*published by Flopping Aces*

On the very first day in office, the new administration announced it would rescind the ‘Mexico City policy’ Thursday. (This banned tax dollars from going to non-governmental agencies that perform abortions.) See here: 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/01/21/obama-lift-ban-funding-groups-providing-abortions-overseas/.

Thursday is the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade, when thousands of Pro-Lifers annually descend on Washington for the March for Life.

So, it is “above his pay grade” to decide what human life is, but he can use MY TAX DOLLARS to kill human life without bothering his conscience a wit. That is the logic of Goebbels, not Lincoln or anyone else.

Further, how is this any big “change” from the same old confrontation we’ve always had? This is what Clinton did too with the same “in-your-face” timing. Obama had a great opportunity here. What a chance to be truly different. Sad to say, I knew this would happen. Obama tipped his hand early on that his mind and heart are the most radically pro-abortion of anyone who has ever entered the Office.

Poor John Adams! He said: “I pray heaven to bestow the best of blessings on this house and all that shall hereafter inhabit. May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof.” It seems the noises Obama made about “change” and reaching out do not apply to me and so many like us, and, in my opinion, that is neither honest nor wise.

 

THIS SIDE IS DONE, TURN ME OVER!

 

We stand at a crossroads in America. The government seems to be proposing that all citizens basically lose their faith in capitalism and liberty. Let the government take over the wealth and make it fairer and easier for everyone. Hmmm, sounds familiar. Weren’t the liberal press in the Fifties urging us to follow the example of that benign paragon, the “agrarian reformers” of Communist China and the Soviet Union? Well, in my opinion, we need a hero – or two – or more! We need a lot of good people to step forward. We also need good examples to follow. A very proper patron for this pickle comes to mind: St. Laurence (or Lawrence).

Laurence was an archdeacon of the city of Rome during a time of great persecution for the Church. The original martyrology was lost early on, but his story captured the imagination of many great early reporters. [There is some dispute about certain details of his ordeal, but the reality and effect of his sacrifice are indisputable. He, along with Nicholas, in the view of some, became the paradigm saint of the early Church.] In short, the way he opposed the government and his ultimate triumph point to a pattern we can imitate.

The year was 258, we are told. Pope Sixtus had barely attained the Chair of St. Peter, and, in view of the longevity of Popes at that time, he could barely hope to survive for long under the fierce persecution of Emperors Decius and Valerian, when he called upon his good friend Laurence to take charge of the duties of record-keeping and organizing charity to the poor.

Predictably, Sixtus was captured and condemned. As he was being led away, Laurence came to be with him. Sixtus comforted the weeping deacon by reassuring Laurence that he would very soon follow his friend to eternal happiness. Sure enough, four days later, Laurence was captured and, in view of his role in the Roman Church, confronted with an ultimatum: bring the famous “hidden riches” of the Church within two days or he would die a terrible death. Laurence agreed. He came back with a crowd of beggars, widows, cripples and the poor. “This is the riches of the Church!” he declared.

Now, let’s just take a look at that action! His was not the resistance of bitter, pessimistic antagonism.  This showed the good humor that always results when one’s faith is girt under with a peaceful, brimming confidence. Show those who are in error where they err with gentle irony. (The response of McAuliffe at Bastogne to the German ultimatum comes to mind: “Nuts.” This is the very same dynamic.) Cut through all the hot air and pretension with something that exposes the truth of a situation for all to see.

The government propaganda was that the Christian Church was a weird group of incestuous cannibals who, though they seemed to love in a new, almost attractive sort of way, were actually greedy hoarders of wealth. (This was almost entirely either gross exaggeration or deliberate misrepresentation.) Further, they were way too preachy about what was wrong with the culture of death and sexual excess.

What did Laurence succeed in doing in this one public action? He showed what the Church was really about. It cared about individual people! The poor were not the faceless, exploited mob that the government saw. The ruling culture’s attitude was exposed! For the Church, every person had value and influence! ‘We will not directly oppose the master-mob ethic but we will show it for what it is and we will continue working beneath the surface for a new civilization of selfless agape love, of freedom and responsibility, respecting families and persons and standing in solidarity for what is right.’ Perhaps you recognize this ethic. It is the same basic approach that inspired our own Founding Fathers.

After the temerity of Laurence’s wordless lesson, he was condemned to a painful death. Ambrose among others says he was grilled to death on a gridiron. It is said that he told his torturers, “This side is done; turn me over and have a bite.” What a true sense of humor! ‘All you have is force and bluster’, he seems to be saying, ‘I have sublime, peaceful truth and I know it’. As Isaiah prophesied the Suffering Messiah will say in the midst of being tortured and beaten, “I have set my face like flint KNOWING I shall NOT be put to shame!” [This reminds me of Reagan’s remark to the doctor when he was shot: “I hope you’re a Republican!”]

Shouldn’t the conservative movement recapture this basic confidence of Reagan? Where did he get it? He got it, from the very principles displayed in Laurence’s actions. Will any of you out there stand up and show some confidence and humor in leadership? I think I see some of this in Jindal or Palin and I’m sure there are many others on every level and in many communities. How many of you will go through the hardship of running and governing or doing other things for the sake of the nation? You might get grilled over the coals, sure enough. Just smile and tell them: ‘You want a piece of me? Go ahead! Take a bite! But rest assured, I’m not done yet!’

 

Joan of Arc Was a Loser!

*published on Flopping Aces* 

Yes, Joan of Arc was a loser. Moses was a failure. Churchill was an outcast and then an outcast again. The Lord Jesus himself was - or seemed to be - defeated. This is an important thing to remember at times like this. The election has been lost. But even the defeated never lose - even when they do - if they preserve that core of self deep within that no one but our Creator can touch.

