Democrat Accuses Republican in Missouri of 'Priest Shuffling'

Erick Erickson over at Red State posted today about some slimery over in Missouri.

I know, I know... I am supposed to be on hiatus, and here I am posting... about, of all things, Politics. There is a method to my madness. That being said here is part of the story:

This time, in Missouri, Democrat Russ Carnahan has coordinated a smear against his rival Ed Martin. Reboot Congress has details.

The attack alleges that Ed Martin was complicit in shuffling pedophile priests around St. Louis Catholic Churches while he served at the St. Louis Archdiocese

The people driving this campaign have been in the employ of Carnahan, which makes it more than a little futile for Carnahan to deny any connection. And that the Democrats have done this in multiple places in multiple campaigns tells you all you need to know about how they view Catholics.

 There is a whole list of places where Catholicism is coming into play during this election cycle. I wish I could speak to it more... I just dont have the time. That being said here in our fair state we currently have two sitting Senators, both of which are allegedly Catholic. Now I know that I should not be judging hearts or souls, and I am not. I am judging actions...

Read Archbishop Chaput's book: 'Render Unto Caesar' before you vote. Know your duty to God when it comes to politics.

Funny Friday: Obama v. Putin

Crap. We surrender.

Buy Ammo... really.

***UPDATE***:
Hey Alaskans... this would include lead fishing weights that are found not only in sinkers... but lots of fishing things. (Link)

I try and stay on topic on this blog as much as possible. That being Defense of the Catholic Faith. Obviously over the last few weeks a lot of focus has been placed on Alaska Catholic Life and even Alaskan Politics. For that I apologize to the readers that find that topic to be mundane.

That being said, I have another off-topic post that I find is vitally important. Not so much to our Catholic faith, but our American Life. You see, I ran across this tidbit on another blog:

With the fall hunting season fast approaching, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Lisa Jackson, who was responsible for banning bear hunting in New Jersey, is now considering a petition by the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) – a leading anti-hunting organization – to ban all traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substance Control Act of 1976, a law in which Congress expressly exempted ammunition. If the EPA approves the petition, the result will be a total ban on all ammunition containing lead-core components, including hunting and target-shooting rounds. The EPA must decide to accept or reject this petition by November 1, 2010, the day before the midterm elections.

The source of this article (link) is a gun & hunting rights website, but I found it over at Dad29. Now, I don't mean to be a conspiracy theorist, but November 1st? How convenient. On top of that the real problem isn't that I want to go around shooting lead. I don't care what the bullet is made out of, as long as it is effective (i.e. humane) and cheap. Bullets for some rifles can start at one dollar a round. If you are trying to become proficient so as to become a more humane hunter, the cost in doing so is somewhat concerning. Now imagine if you had to pay five dollars ($5) or even ($10) a round? How much would you go to the range?

The other concern I have is why does the EPA handle this? You see, the government knows it can't outright ban things: ammunition, cigarettes, fuel, etc... but they can tax the heck out of them making it impossible for most (not all) to buy. This is an important distinction, because most government officials don't really want to ban these types of things because they are consumers of them. So it becomes an elitist law, where it doesn't affect those that have very much, and only strains those that have not.

So for those of you familiar with conservative blogs that suggest the best way to protect ourselves from the impending doom that is American culture and society, you know what advice is coming:

buy ammo.

Un-Catholic: Who decides? or "The Illegalization of the Faith"

Religious Persecution

The idea of religious persecution seems like a stretch for most of us "Born and Bred" Americans. It is a far distant historical feature that somehow caused our relatives to come over to this country a long time ago. Beyond that, we don't really think much of it. I on the other hand am a little bit more convinced that our societal downward spiral is around the corner and we will face physical persecution for our faith in our lifetime.

So when I read two recent posts over at Creative Minority Report, I started thinking about how this is all going to come about. You see, it won't come in the form of some instant edict. You have to coax a culture into denying itself, otherwise you have revolution, and that would defeat the purpose. The purpose is to eliminate faith, more precisely to eliminate Christianity, especially Catholicism. I know this will get many of you to stop reading, but give me a chance here, you see, Catholicism if true (which we believe to be the case) flies directly in the face of the lifestyle that most who are in "power" in this country, have. That being the case, a dichotomy is set up between the believers and the un-believers. To them freedom is the ability to do whatever, whenever. So they see moral constraints as an affront to their freedom and way of life. Therefore, just as an enemy, we must be eliminated or suppressed. Suppression works when easily contained, but there is always the fear of "escape." Hence, elimination is more stable.

