For any who would care to use it.
Bear in mind Rule 1, though.
Author: Jimmy Akin
Jimmy was born in Texas, grew up nominally Protestant, but at age 20 experienced a profound conversion to Christ. Planning on becoming a Protestant seminary professor, he started an intensive study of the Bible. But the more he immersed himself in Scripture the more he found to support the Catholic faith, and in 1992 he entered the Catholic Church. His conversion story, "A Triumph and a Tragedy," is published in Surprised by Truth. Besides being an author, Jimmy is the Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a contributing editor to Catholic Answers Magazine, and a weekly guest on "Catholic Answers Live." View all posts by Jimmy Akin
Keep in mind rule 1 right? Well is that an Anglo-Saxon rule one or an Italian rule 1?
I think this election was disasterous for the prolife movement. Should the democrats go on to take control of the senate, you can say bye-bye to appointing the justice we need to bring back sanity to the Supreme Court.
We Catholics need to put forth a more consistent moral and ethical message.
Had we heeded our beloved Pope John Paul II, and urged the President not to invade Iraq, the Republicans would have held onto a large majority in both houses. Our desire to end the stain of abortion and our desire to secure the institution of marriage would have been closer to reality.
And I understand that one could make a moral claim toward invading a country. But seriously, did anyone actually conclude that the invasion met the standards of Catholic morality? Or did our sinfulness affect our discernment and turn us into cafeteria catholics on the right?
Surprisingly, what would have thrown me into apoplexy a few years ago (Dems taking back Congress) has left me strangely unmoved. Let’s see how they run things for a bit.
It may do people good to be reminded of what Dems are like when they control policy and purse strings. It may set things up to be more favorable for conservatives in ’08. The economy is humming right along… can they keep it going?
My prediction is that Congress will try hard to accomplish exactly nothing before ’08, to avoid giving anyone ammunition to use against them. A great deal of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Iraq policy will change little, conservative judicial appointments will be harder to approve, and Bush can start looking for a publishing house for his memoirs.
I’d like to say a prayer for all of the newly elected lawmakers.
“St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and thou, O prince of the Heavenly host, by the power of God, thrust into Hell Satan and all the other demons who prowl about the world for the ruin of souls. Amen.”
Had we heeded our beloved Pope John Paul II, and urged the President not to invade Iraq, the Republicans would have held onto a large majority in both houses.
There’s really no way of knowing what would have been. This is a pretty strong statement to make definitively.
I just pray to God that He protects the President and Vice President from harm, lest the new Speaker take the helm.
I have not looked at many of the seat changes, but so far I notice that in most of those changes, those Dems kept the moonmaiden Leftism at home. Also note that in my state of Michigan that although Dems won (we have straight-party ticket voting, btw) meaning another term of Debbie Stabafetus, our proposal to ban affirmative action passed overwhelmingly. Also, I believe every proposal to limit gun ownership were defeated and several of those victorious dems are pro-life. So either they are faking being right-leaning, or they are actually starting to abandon the dorkier ideas that have kept them out of contro.
I have been looking for a definitive count, but early indications were that there were several pro-life candidates elected. Many of the democrats that won were more republican than the republicans, which I believe played at least somewhat of a role in their having been elected.
In either case, I certainly believe that this will make things far more favorable in ’08. The voice of the democratic party is now going to be Ms. Pelosi, which can do nothing but give the entire party an image in the eyes of your everyday, average joe that is extremely unfavorable. Those who comment on this blog may already be aware of the general pattern of thought in the party, whereas your everyday voter still sees the Democratic party as the party of FDR. This will go a very long way towards finally alerting the nation that this perception is no longer valid.
There’s really no way of knowing what would have been. This is a pretty strong statement to make definitively.
Fair enough. I’ve the need to vent some personal frustration.
I have two sets of Catholic friends, one group consists of typical cafeteria catholics who want doctrinal changes. You know the litany.
The other set or orthodox, but seem to side more with Protestant evangelicals on issues like the death penalty, invading Iraq, and care for the poor and marginalized.
This split drives me nuts.
There’s that old saying that says, “Keep one eye on the Bishop, and the other eye on the Pope, and when in doubt, keep both eyes on the Pope.”
Our Holy Father was trying to teach Catholics in America a lesson during the build up to the war, and I don’t think we listened. B16 is doing the same thing. The lesson is hard, and it goes against a lot of instincts.
For myself, I’m keeping both eyes on the Pope.
This was a sad day for Missouri.
The state elected a proabortion senator. Amended the Constitution to allow embryonic stem cell research. And we failed to raise taxes on cigarettes to fund healthcare.
If Hilary is elected in ’08 my family will move to Ukraine.
Pray for the conversion of the Democrats.
And the Republicans, while we’re at it.
I have been looking for a definitive count, but early indications were that there were several pro-life candidates elected. Many of the democrats that won were more republican than the republicans, which I believe played at least somewhat of a role in their having been elected.
Wow. It looks like we had the same idea 12 seconds apart. 🙂
The fact that there were ANY Deomcratic alternatives to Republicans, and there were, is the big news here. I have voted Republican (or thrid-party) for years not because I like them, but because the Democrats have been so insane for so long. If they allow even a few moderates (e.g., Casey in PA) to run, they can and will cut into what is actually very soft Republican support.
I would agree that there has indeed been a shift – the democrats I have seen have been more likely to be fiscally conservative, socially moderate, and even pro-life. In my own district, the republican incumbent who is not pro-life, defeated the Catholic, pro-life Democratic.
It will be an interesting two years for the democratic whip, as it seems the “blue dogs” (http://www.bluedogdems.com/) have made solid gains. While the older dems in the house and senate are from the Great Society, the new dems are not, by and large.
I just pray to God that He protects the President and Vice President from harm, lest the new Speaker take the helm.
God save the country should the 3rd person in line end up taking over (God forbid).