Yes, as we probably all know, Joan of Arc did have some success. [Her story is one of the best and well-documented of any medieval saint (save Francis of Assisi, perhaps) in historical terms and would be worth anyone’s time to investigate further. Mark Twain devoted 14 years of his life to research his version of her story under another pseudonym and considered it his best work.] By 1428, the Hundred Years War had been going on since 1337 and the social and moral effects were devastating to the country in countless ways as war usually is (mercenary war in particular!). Then along came this young girl from Domremy. Within a few months, she energized the ‘useless’ Dauphin, handed two major defeats to the English and Burgundians and got Charles crowned at Rheims. She accomplished more in this short time than had been done in a century, and with relatively little loss. This seems like success to us, but we have the benefit of seeing from afar and knowing what followed. Yes, by the end of the war, the ‘cowardly’ Charles would personally lead the conquest of the a city and help complete the eviction of the English invaders; and we can look back to what Joan did as the crucial turning point.

But in 1428, that was far in the future. What did it look like to those at the time? Joan’s influence at court was quickly undermined after her initial success and she was looked down on as an uneducated country rube, despite the fact she had just given the country a new start. A whispering campaign motivated by this disdain and jealousy, defeated her insights and probably prolonged the war for many years more. (By the way, I think there are parallels with Sarah Palin, who was despised by insiders for her appearance and demeanor and lynched in a media show trial. And Palin, unlike her persecutors, actually accomplished things worthy of praise and, I feel, has good insights for going forward!) In any further efforts to lead within the court, Joan was seen, and rightly so, as a failure.

Joan tried to keep fighting, with little support, and without the benefit of her supernatural directions, but she was betrayed and tragically captured by the Burgundians. She was the victim of a rigged, political show trial by the English and burned as a ‘heretic’, bringing shame and defeat to her name. Many in France did see her as a hero but her name would not be totally cleared, even by the Church, until the 20^th Century.

It may be that right now all the powers that be, the media, the educational system, etc.  seem to be arrayed in favor of things that we, the minority, can see are not good. Much of what we have seen has seemed ‘rigged’ against us, and we have been ‘defeated’ like the inner and outer enemies of Joan defeated her. In this time, we should remember we cannot possibly see with an infinite eye. We should leave that for the One who is competent to do so. It can’t be our goal to only ‘win’ arguments or technical victories. It is our job to live lives worthy of our calling, graced as that young woman was so long ago; we must show faith, hope & charity which are the true powers of this world as John Nash, Einstein and others have noted. If we do that, and leave the results for the future, it may be that our personal defeats may be, in fact, turning points for the general good. No good deed or good word is ever for nothing. Americans, don’t forget Joan of Arc!

http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/   and   http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/

 

 

Life – Taken For Granite

 [For pictures, see http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/]
The following is a composite conversation based on several post-Election Day discussions with friends and acquaintances up here in the Granite State of New Hampshire. The Great Stone Face, The Old Man on the Mountain, was once a symbol of our fierce independence: Live Free or Die! We were a rock island of red sanity in a sea of blue madness. Now with our deficits, spending, new laws and liberal leaders, we are no longer unique; we are well on our way to becoming Massachusetts North, if we’re not there already. It seems we ‘lost face’ and our identity the past four years since our great symbol, the Stone Face, fell off the mountain.

Hearts of stone and heads of granite: O Lord may you take them from us and give us hearts of flesh and minds which no longer take life for granted.

“Isn’t this just great? The first black man has been elected President! What a great day! You can celebrate, right? You’re happy, right? ”

“No, I’m sorry, I’m not happy. I’m glad we broke the barrier, but, for me, this day is a like a tragedy.”

“What makes you say that?”

“Well, I’m pro-life.”

“What’s that? Oh yeah, that has to do with being against abortion, right?

Yes, somebody actually said that. I found out that some people voted for Obama without knowing some bare basics about what he believed about this and other things.

“You mean Obama’s not ‘pro-life’? I figured he was. He seems like such a nice guy.”

“He’s an utter catastrophe for anyone like me.”

“In what way?”

“For one thing, do you know what bill he plans to sign first? Guess,”

“No idea, what?”

“Obama said, ‘the first thing I’d do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act’ and Pelosi has said the same thing, so it’ll almost certainly be done.”

“What’s that, ‘Freedom of Choice Act’?”

“It’s a law that will get rid of any and all restrictions on abortion. ALL laws wiped off the books. There’ll be no more parental notification or anything and YOUR taxes and MINE will now be used to pay for abortions.”

“Whoa, I don’t agree with that, even if I’m not sure I totally agree on abortion. Why didn’t we hear about that?”

“Are you kidding me? You expected the press that was so in the tank for Obama to report anything?? Don’t you know how much they covered over for him?”

“Yeah, I know they were all in the tank for him.”

When I brought up the press coverage, people hung their head in guilty recognition. Several things I mentioned, like the Fairness Doctrine, the Mandatory Service Plan, the 2001 Share the Wealth Tape, and a host of others, they either hadn’t heard of at all or they knew little about it. They looked truly shocked.

“Well, I DO think we should stop that bill anyway.”

“It’s too late.”

“What do you mean?”

“Do you figure you can call your Senator to ask them not to vote for it?”

“Yeah, right.”

“Who’re you going to call, Shaheen, who we just elected?”

“Yeah, why not?”

“She’s a former board member for Planned Parenthood that makes hundreds of millions from abortion. Do you think she’s going to stop it?”

“Well, aren’t there others?”

“Yesterday was our chance. Now it’s TOO LATE! What’s going to stop them NOW? NOTHING! The pro-abortion people now control it all and there is NOTHING left to stop them. And you want me to be happy?!”

“I didn’t know that about Obama, but he’s good on other things. He’ll be better on the economy, won’t he?”

“It’s too much like socialism to me.”