The Erasure

Stripping the world of the faithful is impossible. Let us focus on this country. If the government instantly outlawed Christianity over-night, chaos would erupt. So it has to be a slow fade, a systematic and calculated erasure of Christianity from public life. Thereby, it would turn religion into something private which could then eventually be regulated, and eventually outlawed. Think about it, how did contraception become legal? It became a personalized right, and then it became public welfare, and now healthcare. To legalize something, you take a private practice and make it a "privacy" issue, and eventually make it into a publicly acceptable practice. Homosexuality turned into same-sex marriage, recreational drug use turned into health-care covered prescription marijuana, and in-utero murder turned into the "5 day-we-don't-know-when-life-begins" pill. So to do the opposite, to erase something... we have to take it from the public sphere, and make it private.

A sign of things to come will be the removal and literal erasure of Christianity from public life. Think of all the symbols in our nation's capital that are Christian based. There are inscriptions, carvings, symbols, and the like on almost everything built prior to 1960, and even some more recent things. Now, lets imagine if they wanted to "carve out" some of the religious words on the Washington Monument, would we be upset? Would we see it as an affront to both our country and our faith? Or would we just say: "It really isn't a big deal." Isn't it?

Using the double-standard

Over at Creative Minority Report, what I read that got me thinking about all of this is that some liberals have started calling certain actions "Un-American." (Specifically criticism of a plug-in-hybrid car. Ironically, the person who said that such criticism is un-American was born a Canadian citizen: Jennifer Granholm.) What Matthew Archbold points out about this situation is that just a short while ago, liberals would lambaste anyone on the conservative end of the political spectrum that used the phrase un-American. But, for their own agenda, the phrase is completely acceptable. I am sure they have some equivocation or justification for its use.

So I wonder if one day, we as Christians will have our own principles used against us. Will Charity, Hope, Compassion, and Love be used against us? Will marriage and life laws be crafted in a way that utilizes the core beliefs of the faith to make a point? I would argue that it is already happening to some degree. We have religious suppression in the name of religious freedom. We have same-sex marriage laws crafted in the words of love, life, family, and commitment.

So when the illegalitzation of the faith occurs, it won't come beating down the door, no, it will come like a thief in the night. It will slowly make private our beliefs. It will remove religious principles in the name of religion out of the public square and into our homes. Then the ostracizing will occur. From there, the faith will become anti-social, and then eventually illegal. The precepts of the faith will be ignored by society, and the social function and purpose will be the only thing evaluated. They will be shown to have no positive purpose and therefore they will be outlawed.

Ground Zero (left); Proposed Mosque Location - "Obama Supported" (red rectangle)

I'm confused...

So I am trying to figure this out...

Federal courts have said it is wrong for government entities to essentially "kick out" people for being a certain race or nationality...

...but...

it is it is ok for a similar government entity to "kick someone out" of a college program for being a certain religion or because they didn't think a certain way?


I am not condoning or indicting either decision, just trying to figure it out...

::shrug::

At least we still have our health! Good thing they haven't made any laws concerning that...

The LA Times: An Agent of Evil

So I haven't talked about the Perez Hilton, Miley Cyrus (aka Hannah Montana), "Up-Skirt" Photo - Issue, because ... well, frankly, it is hollywood & celebrity gossip at its worst. It is the exploitation of women, children, and sex to an extreme, but what is new for Hollywood? If you really want to know about the story you can google it... I don't really want to link anywhere.

What really gets to me in this whole issue is how the media is treating it. For example, look at the poll that the LA TIMES has up regarding the issue:

How is this even a question? What kind of question is this?!? Why doesn't it just ask the question they are hinting at: "Is semi-nude photography really Child Porn if the person in question is famous and almost 18?" I know there is a QUESTION over whether she was ACTUALLY sans underwear and therefore: nude... but lots of laws don't actually REQUIRE actual nudity.

This whole situation is messed up... just MESSED UP! I blame everyone: Perez, Miley, her dad, the press, the culture, the people that still buy her albums for their children, the people that let their children continue to watch her on TV, I just can't take it! Our culture has seriously gotten us to the point where it is OK to watch and support Miley as HANNAH, because that show is OK even though she isn't! This whole thing makes me furious... and if you are a PARENT and support Miley Cyrus in anyway... you fail. The End. Not that there is any... but all Hannah Montana/Miley Cyrus stuff is IN THE TRASH tomorrow... this is why pop culture is ruining our children.

There are no words...

Source: Iowntheworld

June 4 - Tiananmen Square Anniversary

The American Catholic had a great post yesterday about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre.

Here is an excerpt:

Yesterday, June 4, was the twenty-first anniversary of the brutal suppression of the pro-Democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in Beijing.  Over 3000 of the protestors were murdered by the Communist government of China.  Tyranny won that round, but I have absolutely no doubt that Democracy will ultimately prevail in the Middle Kingdom.  When it does, the heroes and heroines of Tiananmen Square will be remembered and their murderers forgotten.