And what’s the deal with that statement (and I’m open to correction since I was changing the channels quite frequently between one network to the next watching the inevitable occur) that was being made over at the FOX network by one of their guests that because the current administration was running on “theology” and not good democracy, that we’re suffering all the problems that we are today?!?!
Is that to say that if we let the country have its way with pro-choice (pro-murder of innocents), homosexual unions, etc., that our country would have been in a better state than it is now?
GOP certainly screwed up as far as IRAQ is concerned and a few other matters (the horrible scandals that were observed amongst members of the party certainly exacerbated the entire affair), but there were redeemable aspects such as their stance on pro-life.
And what’s the deal with that statement (and I’m open to correction since I was changing the channels quite frequently between one network to the next watching the inevitable occur) that was being made over at the FOX network by one of their guests that because the current administration was running on “theology” and not good democracy, that we’re suffering all the problems that we are today?!?!
Typical media brain fart. Ignore it. As Bush and the Republicans did much to kill themselves, I think they should pray thanksgiving that they only lost the house.
“I think they should pray thanksgiving that they only lost the house.”
So far.
So far.
True.
I also noticed how many pro-life Democrats there were elected. This gives me great hope – maybe, just maybe the Democrats are starting to get it! It remains to be seen if these Democrats can remain true to their convictions. The Democrats have a tendency to “grow” their members away from their pro-life convictions for the sake of power. And the Democrats’ leadership is oh so very liberal – Pelosi as speaker is truly frightening.
But she doesn’t have a Democrat as president so things might not be too bad, especially if the Republicans can hold onto either Virginia or Montana. And if these new Democrats do “grow” away from their constituents, it will be even more in your face that this is no longer the Democratic party people think it is (as someone above mentioned) which can only help Republicans in ’08.
I’m utterly depressed. I’m offering my despair up for the good of our country. We’re going to need it. I’m sure glad our Catholic bishops spent so much time supporting pro-life issues last year and didn’t waste their teaching authority on matters of prudential judgemnt like immigration…
What a disaster for the prolife movement.
What a disaster for our country.
Alot of the blame must go to President Bush’s hapless leadership in everything from spending to immigration to inarticulateness on the war on radical islam.
Typical media brain fart. Ignore it. As Bush and the Republicans did much to kill themselves, I think they should pray thanksgiving that they only lost the house.
You’re telling me!
By the way:
Pelosi: ‘Democrats Will Create the Most Open and Honest Government in History’
I guess the nation is now saved! Pardon the sarcasm, but just how could anyone promise this? I’m open to see what the Dems will do to improve the state of the nation.
But talk about promising something you can’t deliver! It’s almost the equivalent of promising world peace!
“Democrats Will Create the Most Open and Honest Government in History”
Her first lie. Might as well make it a whopper.
Curious, that’s described my morning also – utterly depressed. NY will have a governor who has actively gone after pro-life groups, orthodox Catholics and is pro-homosexual anything.
It was good to read Tim’s comment that the next two years may make it better for conservatives in 2008.
Did Pelosi really say that? Did she preface it with the phrase “read my lips,” perhaps? The potential for a huge fall is so very inherent in a statement of such hubris. I’ve known her to make silly statements in the past but this is simply laugh-out-loud stupid. “It’s going to be a new day,” indeed!
“I also noticed how many pro-life Democrats there were elected.”
Please pardon my cynicism but . . . are they really? How much say will they really have with Pelosi, abortion supporter extraordinaire, as [SHUDDER] speaker? Seems to me, they’ll be marginalized & silenced by Those With Real Power(TM) in the Democratic party. We’ll see. I hope & pray the optimism of others will win out!
“I think they should pray thanksgiving that they only lost the house.”
So far.
11/8, 8:44 am
The Senate races in Virginia and Montana are still close, but with 99% of the ballots counted, it would take a minor miracle for Republicans to prevail in either state.
” …it would take a minor miracle for Republicans to prevail in either state.”
Eek.
“Democrats Will Create the Most Open and Honest Government in History” –Nancy Pelosi
Sound familiar?
In November 1992, Bill Clinton pledged that his administration would be the “most ethical in the history of the republic.”
Hmmm.
italics off
Did it work?
italics off
Testing…
Fixed it…
Here’s the problem folks: Faithful Christians are in enemy territory. The world will hate us as Christ stated. Don’t expect to get our important issues passed as law. We should aim for it, but you shouldn’t be surprised. Christians will lose this war on Earth until Jesus Christ returns.
Sorry all…
I guess my depression over recent events spread to the blog. Not to mention, it wasn’t really helpful to hear Pelosi promise me (and I apologize again for my sarcasm when I had posted the following, but I hope you’ll understand) “the Most Open and Honest Government in History”.
Now, with the Senate at the verge of also being taken over, if I can at all inject even the slightest hint of levity at this point, it seems like The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers except without the actual reinforcements coming in to save the day!
DeLay, Cunningham, Foley, and Weldon- the stink from these three overwhelmed the Respect-for-Life Movement!!!
And I leave as per Rule 1.
Oops, make that “the stink from these four”.
Prolife Democrates are the same as Pro-Life Republicans. You can count on them to do nothing to promote the Pro-Abortion agenda but they will also do precious little to appose it.
Prolife Democrates are the same as Pro-Life Republicans. You can count on them to do nothing to promote the Pro-Abortion agenda but they will also do precious little to appose it.
I beg to differ.
It got pro-life Justices on the bench, didn’t it?
I just pray that our men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan are not left turning in the wind for the next two years while the Republican Administration and the Democrat Congress lock horns.
DeLay, Cunningham, Foley, and Weldon- the stink from these three overwhelmed the Respect-for-Life Movement!!!
Realist,
You know what, Brutha; we finally agree on something! ;^)
Prediction:
Now that Rummy has quit… If the Dems take the Senate as well, I predict Bush ’43 will be impeached.