“I’m not quite sure, what’s socialism again?”

“Never mind.”

“He’s better than Bush. He’ll get us out of our wars…”

Most people spouted anti-Bush platitudes or comments on personality, symbolism and appearances or how great it will look to the world. The euphoria from the acceptance speech the night before was what was driving most of them.

“Listen, we’re friends, and I sincerely wish I could really be happy with you today. But, with everything I know, I can only feel really upset and scared for my country.”

“You’re just mad because you lost. Isn’t he your President now? Shouldn’t you support him?”

“He is going to be my President and ours and I will pray for him every day. I won’t be disrespectful. But I’m not going to be quiet anymore; if he does the wrong thing I’m not going to pretend it’s just great and say nothing. And I’m not going to ACCEPT things like the Freedom of Choice Act or other things that could mean the ruin of our country. I won’t go along and say it’s OK.”

“Wow, you really threw a wet blanket on my day.”

“I’m really sorry. You know I respect you and you’re important to me and this shouldn’t get in the way of our friendship.”

“The feeling is mutual. Well, gotta get to work. See ya.”

Every single one of the people I talked to remain my good friends or working acquaintances. I think my honest reactions gave them pause for thought. Now we’ll all have to wait and see what happens over the coming days. I don’t think these Granite State friends will ever take the life issue for granted again.

 We turn away to face the cold, enduring chill
As the day begs the night for mercy love
The sun so bright, it leaves no shadows 
Only scars carved into stone on the face of it
The moon is up over One Tree Hill
We see the sun go down in your eyes….  
I'll see you again when the stars fall from the sky  
And the moon has turned red over One Tree Hill

- U2, “One Tree Hill”  

Stand Up, Barack! Part Doh! My God, What Have We Done?

*published on Flopping Aces*

You’ve got to hand it to Joe Biden. Sir Gaffe-a-lot tried to warn us about this guy, Barack Obama. For whatever reason, subconscious guilt, knowledge that he had made a dreadful mistake or whatever, he guaranteed a “generated crisis” for Barack within six months. He hinted heavily at what he had said openly several times before: Obama is not ready and there is something very disquieting about him.

Well, that “Stand Up, Chuck!” realization is spreading like wildfire. [To see the original “Chuck” incident, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2mzbuRgnI4]. Take a look around. A record 10% post-election stock drop did not really match any new information except for Obama’s election. Chris Matthews looked like he was about to soil his trousers, this time out of fear. http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/11/06/chris-matthews-my-job-to-make-sure-this-presidency-works/. Newsweek’s brave investigators are suddenly squeamish about not knowing who Barack is or what he wants using the words “creepy” and “deeply manipulative”. (See what they had to say on Charlie Rose: http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/11/06/newsweek-editors-obama-a-creepy-deeply-manipulative-creature/). There are several other examples.

Obama chose Rahm Emmanuel for his chief of staff. Here is another corrupt Chicago politician who is known to have operated as a ruthless shark; this gives us a clue that our feelings of misgiving are well-founded. A never-before-seen stand-alone transition team is meeting in sealed secretive silence doing who knows what. There is talk of forced voluntarism, a hint at that Civilian Homeland Military. There’s a sinking feeling rampant. A lot are wondering aloud about what Obama really thinks and what he is really going to do.

Well, why didn’t anybody find out about any of this BEFORE the election beside the marginalized “right-wing crazies” among whom I must be counted by the press’s reckoning? Because the press allowed Obama to amass his huge sums of cash, prime the polls and cover his past with nary a whimper from our ‘watchdogs’, we must now face the consequences. 

Thanks, Joe Biden, for at least hinting at all of this before the election. Maybe there still is a Catholic conscience buried somewhere in that whirl of words that swirls around you. In the meantime, we feel the same anxious tension Joe threw out there last month. Will the real Barack Obama please STAND UP?!?

http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/ and http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/

WHEN IT SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE…PRAY!

 {For an image of John McCain with the miraculous image of Guadalupe:  http://media.lasvegassun.com/media/img/photos/2008/10/16/scaled.McCain_Hispanics_WX205_t318.jpg?35f122e0f08a19b997c3516b471ccb8daa82d675}

*published on Flopping Aces*  
The situation for Christendom in 1571, by any measure was impossible. The resurgent Ottoman Empire was poised to invade Italy, march up the boot and finally crush the Christian world out of existence. The earliest Arab Muslim empires had been more civilized and tolerant, perhaps, but the converted Turks retained many of their brutal ways; and now the time had come to finally destroy Europe. Ali Pasha had gathered a large fleet and army, had overwhelmed many of the Mediterranean islands with vastly superior numbers and vicious cruelty and what they would do to Europe was a horror just to contemplate in its certain fierceness and in its inevitable scope. [By the way, no ‘anti-Muslim’ prejudice is intended in telling this particular story.]

Pope Pius V (the future Saint Pius V) was virtually alone in seeing the threat. Europe was much too engrossed in the fratricidal religious struggles of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation and the venal impulses of nationalism. He finally did prod Phillip II of Spain to provide some ships and men and the famous Admiral Andrea Doria of Genoa joined under the leadership of Don Juan de Asturias, half-brother of Phillip. This 24-year old ‘Don Juan’ was the very same original profligate high-liver we associate with that name. This neophyte’s chances at keeping the fractious, disorganized, vastly outnumbered alliance together at all were dim at best, and odds of his defeating the far more experienced and dominant Ottoman force were infinitesimal. Everyone frankly considered the last-ditch effort doomed from the start, and any honest appraisal could actually come to no other conclusion.

