Sunday, September 30, 2012
Monday, September 17, 2012
Sunday, September 16, 2012
To read Dr. Sowell's essay: "Trickle Down Theory and Tax Cuts for the Rich," click on the link below:
Political Scientist and Author Carson Holloway wrote a very insightful essay at ThePublicDiscourse.Com the other day about what even the appearance of Bill Clinton at the recent convention of the Democrats means about our society. Our Founders considered it imperative that the president be a man of virtue, but somewhere along the way that prerequisite for the office was abandoned, as evidenced by the honor accorded to the man who brought dishonor on the office, on himself, and finally on our society.
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt. He therefore is the truest friend to the liberty of his country who tries most to promote its virtue, and who, so far as his power and influence extend, will not suffer a man to be chosen into any office of power and trust who is not a wise and virtuous man. We must not conclude merely upon a man's haranguing upon liberty, and using the charming sound, that he is fit to be trusted with the liberties of his country.”
— Samuel Adams (1722–1803) Father of the American Revolution, Patriot and Statesman
Here are some clips from the Holloway essay:
There was a time in America, not too long ago, when someone exposed as such a man would not have been welcome at the national convention of either political party. His misdeeds would have gone unmentioned in our public discourse not because they were regarded as irrelevant, but because everyone on all sides would want to forget that such a character could have attained and then tainted the presidency.
Clinton’s misdeeds set off a partisan war over whether he should be permitted to continue in the presidency. A majority of Republicans thought he should be impeached and removed from office, while a majority of Democrats disagreed. The final outcome reflected a kind of compromise: Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives but not removed by the Senate.
This collective judgment, made through the collaboration of the relevant authoritative institutions, says something about our nation’s moral standards, about what things we take seriously and not so seriously. The presidency is not only a job but also an honor. We expect those who occupy the office to be not merely competent in the work but also of a certain character. The Clinton impeachment and non-removal, therefore, represents the nation’s judgment that a man guilty of predatory adultery and self-protective perjury is nevertheless worthy of the highest honor the republic can bestow. And, being worthy of this highest honor, he is obviously worthy of lesser honors, such as addressing a major political party’s nominating convention in the capacity of a kind of elder statesman.
Are we, then, to regard Clinton’s presidency, and his continued public respectability, as a serious defeat for the common good? I think so, but no doubt many of my fellow citizens on the left will disagree. A short article such as this cannot settle the question. Nevertheless, it is possible here to point out the very real costs of Clinton’s presidency, specifically the costs of the arguments that were used by his supporters in order to preserve him in office.
Clinton’s most ardent defenders held that his conduct was really not very serious. Some, in fact, openly contended that his illicit affair was the kind of behavior that one should expect from any powerful man. These defenders, therefore, did what was in their power to teach young American women—our daughters—that they should expect their husbands to be adulterers if they should become successful and powerful men, and at the same time, of course, taught young American men—our sons—that they could rightly be adulterers if they should achieve high status and influence in the community. This lesson was taught by supporters of that political party which, then as now, claims to be the special defender of the rights and dignity of women.To read the whole essay, click on the link below:
Saturday, September 15, 2012
Friday, September 14, 2012
Ben Stein, writing on The Spectator Blog today:
He goes on:I awakened to a text from a close friend who is a devout Christian and who was so angry at the elite media that she could not sleep. "I am so frikkin' sick of the media telling us that Islam is a 'religion of peace,'" she said. "Look, people make fun of Jesus all of the time and I mean ALL of the time and we don't kill them or harm them. But do anything at all that offends any Muslim and they start killing Christians and Jews -- and then Obama apologizes for it. How long can this go on? The times of Tribulation are at hand."I got up, walked out on the deck and looked out at the perfect fall day over Lake Pendoreille. An absolutely perfect Fall day, blue skies, light breeze, just a slight chill in the air.At breakfast, my wife suddenly said, "And then I beheld a red horse ridden by a man with a great sword....""What is that?" I asked her."It's Revelation," she said."I know, but where does that come from?""I just feel as if something big is about to happen," she said. "Something feels like we're about to live in a totally changed world. It feels like end times. Why are we apologizing to the Muslims? They're killing and expelling their Christians and we don't say a word. End times."I nodded. There is that feeling in the air.
Apparently word had been out for months that the most extreme of the anti-Qaddafi rebels were working with al Qaeda for 9/11. The State Department and the Defense Department had done nothing meaningful to protect the Ambassador. When the killers attacked the U.S. compound, they were heavily armed with anti-aircraft automatic cannon (a very deadly weapon) and RPG's. They were a recognizably violent group connected with al Qaeda.It's amazing that Qaddafi kept saying that the people fighting against him were al Qaeda and we kept helping them -- and sure enough, they turned out to be al Qaeda. And Qaddafi, who had become our friend -- although a cruel and vile man -- was killed by the rebels so now Libya is in large measure in the hands of al Qaeda.Same with Egypt. Mubarak was no one's idea of a great guy, but he was our pal. He kept the peace with Israel. He suppressed the terrorists. So, naturally, we stabbed him in the back. Now, we have worked to create an "Arab Spring" that has given us a fantastically more anti-American, anti-Israel, pro-al Qaeda Middle East.But incredibly, Mr. Obama considers this an achievement. An achievement? To help al Qaeda and its pals, the Muslim Brotherhood, take power in the most populous Arab state? To help al Qaeda take over in oil rich Libya? What are they talking about?