A few generations ago, we discovered that we could vote ourselves rich. Now we are told that we can vote ourselves immortal, too.
Draw your own conclusions about the next dozen elections.
Well folks, one bit of good news from here in the Old Dominion – The marriage amendment passed.
Isn’t it just sad that we are talking about “who won”? Our representative system is broken in a major way such that the parties are more concerned about winning and power grabs than doing what is right for their constituents & the country. We need to clean house on both sides and prohibit re-elections for all government offices (who would vote that one in?!). There are very few politicians that we can trust to do anything but serve themselves.
Isn’t it just sad that we are talking about “who won”?
Isn’t it sad that instead of being provided with a choice between a good and bad candidate, you’re often left with a choice between bad and least bad?
Instead of spending all of our time down in the dumps over this, it would be far more valuable to spend our time and emotions praying for the United States Supreme court to make the right decisions in the abortion case they are hearing today.
I think more often than not we get what we deserve. Have we really put in the time in prayer praying for these elections that we should have? I highly doubt it, and I highly doubt that we are putting the time in that we should be for this Supreme Court case. Instead of looking at everything that is wrong with the world, we should be looking at it as St. Francis did when he responded to the question of what is most wrong in the world by saying that he himself was. Let’s sanctify ourselves so that we can sanctify society, and let’s pray for this decision so that we can make a difference.
Now that Rummy has quit… If the Dems take the Senate as well, I predict Bush ’43 will be impeached.
The Senate has nothing to do with filing articles of impeachment. If you mean “removed from office,” then I ask you to list the sixteen Republican senators you think will join the Democrats and vote to remove him. It takes two-thirds to convict in the Senate.
I beg to differ.
It got pro-life Justices on the bench, didn’t it?
If you’re referring to Roberts and Alito, I think not-known-to-be-pro-abortion justices is a better description.
BREAKING NEWS from the Truth Laid Bear:
Montana Senate: Nobody noticed while Rumsfeld was being replaced, but it looks like Montana is done. CNN and MSNBC have both called it for Tester; Fox hasn’t yet but they show 100% of precincts reporting with Tester ahead by just over 3,000 votes. I think we’ll see a recount on this one, but for now — it belongs to Tester.
I think the previous post (Americans are from Mars, Romans from Venus) is apropos for this discussion. Let’s think in a longer time frame and have more babies and bring them up with Orthodox ideals.
I believe we’ve reached an unprecedented point of decline in our society where we’ve really become a post-Christian nation. We have built a tower of babel – abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cells, human/animal cloning, normalization of same sex marriage – and created a society which is completely unhinged from the moral law of God.
I’ve given up on a political solution and believe there are spiritual signs that – save for massive conversion – we are on the bring of judgement and disaster. At this point, the most effective action is prayer, conversion, and the spread of the Gospel. Pray for the truimph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.
I’m not grandstanding or hobby-horsing. Just saying that, as a former political junkie, it is now too late for political solutions. We are at the 11th hour.
Corrupt, incompetent Republicans lose and all the sudden its the end of the world. I’m bummed too, but we need to really get a grip here.
I was with Tim J (“strangely unmoved”) way up there until I saw Joy’s post re: President Pelosi.
The really depressing result was the MO cloning referendum. It wasn’t even imposed judicial activism. People of Missouri actually want to pay tax money to make children for the express purpose of killing them, so they can produce stem cells which don’t cure diseases but instead cause tumors, instead of using stem cells made from umbilical cords, fat, and snot (is that what is meant by “nasal tissue”?) that actually cure diseases. Go figure.
Let’s think in a longer time frame and have more babies and bring them up with Orthodox ideals.
The only problem with that is if an environment is created (and this may, to some, appear to be a pessimistic point-of-view, but it has roots in reality) where liberals have control over what values get promoted and what not, what are the chances that the children we raise will even turn out Orthodox given the overwhelming contradictory messages thrown at them by an environment created by liberals through their influence in government that fosters primarily liberal values such as pro-abortion, pro-homosexual anything, etc.
Already, in a particular state, our children can have abortions without even needing to notify their parents! It’s almost a “license-to-abort”, if you will, for teens. This is especially bad since these teens might not be in the right state of mind at the time of such incidents to realize the wrong that they’re doing. At least, with notification to the parents (which the Prop here intended to bring about, but, unfortunately, lost), the parents could have helped to counsel their kids through these kinds of crisis.
However, you know what the commercial said that went against this Prop: We’ve got to “think outside our bubble”!
“I’ve given up on a political solution and believe there are spiritual signs that – save for massive conversion – we are on the bring of judgement and disaster. At this point, the most effective action is prayer, conversion, and the spread of the Gospel. Pray for the truimph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.”
Amen, Mark…well said!
I have been trying to tally up the Democratic pro life victories. So far, I have been able to come up with this:
*Senate*
Bob Casey, Pennsylvania – New
Ben Nelson, Nebraska – Re-elected
*House*
Charlie Wilson, Ohio – New
Heath Shuler, North Carolina – New
Brad Ellsworth, Indiana – New
Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania – New
*Governor*
Bil Ritter, Colorado – New
“I predict Bush ’43 will be impeached.”
I don’t think there’s a chance of that. On what charges?
Corrupt, incompetent Republicans lose and all the sudden its the end of the world.
You’ve a point.
But, as I mentioned, it’s the choice between bad and least bad.
With the morals in society being as bad as it already is now; how much more so once the liberals get the chance to work its magic?
I personally believe that people are reacting a bit too harshly. We have come to equate the democratic party with pro-abortion, anti-family , far left ideals. This is understandable, but when examining those democrats who actually did win this time around, there are a very substantial number of them who do not fall into that category. Most are moderate with a number even being conservative.