What does a believer do at a time when the situation is absolutely overwhelming and impossible? Jesus had said something may indeed be impossible for us, but for God nothing is impossible. He promised us the power of prayer could pierce circumstances of time and space. Pope Pius called on all the people of Rome to pray a novena of Rosaries. [The idea of a ‘Novena’ has its origins in the nine days that Mary & the Apostles prayed for the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. The Rosary has always been amazingly powerful, I think, because it is so accessible and simple, sums up what Christians believe and can engage all levels of prayer.] All went to their churches praying for nine days.

The forces of the ‘Holy League’ went to confront the Turkish fleet off the coast of Greece at a place called Lepanto. Turkish spies reported that crushing victory was inevitable. Andrea Doria hoisted the blessed image of Our Lady of Guadalupe which had been touched to the original miraculous image in Mexico. Don Juan called for the attack and at that moment the winds immediately turned to maximum effect. A series of more unforeseen and astounding events brought about the miraculous victory.

The Pope at that moment in Rome turned to his Cardinals and asked them to sing the Te Deum Laudamus for God had delivered the people. He said this though news was weeks away, for God Himself had somehow revealed it. Sure enough news came confirming the miracle. The Pope credited the act of faith by the people. From that time October 7 has been celebrated, now as ‘Our Lady of the Rosary’. Many historians regard Lepanto as the most momentous history-changing naval battle since Actium itself which created the Roman Empire. From that moment on, the Ottoman Empire began its long, steady decline into “the Sick Man of Europe” of latter days. It was impossible; but it happened.

Now we find ourselves in an impossible situation for our country. Most of the major powers-that-be are using every possible force, legal, illegal, nefarious and otherwise to foist upon us “The One” they have ordained. The media, the entertainment industry, millionaires, well-financed PR groups, ACORN, etc. etc. have declared the election of Obama inevitable.

The candidates for President and Vice President hold vastly disparate world views and visions for our country. So much that we as Americans hold dear and have fought to retain is subject to destruction if Obama is elected. Some examples, to name a few:

-- Right to free speech vs. the “Fairness Doctrine” 
-- Free market economy Capitalism vs. Redistribution of wealth Socialism
-- The Pursuit of Happiness vs. Taxes, taxes, taxes
-- The inalienable Right to Life vs. the “Freedom of Choice Act”

What possible chance is there for those who still love freedom, the American ideal and independence? The answer remains the same. We must pray. I have heard of several groups beginning daily prayer chains. My wife and I are praying the Rosary and the Chaplet of Mercy every day in a deep way. When I saw a picture of John McCain with the same image of Our Lady of Guadalupe that won an impossible victory in 1571, it gave me hope. Hope when inspired by God’s will is unconquerable. Our Lady recently saved Mexico from a Marxist government. Perhaps it is God’s will that her Son save us now rather than later, and, hence, the entire world. Man proposes; God disposes. Let us truly turn to God and perhaps we may be delivered. Freedom isn’t free. It takes the total devotion of our lives and all we are. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, won’t you?
http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/ and http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/

STAND UP, BARACK! O GOD, WHAT AM I TALKING ABOUT?
*published on Flopping Aces*

It seems everyone is talking about the latest absolutely amazing super-gaffe from Joe “Gaffe-a-day” Biden. (Everyone is talking, that is, except the major media organs of communication who are supposed to be reporting fairly. If I were them, I would camp out permanently right next to Joe for at least for a day, if only for the entertainment value! Forget for just a minute that you are a sold-out toady for the Messiah!)

I won’t bother to quote at length or recount all of the details at this point. Go to Glenn Beck today or other places like the following article by Matt Jaffe on the ABC News blog to see what he said: (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/10/biden-to-suppor.html).

Suffice it to say, Joe began blabbing about the possible foreign policy threats out there that are certain to strike us soon, and how Barack will stand up for us, when he realized in mid-blab that his guy is a foreign policy cripple in a wheelchair. Figuratively speaking, it is virtually the same double-take he did with Chuck, the wheelchair-bound politician of “Stand up, Chuck!” fame. When he realized the implications of his realization, he began to babble like a babble-head doll.

The sheer incoherence of what followed was absolutely breath-taking. Basically, he’s guaranteeing that Obama’s weakness WILL bring us a catastrophic attack, a la Khrushchev and Kennedy (which gave us the Bay of Pigs and nearly blowing up the world!). He tried to reassure everyone by resorting to one of his standard fallback positions - shameless, narcissistic boasting – saying he knows more about foreign policy than everyone else around (a move certain to make friends and influence his legislative compatriots). He’ll out-Cheney Dick Cheney and save the country when it seems like Barack is doing the wrong thing when he’s really doing the right thing. BLAAAAH! I can’t stand it! It seems like the truth keeps leaking out of the holes in this guy like water from a pin-pricked balloon.

[And they say Sarah Palin isn’t qualified?? My goodness, at least she’s faced down some tough customers and gotten a lot of things done! Biden has either been on the wrong side of things or he’s devolved into these nearly psychotic skeins of verbal folderol.]

Maybe he’s subconsciously trying to do all of us a huge favor and warn us all about the sheer lunacy of hiring a security risk who’s never run anything but radical community organizations to lead the world. He could possibly make Jimmy Carter look bold, experienced and decisive.

Please, anyone within the sound of my voice, listen to the nervous tension in Joe’s voice; I mean Joe the Plumber AND Joe the Babbler. Elect John McCain for the good of the country! Put country first before any other motivation which might be driving you. Don’t sell out. Be noble and STAND UP! STAND UP before you find you can’t or you are not allowed to…

“What Do You Do With a General
When He Stops Being a General?”

*published on Flopping Aces*

Well, now we see; it is clear. Colin Powell is Obama’s October Surprise. Those who know better and have decided whom we need in spite of us are bringing in the biggest gun to secure their victory and make it clear for us.

Colin Powell is a very good man, by all accounts, in many ways. I’m sure he’s trying to be sincere. But like all of us he has weaknesses and tendencies that might explain why he was open to taking this move directly on behalf of Obama. What was he really doing this morning on “Meet the Press”?