“The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it.”

–Thucydides

Go check them out - The American Catholic

Ex-Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick Goes to Jail

It is about time.

I guess he really is... America's "Hip-Hop Mayor".

But people still donate money to him?? For what?

How about those people donate to this blog instead, I promise to buy Fr. Corapi Volumes and have listening/viewing parties with my Parish.

Please let this be the end of this sad chapter in Detroit's history... please?

Farewell....

Amazing dis-Grace

Wow... I am quickly becoming a Vortex with Michael Voris fan.

This latest one... pretty much tells it like it is.
It isn't soft.
It isn't cuddly.



This program is from RealCatholicTV.com

Why isn't this on the front page of the New York Times?!

Q. Health Care Reform Bill = Stupid? Nancy Pelosi = Marxist Socialist?
A. Yes.

Proof:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this week that thanks to the new health-care reform law, musicians and other creative types could quit their jobs and focus on developing their talents because taxpayers would fund their health care coverage.


“We see it as an entrepreneurial bill,” Pelosi said, “a bill that says to someone, if you want to be creative and be a musician or whatever, you can leave your work, focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations because you will have health care.”

Um.. I am a hunter. Can I quit my job and just hunt? Not only would I be focusing on my talent, skill, and passion but I would also stay healthier eating good food, and would be getting exercise thereby cutting down on my health care costs.

How can this woman continue to claim that she is Catholic? There is NOTHING... I REPEAT nothing in approved Catholic teaching that says, "Focus on your talent, your skill, your passion, your aspirations... while someone else supports you financially." Usually if you do that sort of thing, you go in debt until you are 40, paying the bill back, at around 9.9% interest. I pray for her... but at the same time, she might need some tough love. An excommunication until she repents might do the trick.

You can read the full Moonbattery craziness here: Pelosi to Aspiring Musicians: Quit Your Job, Taxpayers Will Cover Your Health Care with Video Yummy-ness!

Reason #43,809 not to live in Detroit

I used to live near there, work there, and go to school there? Now I know why Dad was so furious when I went to that city. He would say, "I can't believe you are throwing you money at that [forsaken] city."

Here is a recent article from the Detroit News:

Less than a day after it opened, the Mexicantown Bagley Avenue Pedestrian Bridge was vandalized, Michigan Department of Transportation officials said 


Numerous individuals have "tagged" the $5 million bridge with spray paint and used knives to carve into a wooden bench in the middle of the span. Others signed their names with pens and magic markers on the bench, officials said. 


In fact, an MDOT employee's video camera caught one woman as she used a colored pen to scrawl on a bench in the middle of the 400-foot-long bridge. 


"Yes, it was me," said Oneita Jackson, a copy editor at the Detroit Free Press and author of Sunday's "O Street" blog. 


"I did it. If you see a person with a green pen ... dressed in black slacks and a red top, that's me. I was excited about the event and wanted to put my name on it." 


Jackson eventually put away the marker and said "Oh, I guess I shouldn't be doing this," the tape showed. As a blogger, she has written about her efforts as a mom to raise her 16-year-old son and encourage citizens to be more patient and civil.

WHAT?! First, a 5 million dollar bridge there? Really? We are talking a huge waste of money.
Second, a Free Press Editor?! She should be fired.

Here is the link to her sorry apology/excuse. The Free Press should let me blog for them. What a disgrace. And if you think this is an isolated incident. You are mistaken. This is a person, with a PUBLIC JOB, and a job telling others how to LIVE in that city... what a shame, and what a disgrace. The liberal masses really is the blind leading the blind.

Here is an excerpt from her "apology":

Was I ashamed? Yes. Did I think it would go away? Yes. I hoped it would and I wouldn’t have to deal with it.


But I have to deal with it now; I wouldn’t be writing about it right now if that reporter hadn’t called me, seeking comment.


I make a living running my big mouth telling people how they should behave. I cannot be Oneita Big Silent now. I have to answer to Detroit -- and to my son.

I returned to the pedestrian bridge Friday to look for my name on the bench and was surprised to see that it was gone. So were other names. I went to the welcome center and told the women there what I had done. They asked what kind of pen I had used and told me Wednesday’s rain probably washed it away.


It might have washed my name away, but it cannot wash away how stupid I feel.


I apologize.

Wow... speechless. Read the rest here Nevermind, I don't even want to give her blog traffic.

The Theology of South Park

So a few weeks back South Park bent to the demands of terrorists. Now they are planning on a show about Jesus leaving heaven to go live in NYC away from his "video game playing Father."