In addition to the pro-life victories (albeit contrasted with the defeat in South Dakota), 7 of 8 states to have amendments banning gay marriage passed them.
“what are the chances that the children we raise will even turn out Orthodox given the overwhelming contradictory messages thrown at them”
Easu, their chances are probably better than those of the early Christians.
I don’t think there’s a chance of that.
I don’t think so either. It would require every dem to be in lock-step, and I don’t see that.
Come on, guys. This is not the time for depression and giving up. Not even time for indulging the “oh, woe is us!” mentality for a little. You will unwittingly spread it to others.
What it is time for is prayer, for the conservative democrats to stand up for their beliefs and realize that they will soon become the leaders, and for the republicans to realize they lost because they listened to Rove and not to conservative America.
In two years we’ll have another shot. Just two years. By all means, spread the Gospel and pray for the triumph of the Immaculate Heart. But don’t taint that message with “we’re on the brink”, “in the 11th hour”, or any other apocalyptic nonsense that turns people away. God made us to be hopeful, not despairing. The gospel itself tells us Jesus said worry gets you nowhere. And if the apocalypse comes soon and I’m wrong, well, I’ll be happy to admit it then.
But let’s not go counting our disease-ridden, famine-starved, liberal-death-squad chickens before they hatch. Let’s give people hope instead of fear and resignation.
No offense intended. I’m just tired of people giving up.
My prediction was just that a prediction, like the weatherman does. Whether or not it happens is not up to me. My liberal parents agree with me, in that they think Bush will be driven out of office. I believe that the idea of this topic was for pretty much anything related to the election, so my prediction is as good as anyone else’s.
Viva Cristo Rey!
The South Dakota abortion law defeat, while depressing, actually has a silver lining. That is: 45% of South Dakota residents agreed that abortion should be banned except to save the mother’s life. Really, that’s great!
The dirty little secret that the pro-abort movement doesn’t want anyone to know is that if you gave Americans a sliding scale on abortion and asked them which abortions they wanted kept legal…
1) To save the mother’s life only
2) #1 + plus cases of rape and incest
3) #2 + 1st trimester
4) All abortions should be legal
…you’d have a clear majority of Americans (I’m thinking 60%, but definitely above 50%) who would fall into categories 1 & 2.
Let me say it again:
MOST AMERICANS WOULD BAN ABORTION EXCEPT TO SAVE THE MOTHER’S LIFE OR IN CASES OF RAPE AND INCEST!! That would ban about 98% of all abortions.
It’s not perfect, abortion in cases of rape and incest are still just as wrong, but I’d jump on a law like that in a heartbeat. For now, I think we need to give up on banning abortion in cases of rape and incest and craft laws that could potentially save tons of lives. If the South Dakota abortion law had allowed those abortions to remain legal, it would have passed very easily.
Thanks for the reminder, Sifu.
Mt 6:34 Be not therefore solicitous for to morrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.
I guess we’ll wait for “The Day After Tommorrow”…
Sorry… with all the Apocalypse referenced above, the extremely weird hot weather we’re having in the middle of November, and Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”, I couldn’t help it! ;^)
Shane, not sure of the other politicians that you mentioned, but dispite Ritter’s use of the “pro-life” label, he ain’t. Take a look at his website and tell me how his public policies are any different from a pro-abortion politician.
He’s a POB Catholic. Personal opposition is meaningless to dead babies. Using his logic I could say I’m personally opposed to the murder of Democrats, but recognize that there are others who disagree with me on this issue. If murdering Democrats were legal, I could say that it’s not part of my agenda to change these laws, but would like to increase mental health education to reduce the number of those who cannot control their rage. This is the muddled thinking of our new governor in Colorado.
He doesn’t say why he’s personally opposed, but it cannot be because he thinks the murder of unborn children is unjust. I can only pray that his eyes be opened.
Sifu, you are correct. I suggested earlier that it would be better to devote our energies to praying for the success of the ban on partial borth abortions in the Supreme Court, but it seems to have gone unnoticed or ignored.
Would The Blessed Virgin, St. Francis, St. Thomas More, or any of the other saints have despaired in such a time, or would they have proven to all that they had trust in God?
I never doubted that some of the candidates that I mentioned may be strong on their pro-life stance whereas others would be more wishy-washy. I was just trying to get a general count; I did not take the effort of digging too deeply.
That being said, democrats for life, where I obtained the list of candidates, did indicate that there was some question over Mr. Ritter’s stance, while they showed no noticable concern over the other candidates.
I believe that the idea of this topic was for pretty much anything related to the election, so my prediction is as good as anyone else’s.
Who suggested otherwise?
My prediction was just that a prediction, like the weatherman does. Whether or not it happens is not up to me. My liberal parents agree with me, in that they think Bush will be driven out of office. I believe that the idea of this topic was for pretty much anything related to the election, so my prediction is as good as anyone else’s.
The only way it happens is if the overwhelming majority of Americans want him impeached. Otherwise there’s not a snowball’s chance of hell that the Democrats get 67 votes in the Senate to convict with only 51 senators of their own. It’s just not going to happen.
“It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged.”
G.K. Chesterton
The possibility of an impeachment is extremely unlikely.
Shane,
Prayer is indeed powerful.
However, in the same vein as in James Chapter Two, you cannot leave it all to prayer such as when you see someone poor on the street without any food whatsover and you just say to them that you’ll pray for them. You wanting to pray for them is great, but it would also be necessary to actual provide for the physical needs of that person suffering.
Now, in terms of Sir Thomas More and St. Francis and the Blessed Virgin, they indeed committed their lives to prayer, but, at the same time, their being agents for good performing certain physical actions for the promotion of the Kingdom of God on earth was indeed a necessity as well.
As far as our government is concerned, certainly, I doubt you’ll find an actual agent of good; however, there are those agents that are necessary that we need to install in office, that we need in place, in order to advance certain causes for good such as pro-life issues and the sort and not leave it simply to prayer alone.