This is my take. What Powell gave was an uninterrupted political speech not the argument of a statesman. (Tom Brokaw didn’t seem as concerned about time constraints this time, by the way; he must have left his stopwatch at home. Somehow, I don’t think Tim Russert would have left several of Powell’s points unchallenged like Brokaw did.) My wife’s remark as we watched him was: “he’s reading through a list of Obama campaign talking points, bullet point by bullet point. He’s not even coming up for air!” His tone and manner even sounded liked Obama’s, reassuring but lacking something somehow. Why did it seem this way?

Logical reasons don’t seem to be the primary justification for this move he’s made. Rather, his points seem to be political, power-sharing and influence-building more than issue-based or ideological. He seems more concerned about appearances, how he looks, how we ‘look’, “approval ratings” and our perception in the world. (For instance, I understand we need to build coalitions more than Bush has, but I think Obama and Powell are not really talking about that; they want ‘standing’.)  



There are more clues in the programmatic points he made that indicate they are more ‘excuses’ than reasons. I would like to address some of them as examples of the overall pattern I see.

- If he really was “impressed” by Obama’s response to the current crisis, what exactly did Obama DO that impressed him so much? The one meeting he tried to conduct as an “executive” was an unmitigated disaster. His stated purpose was to pass the original version that had billions for ACORN. Thank God he failed. He also employed the “call me if you need me” method of leadership most of that time. McCain actually did help save us from the original bill and did get some safeguards put in, no matter what it looked like. I think what Powell is telling us is that Obama gives an IMPRESSION of ‘calm’ and he ‘looks presidential’ through the crisis while McCain ‘looked’ “erratic” in the codeword of the Obama campaign (even though he was the one who actually DID something). If this is what he’s really saying, then this is more evidence his move is a political one not a principled one.

- He claims to be very concerned about education. Does he really think the slavish toeing of the education unions’ line which is what Obama is really espousing has been or will be good for us? Does he not know what kind of “education” Obama was funding and promoting with Bill Ayres in Chicago? Shouldn’t he be for true “change” like vouchers or true teacher standards? But, I suppose, that wouldn’t ‘look’ right.

- Powell said the Republican Party is “becoming narrower.” This, once again, is all about impressions, vague characterizations and talking points as opposed to principle, records and evidence of actually doing something. Powell claimed Obama has somehow “widened” his approach. After all we’ve seen, is there anybody that’s been paying attention who, with full and firm conviction, buys any of Obama’s “post-partisan” rhetoric now? Ask the ordinary citizens who supported Hilary how THEY feel about his actual practices, for one thing. Ask the victims of the ACORN, Fannie Mae and other fiascos about the Alinsky tactics used against them. Who is it that has been ‘wider’ in the REAL world? McCain has lived it; Obama NEVER has and has done the opposite. John McCain has the proof of it in ways that has actually upset the so-called ‘narrower’ Republicans.

- His accepting of Obama’s “experience” and rejection of Palin’s seems to be totally based on what it will LOOK LIKE. Can the ‘poise’ shown in ‘running a campaign’ really outweigh real actions and the supervision of a very large budget or a business? Powell says he prefers how we’ll be perceived over actual records and accomplishments. Biden has been totally wrong and loopy at times in his foreign policy approach and he lied 14 times in 90 minutes during his debate with Palin, but he ‘seems’ more Presidential so he is preferable to that bumpkin Sarah?

So what’s really going on here? Why would he do it? My guess, because of the political nature of his polemic, is that it has everything to do with the fact that Powell shares the upper class, pro-choice, we know better than you socially liberal approach of Obama’s core support. His reputation in the military has been that of a rather ‘soft’ Beta male, in opposition to the Schwarzkopf types. He wants to be well regarded, I suspect, by his elite peer group. If that is so, Americans should recognize it as such. It seems pretty obvious to me that’s what he has done. Unfortunately, we are an image-driven society and the impact of this will probably be very large. We will need to work hard to get this insight out there, if we can.

Well, I hope he will take responsibility for making this move later on if it actually helps elect the least experienced President ever. He is spending the well-earned capital of his reputation in a very dubious way. I hope he will be strong enough to admit that the voices callin’ Powell were lying. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The Emperor still has no clothes, even when a retired General says its so.

Joe the Plumber Flushes Out Senator Government!
*published on Flopping Aces*
How very revealing all of this has been, hasn’t it? Obama wandered onto the wrong street that day didn’t he? The question itself ‘flushed out’ Barry well enough. It forced him to pretty much admit his socialist mindset. I suspect the effect has been earth-shaking. Their internal polling must have alarmed them quite a bit or they wouldn’t have reacted they way they have.

And it is that very reaction that has even more successfully ‘flushed out’ the REAL Barack Obama, so fortuitously re-named by McCain as “Senator Government”. He and his friends have that Marxist impulse so perfected by Stalin of attacking the symbols which reveal their hypocrisy ruthlessly. As in Orwell’s 1984, they can produce their own reality, without worrying about the effect on their hapless victims. This is what they are trying to do to Joe. I won’t go into the details of the facts about him and their attacks. Suffice it to say, he was in no way a plant, he asked a question about a possible business, not his present situation. The inquisition he is undergoing in two days exceeds most of the MSM’s efforts investigating Senator Government for two years.

But I think they just may have overplayed their hand this time on the heels of what they did and are doing to Sarah Palin. I just went to one of her rallies and the crowd was truly astounding. Like the people of Solidarity or the non-violent crowds of the Velvet Revolution and their sister uprisings, many are simply not going to ALLOW themselves to be stampeded this time by the hackneyed ‘tell us what to believe’ cant coming from the old, far-left power bases. Their reaction reveals them as not agents of reform, but the most predictable socialist idealogues with the same failed ideas.