Thursday, September 13, 2012
John Yoo wrote this post at Ricochet.com last night.
While this President is all too happy to exercise his powers domestically to remake society, he shies away from the singular area where the need for swift and decisive executive action is greatest — foreign affairs.Compare the Obama administration's response to that of an earlier, greater President. In this some region of the world, once, an American man named Perdicaris was taken hostage by an Arab brigand named Raisuli. President Teddy Roosevelt sent out the message: "The American government wants Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead." It had the desired effect, thanks to the dispatch of seven American warships and the Marines. By contrast no doubt, Obama will ask the United Nations to resolve the matter instead.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
To read the rest of the article, click the link below:Here are a couple of facts:On June 4 the White House confirmed that the US had killed Abu Yahya Al-Libi - OBL's Libyan lietenant who had moved into Al Qaeda's #2 spot after Ayman Zahawiri after the Navy SEALs whacked OBL.On Tuesday 9/11, a tape was released of Zawahiri announcing that Libi had been killed earlier this year by a US drone attack. The Zawahiri tape was made during Ramadan which ended in the middle of last month. Zawahiri called for his terrorist underlings to avenge Libi's death and especially exhorted Libyans to take revenge.The attack in Libya was well planned and executed. It wasn't about a spontaneous protest against some ridiculous internet movie of Muhammad. The assailants came armed to the teeth, with among other things, RPG 7s. They knew that the US Ambassador was in Benghazi rather than Tripoli. They knew how to track his movements, and were able to strike against him after he and his colleagues left the consulate building and tried to flee in a car. As Israel Channel 2's Arab Affairs Correspondent Ehud Yaari noted this evening, you don't often see well trained terrorists participating in protests of movies.Then there is the attack in Cairo. They were led by Mohammad Zawahiri - Ayman Zawahiri's brother. According the Thomas Josclyn in the Weekly Standard, the US media has been idiotically presenting him as some sort of moderate despite the fact that in an interview with Al Jazeerah he said said, "We in al Qaeda..."
This, of course, was taped before the assassination of our Ambassador to Libya.Published on Sep 11, 2012 by usactionnewsdotcomMuslim mobs have attacked the American embassy in Cairo and in Libya. Reports are an American was killed in Libya. Supposedly upset by an internet video originating in the US the mobs have burned the American flag and stormed the walls of the embassy. The state department has issued a wishy washy statement apologizing for free speech in the US. I don't ever remember them apologizing for any denigration of the Christian faith. Fox News reports mobs are continuing to grow.Recently the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood came to power in Egypt in what was hoped would be an "Arab Spring" with a surge of Democracy. The Arab Spring has turned into a Muslim Brotherhood nightmare as radicals take over in Egypt, Libya and soon in Syria.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Let nothing disturb you,
Let nothing frighten you,
All things are passing;
God only is changeless.
Patience gains all things.
Who has God wants nothing.
God alone suffices.St. Teresa of Avila, whose autobiography inspired Edith Stein to convert to Catholicism, be martyred at Auschwitz, and eventually be canonized a saint (Saint Teresia Benedicta of the Cross), wrote this prayer in the 16th century and carried it in her prayerbook until her death in 1582.
The following E-Mail was received from Alec Rawls today:
Please help publicize the latest on the Flight 93 memorial. Despite promises to change the original Crescent of Embrace design, New Park Service images prove that the design is being built with virtually no changes.They call it a broken circle now but they even removed the extra arc of trees that was supposed to turn the crescent into a circle, replacing it instead with a wavy wisp of trees that is barely visible. Side-by-side comparison between the original bare-naked Islamic crescent-and-star flag configuration and the as-built configuration show they are virtually identical!I know we are not doing the blogburst thing regularly anymore, but I hope as many of you as possible will rejoin for this anniversary effort.Thanks a million, and NEVER FORGET!Alec RawlsPalo Alto, CA
Click on the link below to read the Blogburst sent with the E-Mail:
For more on this topic, type "Flight 93 Memorial" in the "Search This Blog" box under the flags on the right.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Wish I could vote for her.Published on Aug 22, 2012 by BarbaraBellarDr. Barbara Bellar Candidate for Illinois State Senate, District 18 sums up Obamacare in one sentence. Please go to my website and contribute to my campaign. I am running against the Chicago Machine and I could use your financial help! Go to electbellar.com or send your checks to Citizens to Elect Barbara Bellar - PO Box 557766, Chicago, IL 60655.
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Friday, September 7, 2012
This video was posted here in May 2012, but given the post-modern, totally secularist, nature of the just concluded convention of the Democrats in Charlotte, N.C., it seems an appropriate time to post it again. President Reagan would never believe that one of America's political parties could turn its back on God.
Caroline Kennedy can believe anything she chooses to believe, but as Fr. Robert Barron has said: "The Catholic Church is not a philosophical debating society." If she wants to endorse a woman's "reproductive rights" (including abortion), she has every right to do so. She does not have the right after having done so, though, to call herself a "Catholic woman."