Corrigendum:
You wanting to pray for them is great, but it would also be necessary to actually provide for the physical needs of that person suffering.
Shane said “Would The Blessed Virgin, St. Francis, St. Thomas More, or any of the other saints have despaired in such a time, or would they have proven to all that they had trust in God?”
OK Shane, we get your point. I was not suggesting despair, however, as a course of action. Trust in God does not mean ignoring the prophetic sense of the faith.
Our choices are to be engaged in the political process or focus our energies on the kingdom of God. It doesn’t really matter whether Hillary Clinton or John McCain or Rudy Guillani or Jeb Bush gets elected in two years! Our country needs conversion.
My sense is we are in a time frame similar to the Christians in Palestine between the Ascension and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. It doesn’t much matter which party is in power – they are equally corrupt and they are both going down!
I am not talking apocalypse but can’t you read the “signs of the times”?
Shane,
They’re (Dems) are furious about Clinton’s black mark. They’ll want to do it to Bush. It won’t matter what the trumped=up charge is, after all, they thought Clinton’s impeachment offense was non-impeachable. The media have been auditioning “impeachable” offenses for Bush every few weeks. They didn’t stick, but it won’t matter. I think impeachment is very likely, although conviction in the Senate may be harder.
Esau, I never criticized the desire to take meaningful action in addition to prayer. I criticized the practice of wasting energy despairing and being woeful when that energy would much better be spent on prayer, particularly an issue that needs prayer *now*.
As others pointed out, the real tragedy is the number of measures against life that did not pass.
The pro-life movement is this country wounded back 10 years yesterday. Given that the opportunities for killing the unborn have been increased, that’s probably a death-toll of about 20 million souls.
God, deliver us from evil.
Ugh! I meant in my previous post that “the real tragedy is the number of measures against life that did pass.”
Conviction in the senate would be impossible, and impeachment is extremely unlikely given those democratic candidates who actually won. Even the mainstream media is acknowledging this.
And that the margins in bans against gay “marriage” are rather narrow and even didn’t pass in one state. 🙁
I (for one) would love to see the Democrats try to impeach Bush. The implications for the 2010 election cycle would be enormous.
If Hilary is elected in ’08 my family will move to Ukraine.
Heh. Is that the same kind of promise that Mr. Baldwin (Alec?) made when he promised to move if GWB was elected?
I believe we’ve reached an unprecedented point of decline in our society where we’ve really become a post-Christian nation.
Double heh. It may be unprecedented, but we are nowhere near the bottom of the decline.
The percentages for the various gay marriage bans were as follows:
Idaho – 63% – 37%
South Carolina – 78% – 22%
South Dakota – 52% – 48%
Tennessee – 81% – 19%
Virginia – 57% – 43%
Wisconsin – 59% – 41%
The key point to note in all of this is that in Idaho, South Dakota, and Virginia, and Wisconsion, the amendments on the ballot also rejected domestic partnerships. In Colorado, no ban was voted on, but the recognition of domestic partnerships was rejected 53% – 47%. The gay marriage issue was an overwhelming success insofar as that it won by tremendous margins when presented alone, and that even when presented with the rejection of civil unions the measures still passed.
I don’t think anyone has to worry about Hillary. She is all but unelectable. Aside from the fact that she is far too polarizing a candidate to win a national election is the fact that a poll taken this year reports 48% of Americans saying that they would never vote for her under any circumstances. Political junkies will tell you that even at 2 years out, this all but guarantees she has no chance whatsoever of winning nationally.
And that the margins in bans against gay “marriage” are rather narrow and even didn’t pass in one state. 🙁
Yes, but it was a Democratic year and the amendment in Arizona that failed had not only a ban on civil unions but also “domestic partnerships” tacked on. The opponents successfully made the case that it would affect shacking-up straight couples too.
Mark said:
“Our choices are to be engaged in the political process or focus our energies on the kingdom of God.”
See, this is the false comparison. You are already convinced, or perhaps were before, that we are on the road to perdition. Therefore, you see signs everywhere of what you expect. We don’t have to make this choice. The church never says, anywhere, “be political or be Godly”. God wants us to focus on many, many things. Otherwise we’d all be cloistered.
Mark said:
“My sense is we are in a time frame similar to the Christians in Palestine between the Ascension and the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. It doesn’t much matter which party is in power – they are equally corrupt and they are both going down!”
Yes, that is the sense I would expect you to have, because like you those Christians believed the end was coming, and soon. When it didn’t, they started to pay attention to who was in power. Read about the constant politicking by good church folk that surrounded Constantine. Makes today’s politics look like a high school debate.
Mark said:
“I am not talking apocalypse but can’t you read the “signs of the times”?”
I don’t doubt your honesty and sincerity, but in my experience the people who think they can read the signs of the times, and advocate others to do so while claiming society is at the end of its rope, don’t know what they’re saying. I know this, because people have been saying that stuff for centuries, and yet we’re all still here.
I suppose eventually they’ll be right, but only in the way that a broken clock is right twice a day.
Peace. I suggest we stop this type of discussion now.
I know this, because people have been saying that stuff for centuries, and yet we’re all still here.
Centuries? They’ve been saying it for millenia!
Faithful Catholics need to pick up the slack now more than ever. Go to daily Mass more often, make holy hours, pray the rosary, say the chaplet of Divine Mercy. Pray in the in-between moments, and above all through our actions.
And never forget that Hope is the divine virtue, not doubt! Perserverance can lead us to very surprising moments in history. The Apostles never expected to see Paul join their ranks. God reaps where he does not sow. No one is beyond the grasp of the Holy Spirit. (I live in Iowa and I try to think this way about Tom Harkin – hehehe)
Dom Bettinelli has a good take on this and expresses it better than me (see his “Silver Lining” post) but it comes down to this election may be just the right setup for 2008. The Ds just have no policy or program and are not capable of governing. Their House caucus will look like a WWE Smackdown. The Rs will hit the 2008 campaign trail asking the question “Is this really what you wanted.”