‘Senator Government’ has been flushed out by ‘the Plumber’.

http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/ and http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/

’69 Celtics, double-knot Red Sox and the Audacity of Hubris
*published on Flopping Aces*

The Obamas are celebrating already. Michelle was ordering that lobster and caviar at the Waldorf. Plans for all the celebrations are, apparently, already moving forward at a feverish pace. Obama’s performance at the Al Smith fundraiser for the Catholic Archdiocesan charities, which was supposed to feature “comedy”, aroused in me a great deal of discomfort; he seems to lack true humor about himself despite the great lines written for him and there was a hard edge to some of his jabs. I think he takes himself very seriously. Contrast that with the deep, authentic self-deprecation and true joy in John McCain’s humor.

My sense is that Obama just can’t help himself and he’s getting ready for the celebration. Meanwhile, Comeback McCain seems to have this underdog mojo happening again like it has so many times. He actually seems to relish and thrive on it.

My memory was jarred. Hadn’t I seen and felt something like this before? My son was marveling over yet another Red Sox miraculous, historic comeback against the Rays last night. He made the comparison to Obama and McCain without even having seen the fundraiser. He said that he had the feeling that McCain was making a totally unexpected miracle comeback because of his authenticity, just like the Red Sox have done the past few years. I remembered the night in 2004 when the Red Sox were down three games to none to the Yankees after laying one of the biggest eggs in history. Curt Schilling simply said, “Why not us? Why not now?” The simple, stark, powerful truth of this statement impelled them to a remarkable team effort. Roberts stole a base and history was changed.

My son can’t remember, but I can never forget the very similar 1969 Celtics. They weren’t supposed to even make it to the Championship. They sure had a lot of pedigree and some nostalgic respect, but they were simply TOO OLD! It was Bill Russell’s last hurrah. The Lakers were the newest, exciting wave of the future featuring Jerry West, Elgin Baylor and Wilt the Stilt; they wowed everyone and swept to the Finals with a fresh sense of inevitability and celebrity. Celtics were yesterday’s news and the odds were all against them. Somehow, against any reasonable expectations, the over-the-hill gang made it to the Finals against the anointed ones. Then, lo and behold, they managed to scratch and fight and stretch it to a Game Seven; but it was the considered appraisal of the Lakers’ organization that the worn-out Celtics could not possibly have anything left to beat the new best team in the world. They loaded the balloons in the ceiling in Los Angeles. They purchased magnums of champagne on ice and all the accoutrements of celebration. Red Auerbach shrewdly showed this ostentation to his team before the game. In the final seconds, Nelson’s shot bounced straight up and swished through the basket and Bill Russell had his eleventh Ring. The old fighters pulled off one of their greatest achievements.

I’m no seer and I’m not predicting what will happen, but I can sure see a lot of correlation. Several times in his career, John McCain has specialized in the improbable comeback. We’ve just seen it in the primaries again. The set-up is now almost identical to 1969. McCain has a LOT of pedigree and nostalgic respect but he has been presented by the Obama campaign as TOO OLD; his time has past! Obama is the new, exciting wave of the future, someone who has wowed everyone in the media with his fresh sense of inevitability and celebrity. Somehow, McCain has managed to keep it reasonably close toward the end, but it’s obvious to the Obama campaign that’s it’s over already or else they wouldn’t be doing these things they’re doing. But like Bill Russell, it’s obvious to me John McCain has some powerful shots left in his gun with bullets just right for the crises we face. I don’t think any one of us should be surprised on November 4 if McCain clanks one on the back of the rim and has it swish perfectly down through the net. And then Obama will have to do with all of his celebratory bric-a-brac whatever it is the Lakers did with theirs in 1969.

http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/

 ACORN-y Idea!

I come up with nutty ideas all the time. Here’s another one. Why not carry an acorn in your pocket when you go to vote. In the secret of the booth, take out the acorn and leave it as a nice decoration. It is fall, after all. It is symbolic of hope for renewal after the death of winter. The multiplying power of the seed in the acorn, the multiplying power of the vote: yes, it seems to be a perfect aesthetic and artistic statement! A lot of our “community organizer” friends should really ‘dig’ this as much as the squirrels do.

Mark A. Lajoie
http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/
http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/

Hey, they're looking for you….Who?....The squirrels!!!

   

Ayres: “‘c’ommunist” More Than Terrorist

The issue of Barack Obama’s ties to William Ayres has re-emerged in the closing days of the election, but I think even the McCain campaign is missing the salient fact. It is very true that having a friendship with a terrorist is troubling enough, but the evidence of a shared radical left agenda is far more troubling.

Bill Ayres, of course, was part of a radical offshoot of the notorious Weather Underground which bombed the Capital and the Pentagon and killed policemen. He was a leader of all this activity. In 2001 he said he wished he had done more.

Obama at first tried to claim to claim he was merely a “neighbor on my street”, but it soon came to light they had worked together for eight years and Obama had launched his campaign at his house. Could Obama had been the only person in Chicago who didn’t know about his tainted past?

As I said, having any association with anyone having this man’s past would be troubling enough. What if John McCain had known Timothy McVeigh? It is what they were doing together and how often that troubles me.  

The Obama campaign and their helpmates the media have tried to portray him as a reformed person making contributions to society. This ignores the words he has spoken and the nature of his activities. He has described himself as “a small ‘c’ Communist”, saying he has preferred the writings of Marx to Lenin. He is a major force in education promoting far left thought, such as portraying our country as a militaristic bully whose capitalist system must be destroyed.

