via satellite-courtroom why our President is a socialist. Liberals see Levin as someone who should have been institutionalized a long time ago. They truly believe he does not have all of his faculties. To all the Bill O'Reilly fans, you should ask yourself why Obama picked O'Reilly to go on out of all the Conservative talkshows when running for President.
9-Gianna Jessen – I called her in a previous post the Most Dangerous Woman in America. Many liberals do not even know her, but when they find out she is the fetus who made it through a botched abortion with scaring injuries, and now can give these destroyed members of the human race a human voice… Oh boy… hold your hat. They truly wish that she could have been discarded as planned.
For the 10th slot, take your pick: Donald Rumsfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Michele Bachmann, Pat Buchanan, etc...
One name on this list that is going to climb like a bullet is Madeleine Sackler. I don't know if you have heard about her movie, The Lottery, that shows the true underbelly of the teacher's union, but this movie is going to tear down the place. Nothing is more hostile than lazy people making tons of money who have their tenure questioned. Good stuff!
1-Glen Beck
2-Sara Palin
3- Rush Limbaugh
4- George W. Bush
5-Ann Coulter
6-Michelle Malkin
7-Tea Party Members
8-Dick Cheney
9-Bill O'Reilly
10-Michelle Bachmann
Now, I think they are giving Glen Beck way too much credit. Liberals see him as an emotional flake, not overly threatening. I mean this guy pauses in the middle of a show, directs his head to the covering camera and starts his eyes tearing up for dramatic purposes.
I also noticed on this list there are many people who are involved with Town Hall magazine that seem to rank higher than they should. I really don't think the ACLU stays up at night thinking about Michelle Malkin who is number 6 on the list.
Here is my real list of who Liberals really "hate" the most in order. I also go inside the Liberal mindset to show you how they perceive these people to give you a little insight on how Liberals think:
1- Sarah Palin- There is a very-old skit on Abbott and Costello where Lou Costello tries to ask directions to the Susquehanna Hat Company. Upon mentioning this company to any pedestrians passing by, the pedestrians become totally enraged beyond measure for some incomprehensible reason and start lashing out. Whala... the” Sara Palin Affect” with Liberals, need I say more? Liberals see Palin as a bumpkin, air-head who is foolin' (you betcha') everyone in regard to her intelligence and abilities. They don’t understand why everyone can’t see her for what she obviously is in their eyes. Then there is that whole Elitist vs. common man thing, and a woman who welcomed a Down Syndrome baby into her life. It is total rage!
2-George W. Bush – The poor guy has been lying on the couch,watching sports and barbecuing for the last 18 months and he is still blamed for every societal ill there is. He was even mentioned as being responsible for the Gore divorce and the Gulf leak. Way too funny. Liberals see GW as a irresponsible frat boy who stole an election and could care less about any of their opinions when he ran the country. Liberals hate being ignored or having their pseudo-intellects dismissed. They also firmly believe that he tricked us into the Iraq war, despite almost every member of Congress voted for it.
Recently, Sienna College polled 238 professors/presidential scholars on the greatest and worst Presidents in history. These academics, read Liberals, put GW at 39, fifth from the bottom with the likes of Andrew Johnson and James Buchanan. Obama came in as 15th overall. Obama was also ranked 8th as most intelligent - although he's not looking to bright lately. All of this is one more piece of evidence that academia is in la-la land, and not tapped into or respected by the real world. GW is in good company, though. Bill Clinton (who was impeached) beat Ronald Reagan (who won the Cold War) on the list as well.
3-Dick Cheney – Liberals see him as the Evil Emperor to GW Bush’s Lord Vader. They believe that GW was not smart enough to run the country by his own wits, so Liberals are convinced that Cheney called all the shots; pulled all the strings. Kinda’ like Sinatra in Vegas. They kinda’ see him like the old, bald, grouchy puppets in the balcony of the Muppet Show who is miserable and heckles everyone. They think of him as a war monger because of his prior role as Secretary of Defense. Throw in his fortune was made from Big Oil, he is deserving of number 3 most hated.
4- The Roman Catholic Church - Townhall.com names an organization on their list, the Tea Party, but the Catholic Church in America is far more hated than the Tea Party. Some would argue this should be number one on the list. Liberals know that the Church is the last bastion of unwavering morality in the world. Her teachings completely conflict with every self-centered lifestyle that Liberals want to have without a ping of conscience. I will bet my life on where the Catholic Church will stand on abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research five centuries from now. I could not do this with any other religious, political, social or ethical organization, and Liberals know this as well.
5- Ann Coulter - Is seen as obnoxious, loud, rude and without class, and that's just how her fellow Conservatives view her.
6-Newt Gingrich – Liberals see Gingrich similar to how the right sees Nancy Pelosi. Some extreme wacko swinging on the fringe of ideology completely not in touch with any reality. They see him as a hypocrite, family value guy who left his wife when she was sick, actually validity in this charge.
7-Justice Antonin Scalia – The Town Hall polls put Clarence Thomas ahead of Scalia, but I believe Scalia is hated more than Thomas by Liberals. First off, Scalia has been infuriating them for longer. Thomas is seen as a misdirected African-American. Thomas is always civil and soft spoken to his credit, though. Scalia is cutting and bluntly honest. When asked who was the one Liberal he disliked the most, he answered, “Ruth Bader Ginsburg…” So much for harmony in the workplace. He once rebutted a lawyer arguing a capital punishment case with, "Where does it say the death penalty has to be painless?" There is nothing that Liberals hate more than a Conservative who is razor sharp and can destroy all their emotional arguments easily with facts and intellect. The ACLU does lose sleep over Scalia.
8-Mark Levin – I think if you gave the Obama administration a choice to take one Conservative talk show host to take off the air… It would not be Rush, nor Sean Hannity, nor Glen Beck nor Bill O’Reilly. It would be Mark Levin. Levin met the dawning of the Chosen One’s euphoric Presidency with his best selling, wet-blanket book “Liberty and Tyrrany.” He is also the most cutting, the highest I.Q. and the most inciting of all the talk show hosts. The other hosts would be very careful about calling Obama a socialist openly for fear of lawsuit. Levin screams it before every commercial break and dares the lawsuit with “That's right… I said it!” There is nothing more than Levin would like than to be sued for slander by the Obama administration, and explain to the world via satellite-courtroom why our President is a socialist. Liberals see Levin as someone who should have been institutionalized a long time ago. They truly believe he does not have all of his faculties. To all the Bill O'Reilly fans, you should ask yourself why Obama picked O'Reilly to go on out of all the Conservative talkshows when running for President.
9-Gianna Jessen – I called her in a previous post the Most Dangerous Woman in America. Many liberals do not even know her, but when they find out she is the fetus who made it through a botched abortion with scaring injuries, and now can give these destroyed members of the human race a human voice… Oh boy… hold your hat. They truly wish that she could have been discarded as planned.
For the 10th slot, take your pick: Donald Rumsfeld, Rush Limbaugh, Michele Bachmann, Pat Buchanan, etc...
One name on this list that is going to climb like a bullet is Madeleine Sackler. I don't know if you have heard about her movie, The Lottery, that shows the true underbelly of the teacher's union, but this movie is going to tear down the place. Nothing is more hostile than lazy people making tons of money who have their tenure questioned. Good stuff!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