Impeachment has been mentioned by some in the current House and I would not rule it out, but it will be even more of a circus than Clinton’s. Pelosi’s first test will be to see if she can is big enough to sit on her wacko margins and stop them from thying it.
I know this, because people have been saying that stuff for centuries, and yet we’re all still here.
Centuries? They’ve been saying it for millenia!
That’s probably right… when was there ever a moment in time when someone out there was claiming: “It’s the end of the world!”
I saw no shortage of this at the turn of the century… Remember Y2K????
We have to have checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches. One party in power of both is just too prone to corruption. There should be balance to check each others extreme elements.
Corrigendum:
…when was there ever a moment in time when someone out there wasn’t claiming: “It’s the end of the world!”
There’s always somebody be he a secular nut or a religious fruitcake!
Sifu sez: “like you those Christians believed the end was coming, and soon. When it didn’t, they started to pay attention to who was in power.”
My point is the end did come for non-believers in the 1st century when the Temple was destroyed and Jerusalem fell. It was not the end of “the world” but it was the end of “their world”. Our Lady of Fatima in 1917 warned the world was on a perilous course and predicted “another and more terrible war will begin during the pontificate of Pius XI”.
In the same way, 9/11 and the destruction of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina were a wake-up call. Indeed Sifu, I agree it is time for us to pay attention to who “really” is in power!
This Saturday November 11, the papal nuncio to the U.S., Archbishop Pietro Sambi, will be officiating a Mass for the renewal of the country’s consecration to Our Lady as the Immaculate Conception (at the Basillica of the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, DC). I pray that this will not be mere symbolism but that Americans will again turn to heaven for answers instead of corrupt politicians!
Impeachment has been mentioned by some in the current House and I would not rule it out…
At least, the people at FOX last night (their guests at the time I flipped onto the FOX news channel from CNN) seemed pretty confident that there would be. They mentioned that there’d at least be an investigation whether to impeach Bush.
I hope you won’t mind a shameless, self-serving link, Jimmy.
The Election’s Message to Islamofascists and Illegal Immigrants?
John Hawkins of RWN has a great summary article at Human Events:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=17943
(quick Q) … what are the before and after tags I need to use in a comment post in order to turn a web address into a link (like ELC did, above)?
Since we’re handing out links to our favorite post-election analysis, I’ll post mine (then I’ll shut up):
http://www.spiritdaily.com/cultureofdeath.htm
I was burned back in the 92 by placing my hopes in the political process. You tend to put up blinders to the flaws of the Republicans and the two party system cause “we’ve just got to get conservative judges!”.
Truthfully, a lot of these Republicans were phony weasels and yesterday, they collected the just wages of cowards.
I’m actually serious about moving if Hilary is elected though, it’s not an “idle threat” like Alec Baldwin’s. My wife has already agreed.
Slava Isusu Krystu!
Unfortunately Caine, a courageous man like Rick Santorum got to collect thoses wages.
Correction,
We may also move to Ireland.
The correct spelling should have been:
Slava Isusu Khrystu!
Now, here is an interesting thing; Especially if the Dems take the senate, you will hear not a peep, not a whisper, about election fraud, hanging chads or voter intimidation.
The Republicans will not bring it up because, in spite of their faults, they will take defeat like grown-ups.
The Dem leadership will not bring it up because THEY DON’T CARE.
The integrity of the electoral process means NOTHING to them, unless the issue can be used to score political points. They were all set to scream bloody murder about vote fraud IF THEY LOST, but if they come out on top, well… why rock the boat?
They manufactured claims of vote fraud in 2000 and ’04, and would have again this year if things hadn’t gone their way.
So, have all the problems with the system been fixed? Are Dems quite sanguine about the accuracy of the vote counts? If so, will they promise not to hallucinate more fraud if they lose on ’08?
Shane,
I hope your optimism is well placed but I’m not convinced. All it would take for Hillary to win is a lackluster, inarticulate Repub candidate, like she ran against in her original Senatorial campaign. And the Repubs only seem to be able to find these types of candidates.
As to impeachment, I can only go by what the soon-to-be committee chairmen were discussing. Unless you think we shouldn’t take the Dems at their word?
Tim,
Didn’t you hear, brutha???
Pelosi: ‘Democrats Will Create the Most Open and Honest Government in History’
Why and how do I know, because Nancy Pelosi tells me so!
Unfortunately Caine, a courageous man like Rick Santorum got to collect thoses wages.
There were many decent Republicans that lost their seats — as even the folks at CNN discussed last night.
All it would take for Hillary to win is a lackluster, inarticulate Repub candidate, like she ran against in her original Senatorial campaign. And the Repubs only seem to be able to find these types of candidates.
New York is not the whole country.
New York is not the whole country
Thank God for that. (coming from a very blue area in upstate NY)
She got 67 percent and her opponent 31 percent, quite telling since she vastly outspent him and the Democratic base in NYC.
Jimmy,
Not much of a food fight.
There have always been grounds for despair by any standards except heavenly. These just look big to us because they’re ours.
Oh David?
cream pie goes flying through the air and lands *splat* in his face
We were just trying to get your guard down
Here’s part of the reason for the thrashing:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/29/AR2006102900300.html
I should also add that things aren’t (quite) as bad as they look. Moderate Republicans were replaced with conservative and moderate democrats. Heck, plenty of democrats have been forced to at least pretend to be pro-life and pro-family, which is more than they’ve done in the past.
I have been a frustrated pro-life Democrat for a number of years. It is encouraging to see movement in the party to the right, but I am still worried about the far left leadership. With the election to the Dems, it will be interesting to see how the Supreme Court rules on d and x abortions. Pray that Justice Kennedy has courage and conviction!