Ayres hired Obama as his Chairman of an Annenberg project on education in Chicago (and, by the way, how could you ‘forget’ someone who gave you $50 million dollars to spend?!). They worked together to pay outside radical groups to indoctrinate students in far left politics, specifically mentioning they should NOT push basics such as math and science. [The results were a total failure, in terms of any educational measures.] Ayres and Obama also worked together in the similarly minded Woods Foundation. Obama has pointed with pride to his work here. Further, the launch of Obama’s political career at Ayres’ house was set up by them; it was NOT set up by the previous State Rep. as Obama has tried to claim.

The main conclusion coming out of this is that Obama must share the radical views of Ayres, especially in light of all his other work and associations, such as his “community organizer” work with the far left group ACORN and his contributions to Wright and Fleger. Fill in this tableau with the voter fraud and mortgage bullying of ACORN which Obama, Frank and Dodd tried to sneak down our throats (to the tune of BILLIONS of dollars) in the initial version of the bailout bill, and we have a threat much more ominous than a mere association with a terrorist. Without stretching credulity much at all, we could be about to elect someone who wants to destroy capitalism and promote far left socialism. Can we really take that chance?

   

BETTER GET BETTER BASICS TO BARRY!

Barack Obama talked a lot the other night at Columbia about new, large government-sponsored ‘volunteer’ or ‘service’ programs. Volunteerism has certainly been a wonderful part of our national character and, yes, the government-related movements like the Peace Corps have been great examples of a healthy body politic.

However, I sensed that Obama sees the government’s role as pretty all-encompassing. His seeming preference for a more socialist approach is what I get out of lot of his remarks. We all remember other top-down ideas that have slipped out of Obama’s deepest psyche, like that Homeland Military Force that will be as strong as the Army (!).

I thought it might be time to go back and take a look at some classic Catholic social justice theory that makes so much sense in retrospect. I think Obama – and all of us – need a little primer on some ‘economy and society’ basics. Let’s take a look.

Leo XIII came out with the seminal encyclical, “Rerum Novarum” in the year 1891. It was followed up by other letters that built upon that good foundation. The basic idea from this tradition that I want to underline is summed up in two words: ‘subsidiarity’ and ‘solidarity’. In Catholic social theory, these two values are presented as tied together, balanced and equally necessary in a healthy society. I know, this all seems pretty abstract to start with, but hang with me, here. If we could just grasp this, a LOT of common sense can flow from it. What are these two words?

In Catholic thought, ‘subsidiarity’ simply reminds us that a healthy society is made up of a whole lot of small, strong, independent social groups – ‘subsidiary’ groups. You have youth groups, charitable societies, local governments, schools, the Elks, religious societies, etc. (By far, the most important is the family, nuclear and extended.)

In order for things to work right, each of these smaller, ‘subsidiary’ units needs to be respected by the larger organs of power. THE State, THE Church, THE Press, THE Armed Forces must respect the independence and integrity of each of these smaller groups for the good of all. These larger groups shouldn’t overawe or super-cede jobs that are properly done by the smaller groups.

What this means is, a large group, such as the government, should neither take over the smaller functions of the family through force such as in Communist or totalitarian governments or through a sort of benevolent ‘smothering’, such as in socialism. When decisions within families, such as how to educate the children or how they will be taken care of are taken over, the result is massive social injustice and disequilibrium.

When Hitler forcibly shipped youths to retraining camps, severed from their family and town roots, it served as great brainwashing but horrible social justice in the long run. Hallowed family and regional traditions which had humanized and stabilized were ripped out, leaving a moral vacuum ripe for the greatest horrors. Scandinavia’s 80% taxation and 6 AM to 8 PM daycare led to unprecedented levels of 5-year old suicides among other things before they lurched away from total immersion socialism. This is not some abstract idea. It’s really there and has real consequences when it is violated.

It was the genius of our Founding Fathers to build in and express respect for states and towns, families, churches and associations. It was this that de Tocqueville marveled about, because it worked so well. That’s why the ethos of ‘small-town America’ resonates so strongly when we see someone like Sarah Palin. (This is not to romanticize all ‘small-town’ values, by the way. I understand these places can, indeed, sometimes, be petty, parochial or prejudiced. The larger point remains.)

However, it’s not good to ONLY have respect for subsidiarity. What if all the small groups did whatever they wanted without regard to other groups or larger supervisory groups? That wouldn’t work, either. John Paul II warned not only about Communism, but, also, about untrammeled capitalism.

What is the antidote for such a danger? It is the idea of ‘solidarity’. (Have you ever wondered why John Paul used the word so much, or why Lech Walesa named his union with this word? Wojtilja knew how to put these classic ideas into practice in the real world!) This principle says that everyone should consider the whole of humanity or the larger group in whatever they do. We’re all in this together, after all. True, my grocery store can put up the price of milk far above wholesale if it wants and that might be good for the store in the short run, but how would that affect the needier people, and, therefore, the larger community? Patriotic sentiments and actions for one’s country are a perfect example of such ‘solidarity’. It might cost my family and my locality for me to serve in the military, but it serves the greater purpose of preserving the liberties of millions.

However, this ‘solidarity’ is absolutely USELESS if it is not entirely starting from one’s self; one must be acting completely from one’s own volition. (That is precisely where Marxism and socialism err, by theorizing that individuality is not important and conformity must be forced.) This internalization of ideals of solidarity is called virtue. If the larger organs of power seek to IMPOSE it, then it is NOT ‘solidarity’ at all! Solidarity must be learned on the knees of mothers, at truly free-standing schools, in the company of local friends and co-workers and in the pews of churches. It involves souls reared in such nurseries that go out “to give their lives to a cause greater than themselves”. Can you see the perfect balance of the two extremes: subsidiarity AND solidarity? Precisely because you are so respectful of the smaller, organic groups, you are able to more perfectly promote the whole.