David B,
Here comes “Stomach in a Bowl!”
The percentages for the various gay marriage bans were as follows:
Idaho – 63% – 37%
South Carolina – 78% – 22%
South Dakota – 52% – 48%
Tennessee – 81% – 19%
Virginia – 57% – 43%
Wisconsin – 59% – 41%
Colorado also had Amendment 43 which defined marriage as being between 1 man and 1 woman, and Referendum I which would have created “domestic partnerships” for gay couples equal to marriage.
Amendment 43 passed 56% to 44%
Referendum I failed 47% to 53%
I have been a frustrated pro-life Democrat for a number of years.
I believe it’s just like what Fr. Groeschel said in one of the episodes on Sunday Night Live — that it’s not the Democrat turned Republican that betrayed the party; it’s actually the party itelf!
Like Someone here said: …And the Democrats’ leadership is oh so very liberal – Pelosi as speaker is truly frightening.
Corrigendum:
…it’s actually the party itself!
(sorry… had something in my teeth!)
The worst thing about the Missouri stem-cell bill: Don’t the people of that state understand what they did? They AMENDED THEIR CONSTITUTION FOR A BUSINESS INTEREST. I read that 95% of the money came from ONE wealthy couple who own a medical research lab (I have forgotten the name – Stoler or something).
Imagine if Missouri was told that Monsanto wanted to put somehting into their Constitution guaranteeing NO regulations on genetically engineered seed? They ‘d say no because it owuld be crystal clear that it was self-serving.
The Stolers (or whatever their name is) want the freedom to create their own embryonic life TO MAKE A PRODUCT THEY CAN PATENT.
It has NOTHING to do with cures – if they wanted cures they would pour their money into adult stem cell research.
Michael J. Fox should be ashamed of himself. He was nothing but a paid shill.
PS – and on Monsanto, add “and they wanted it GUARANTEED that state taxpayers would pay for their research!”
I could cry, but I think I’ll redouble my prayers.
The worst thing about the Missouri stem-cell bill: Don’t the people of that state understand what they did? They AMENDED THEIR CONSTITUTION FOR A BUSINESS INTEREST. I read that 95% of the money came from ONE wealthy couple who own a medical research lab (I have forgotten the name – Stoler or something).
No, they do not understand. The 30 million plus dollar propaganda campaign only talked about the life-saving cures part they were being promised. The ballot language was actually innocuous, deliberately so. One could vote for it and believe you were voting to outlaw human cloning. And the name is STOWERS. It was legally changed from Sauron several years ago.
Thanks for the spelling, Michael. And of course you are right – the language was totally deceptive.
But my question still stands. No matter WHAT people were voting for, or thought they were voting for, since when do we enshrine market protection of this type into a constitutional amendment? The analysis I read says that taxpayers will HAVE to fund this research – there can be no laws or referendum (referenda?) or anything else, because it would be unconstitutional!
So again – it’s astonishing that a single industry (biotech) and worse, a single business
(Stowers Research) could write this into the constitution. It runs rough-shod over democracy. It is as if a corporation that made cigarettes made it UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the state legislature or a citizen initiative to make any laws restricting or regulating cigarettes, on the grounds that the federal laws allow smoking!
Let us all remember that Speaker-To-Be Nancy Pelosi is Catholic! And let us pray that Archbishop George H. Niederauer of San Francisco will one day do his job and hold her responsible for her actions.
Let us all remember that Speaker-To-Be Nancy Pelosi is Catholic! And let us pray that Archbishop George H. Niederauer of San Francisco will one day do his job and hold her responsible for her actions.
I wouldn’t hold my breath. He’d probably have to refuse communion to every single Catholic politician in his diocese, which there is no evidence that he’s remotely inclined to do. How any penalty he could impose would affect Pelosi in Washington I have no idea. Perhaps Ed Peters could weigh in on that one.
“He’d probably have to refuse communion to every single Catholic politician in his diocese”
HAHA! Every politician? Try every single person! Last I heard there is approximately 4 faithful Catholics in San Fran.
3 and 1/2. One of them is waffling.
Let us all remember that Speaker-To-Be Nancy Pelosi is Catholic!
So is Kennedy and Kerry, what good do they do as fellow Catholics???
So is a large part of New Mexico…and its not just Santa Fe county that’s blue in this state. (Though we now have Catholic radio..I hope that changes some things.)
Yesterday’s news segment was terribly disheartening which featured the abortion protests revolving around the supreme court case in progress.
If it wasn’t bad enough that the Pro-Choice movement advocates the countless murders of innocents, in addition to this, their devious manipulation of twisting the young people’s minds by the use of euphemism to disguise this heinous act (such as using the label “pro-choice” instead of the more apt label “pro-murder”) has become for them an effective weapon, which was made evident in the news clip I caught last nite.
Where apparently the Priests-for-Life protestors were, of course, there too were the Pro-Choicers.
Yet, what was sad to see was a young Pro-Choice person (she seemed as if in her teens) telling the Pro-Life folks in a pleading voice that “We are not for Abortion, we are for choice!” — almost as if she was trying to convince herself of this as well
Clearly, the Pro-Choice folks have successfully done its terrible work of not only promoting the murder of the unborn but also by underhandedly brainwashing some of our young, convincing them that it’s not murder that they’re advocating, it’s actually the choice of the individual!
But my question still stands. No matter WHAT people were voting for, or thought they were voting for, since when do we enshrine market protection of this type into a constitutional amendment?
Outside of libetarian circles, who actually believes that government should not support industry in the U.S. anymore? The Republican party has for the past six years been steering as much government money as possible to their private industry friends. That is one of many conservative principles that seems to have been forgotten by the right. Pro-business Republicans also supported this measure, including the ‘pro-life’ Republican governor of Missouri.
I have to admit, when the results started pouring in my first reaction was subdued fear of what the “angry” Democrats are going to do to try to make up for all the ground they’ve lost in the past six years. But then I looked up at the crucifix on the wall and said, “I know I don’t understand what’s going on, but I know you know what you’re doing and that our ways are not your ways; Thy will be done”. Ever since then it’s been easier to deal with – we cannot go back, we can only go forward always looking to the Lord for guidance.
I think some of you are finally starting to see why democracy doesn’t work. Rome was a Republic just like ours in the beginning.
I think some of you are finally starting to see why democracy doesn’t work. Rome was a Republic just like ours in the beginning.
What would you suggest, Communism?
Democracy might have its quirks, but it’s the best type of government we have in our world at the moment!
Dr. Eric and Mary,
Thanks for the laugh. I needed it.
Esau,
Aristotle broke down governments into the 3 best and the 3 worst. The best of the best is a monarchy, then an aristocracy, then a polity (think America during WWII and after 911.)
A democracy is the best of the worst types of government, which is what we have now, then an oligarchy, then the worst of the worst is a tyranny.
So I’d suggest a Holy King like Sts. Louis, Henry, Stephen, and the Blessed Holy Roman Emperor Karl.
So I’d suggest a Holy King like Sts. Louis, Henry, Stephen, and the Blessed Holy Roman Emperor Karl.
Ahhh… yes!
Until a corrupt power takes on those reins —
Absolute power corrupts absolutely!
Kind of reminds me of these folks who were under a corrupt king at one time or another in history, did something having to do with ‘tea’, and poof — a revolution… (well, there’s more to it than that but you get the idea!) ;^)
Absolute power corrupts absolutely!
We already have that. Witness the Republican party.
Kings can have, and historically have had, limited powers. At least they have a connection to the land and people that engenders a greater sense of responsibility than we typically see in the bands of thieves we elect every two years.
Oh come on, raising the minimum wage is certainly a good thing as is taxing the very wealthy (top 5%) rather then runing up more debt. As to abortion, it is not going to stop until a large portion of the American people want it to stop and amend the constitution.
Esau,
If absolute power corrupts absolutely, then the pope must be the most corrupt person on the planet and… Jack Chick is right. Your logic is faulty.
We’ve had plenty of Holy Kings and Queens but no holy presidents. Not even JFK.
I agree with Aristotle– if you give one person absolute power, then the quality of your government is going to vary directly with the quality of that person. That means you will sometimes have a really good (like heavenly good) government, and sometimes you’ll have a really bad (like hellishly bad) government. The problem is that the good governments often sacrifice their own power for the good of the people, and the bad governments sacrifice the good of the people for their own continuation in power– with the result that you get perhaps more bad government than good government.
The only way around this is to establish some reliable mechanism for vetting candidates for absolute power. The Church’s mechanism in modern times has been good to phenomenal, but in past ages it’s been pretty abysymal.
All told, in situations where the Holy Spirit is not guaranteeing infallibility I think I’d prefer to take my lumps with either mildly competent government (i.e., a polity) or a mediocre one (i.e., a democracy).
That said, in the modern U.S. we have elements of oligarchy– the judiciary! Hopefully somday they’ll return to being the aristocracy they’re supposed to be.
Esau,
If absolute power corrupts absolutely, then the pope must be the most corrupt person on the planet and… Jack Chick is right. Your logic is faulty.
We’ve had plenty of Holy Kings and Queens but no holy presidents. Not even JFK.
Did you not propose in your post: …best of the best is a monarchy…
(that is, that the best form of government that we should have is a monarchy???)
Thus, I had cited the quote that absolute power corrupts absolutely!
Why? Well, I hope that’s rather obvious to you since the history of humanity is filled with such examples. If not, let me just say then that should a corrupt individual were to occupy that seat of power, well… you fill in the blanks.
By the way, your statement: the pope must be the most corrupt person on the planet
That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard mentioned since the Pope’s power is not absolute.
If you truly believe in this rubbish, then what kind of faith is that?
(that is, assuming you are truly a believer in Christ, the promises he made to us in the Scriptures and in the very Church he founded upon the Rock of Peter!)
Yet, if not, then, perhaps you just might be right: the Catholic Church is nothing more but a man-made instituton with a corrupt power-monger at the helm!
As for me, my faith resides not actually in the individuals within the Church itself but in Christ himself who established the Church, that came to have the title “Catholic”, that is, universal — that the Pope is nothing more than Servus Servorum Dei; and if he should be found to have any such power at all, it’s only that which finds its source in Christ the Lord!
Reddite ergo quae sunt Caesaris, Caesari, et quae sunt Dei, Deo!
Also, talk about a faulty logic — why do you even think America was born in the first place? Because it found the monarchy such an ideal form of government?
Even Great Britain doesn’t operate under a complete monarchy anymore and has Parliament!
Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant!
Actually, when America broke away Britain already had a parliament with very considerable power. The monarchy wasn’t absolute then either.
Bold off.
Actually, when America broke away Britain already had a parliament with very considerable power. The monarchy wasn’t absolute then either.
That’s the point.
By the way, your statement: the pope must be the most corrupt person on the planet
That’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard mentioned since the Pope’s power is not absolute.
Lord Acton penned his famous quote in the context of the debate over papal infallibility. Irony and ridiculousness seem to go together.
Lord Acton penned his famous quote in the context of the debate over papal infallibility. Irony and ridiculousness seem to go together.
Again, as I had mentioned, it depends on the person and where he puts his faith!
Again: As for me, my faith resides not actually in the individuals within the Church itself but in Christ himself who established the Church, that came to have the title “Catholic”, that is, universal — that the Pope is nothing more than Servus Servorum Dei; and if he should be found to have any such power at all, it’s only that which finds its source in Christ the Lord!