Were you thinking about John McCain as I went through these principles? He is steeped in the language of respect for the small and devotion to the greater. He even uses the phrase “a cause greater than oneself” routinely, and it seems clear it’s really part of him. In this forum, and at Saddleback, the ease with which his convictions arose showed amply how this whole world view forms the warp and woof of his soul.

Can you also see how the Marxism which was apparently so prevalent in Obama’s learning and upbringing runs counter to all of this? Perhaps, that is why he can make some of the suggestions he has. Perhaps, he really believes what he said about the bitter small town Americans clinging to their guns and religion. Perhaps that’s why his campaign’s initial reaction to Palin was a denigration of small towns. Perhaps that explains his explicit espousal of the “What’s Wrong with Kansas” mentality.

We should help to defend and preserve a balance which is good for America, and, hence, good for the whole world. Without rancor, let us promote the election of McCain and Palin. We should maintain the great American balance as expressed in Catholic social theory and lived out across our country. We should not turn our country over to those who espouse the unbalanced, socialist approach. Any reasons we are being given to do so can’t be anything other than rationalizations. Any sudden conversions in Obama’s policies or statements are probably not to be trusted.

Recently he’s tried to talk out the lyrics of the balanced American ideal, but he’s seemed to speak as one who knows only the words and not the tune of the song. Maybe someone can get this basic academic information about subsidiarity and solidarity to Obama and it might help him understand what so many Americans believe and live in practice.

Is there somebody out there who would be willing to send these basic social ideas to Obama and company? Can I get a witness? I really think we had better get better basics to Barry.

 

THOMAS MORE & THE CUP TO NOWHERE
*published on Flopping Aces*
In the famous play and movie by Robert Bolt, “A Man for All Seasons”, we are told the inspiring story of Sir Thomas More. (He is ‘Saint Thomas More’ for Catholics. "He was the person of the greatest virtue these islands ever produced,” was the appraisal of the acclaimed Samuel Johnson. Fame also attends him as the humanist intellectual and friend of Erasmus who wrote Utopia.) More is a judge and a public servant who has a large family and a reputation for unusual honesty and self-application. He eventually becomes the number two official leader in the Kingdom, the Lord Chancellor. The tension of the piece lies in his refusal to publicly approve of King Henry VIII’s divorce and marriage to Anne Boleyn and the King’s break with the Catholic Church. This leads to More’s martyrdom. His devotion to conscience and ethics through all of this has provoked admiration from observers of every stripe, and rightly so.

In one key scene near the beginning, More, the judge, receives the gift of a cup as he is exiting the court to go home. He carries it absent-mindedly, a fact which comes to the attention of the office-monger Richard Rich. On the boat ride home, it is brought to More’s attention that the giver of the cup had a case in his court, opening the possibility it might be a bribe. Within a split second of hearing this news, Sir Thomas unhesitatingly dumps the expensive cup into the river.

Later, near the end of the play, at his trial for treason, the treacherous Judas figure, Richard Rich, attempts to make something of More’s cup, twisting the facts to imply that this man most famous for his honesty and probity had intended to take a bribe. More makes mincemeat of the whole smear by pointing out that not only was there no evidence he kept the cup but he ruled against the woman by whom he was supposedly influenced. [Rich later stole More’s head from his shoulders by outright lying under oath about his statements.]

Among the avalanche of ‘scandals’ thrown against the brass wall which is Sarah Palin, there is one which struck me as more legitimate. A ‘boatload’ of the others have been retracted or proven false almost as soon as they have arisen. However, the word has been trumpeted that Palin was “for ‘the Bridge To Nowhere’ before she was against it.” That would be troubling, if true. But I soon thought of St. Thomas More.

With More, much of the smear campaign did not ring true because he already had a record and a reputation as being unusually, notably honest. Most of the charges fell apart at his trial, despite the most powerful forces being arrayed against him. The cup charge seemed pretty bad at first. But, in the end, it became clear that More had simply gone down that road for a while, ignorant of the implications, and had dropped it as soon as he knew what was going on.

Palin has demonstrated through an undeniable pattern that she is a cost-cutter and a promoter of government ethics. Even most of her enemies concede as much. This ‘outlier’ of an ethics ‘poll’ strikes an impartial observer as suspicious immediately. It doesn’t fit the pattern. It seems like a proverbial straw being grasped at. After reading about the whole affair, it seems to me that we have a similar situation to More’s cup.

Palin has never said she was against the IDEA of a bridge there. (She has actually done a lot for the infrastructure of Alaska by the way.) In her speech, she said, “If our state wanted a bridge, we'd build it ourselves.” That does not contradict the fact that she openly talked about the idea. Why not? Why not check it out and see if it’s feasible? Isn’t that what thorough executives do? She was not AGAINST the IDEA of having a bridge, at first. However, the undeniable fact remains that when Stevens’ federal earmark was brought to her for action, SHE SHOT IT DOWN (a fact Alaska Democrats tried to expunge from the State web site). The Cup ended up in the river. The Bridge never got there. That is the bottom line for this whole affair. She recognized it for the boondoggle it was, and dropped it like a hot potato; at some point, she also saw the IDEA itself was not going to be fiscally feasible and opted for a ferry instead.

Palin, unlike Obama, has a record and a reputation for actually doing things in terms of ethics and change. This is so true that she is being considered, rightly, I think, for the second highest office in the land, just as St. Thomas More was. Neither would have been considered if not for this.

The smear involving More’s Cup led to nowhere. It sunk without the support of a pattern. The enemies of Palin are trying to get across a solitary, contrived point that I believe will crumble and will lead nowhere. This is a Bridge idea that they will not be able to get across to anyone in the end because it cannot be sustained without a ‘suspension’ of belief. In fact, I think they will cross under that Bridge when it falls down.

http://mlajoie2.blogspot.com/ And http://mlajoie2.blogtownhall.com/