A bunch of Catholics are upset over this.

Some are being much more rational, like The Anchoress.

My take is a little different. I say big whoop. As my wife said, Terrorists are scary, a bunch of Catholics praying are not. She makes a good point. Not only that, but can't we laugh at ourselves? I don't mean endorse the show, I don't even disagree with a boycott here or there, but are we really shocked or offended by this... REALLY? Should we be?

And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake: but he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved. - Matthew 10:22

And you shall be hated by all men for my name's sake. But he that shall endure unto the end, he shall be saved. - Mark 13:13

As Catholics can't we laugh at ourselves? Can't we find humor in the divine? Again, I am not endorsing this... but of course they censored the Muslim jokes... they are afraid. I think actions speak louder than words... and this says something about our faith, the practice of that faith, and our mission within the faith.

Really? Donate to Kwame?

Ok... this isn't a joke:

http://www.FriendsofKwame.com/

I don't even know what to say... If you don't know the story about former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, just google him.

And if you want something more reasonable to throw away your money on, read this:
Hunt Fund

“Creative liturgy… alienates us from God and draws us near to sin.”

Rorate Cœli posted an interview of Msgr. Nicola Bux where he discusses the concept of "Creative Liturgies." The title of this post is his main point, the rest of the interview is just as important:

“Creative liturgy… alienates us from God and draws us near to sin.”  

Here are the excerpts (My emphasis and comments) :

“Creative liturgy… alienates us from God and draws us near to sin.”

Then, not too surprisingly, he affirms: “The sense of sin has been weakened by the dilution of the sacrality of the liturgy. [This is a critical point. If the Liturgy is the pinnacle of our faith, then when we dilute it, we allow ourselves to rationalize other areas of our belief.] There is a close link between ethos and worship.” What do you mean? “That we today have lost values because we often do not give God a worthy worship at Mass. [This idea stems from the philosophical precept of absolute truth. If there exists, which we must believe there does, a sense of WORTHINESS which God deserves, then we must strive to find the type of worship worthy of God.] And many atheists ought also to live as if God exists.” (E molti anche atei dovrebbero vivere come se Dio esistesse) But let us return to the liturgical aspect: “People need the sense of the sacred in order to discover God. Sin is a negation of God, but if even when assisting Mass we live far from God, how is it then possible to avoid sin?” Then he specifies: “The liturgy is sacred, divine and glorious; it is vertical in the sense of tending towards the High, towards Beauty and Heaven. It is not something circular or horizontal, some kind of sports stadium, assembly or party. [We should treat it as something unique and UNLIKE anything else we do.] The idea of a fruitful and creative liturgy inevitably loses the sense of the sacred and therefore alienates us from God and draws us near to sin. [The Mass... must be SACRED... nothing else is necessary.]The people, who are much more intelligent than one gives them credit for, perceive where the sacred is. It is not something abstract but a concrete thing. [The Sacred is attainable.]And it says so in the Gospel. "The woman wished to touch the cloak of Christ. In order to defeat sin, there is a need for certain, unequivocal and firm signs, not fluctuating, unstable ones.”


Therefore creative liturgy creates damage: “Many, especially after the Council, ceded to this unhealthy notion of creativity, but it was not the fault of the Council, as the Council never abrogated or cancelled the liturgy of all times (liturgia di sempre). A sloppy, manipulated and -- even worse – violated Mass is an obstacle to the sacred and alienates the people from the Church. To celebrate creative Masses is a profanation of the sense of the sacred, because it brings us away from God. The minister of the cult must never be an actor, often a mediocre one at that and a source of scandal, but should think that his principal duty is to serve God, never his own unbridled desire to play the protagonist. [A commentator on Rorate explained by saying that creative liturgies celebrate the talents and accomplishments of MAN. A good point, and one to which we should heed. Our actions at Mass should be directed towards and CONCERNING God, not the talents of humans.]Only by recuperating or restoring a correct vertical liturgy, can we limit in part the effects of sin, thus rediscovering God.”

This interview is quite telling. Father Bux is a consultor for the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff. So that means he is charged with ensuring that Masses involving the Pope are Sacred and Proper. If not him, who then should we listen to?

When we attempt to put our own influence on the Liturgy - the Mass we have incorrectly shifted the proper focus of the Mass to us instead of on God. Things like video screens, "alternative music", dance, presentations, or anything not found in the Roman Missal are "Creative." When we "distract" folks from the Mass we draw them towards the "Creative" and away from God. This means that people are being pushed away from God and towards.... well does it matter at that point?

If you suckered the USA regarding Nukes, please raise your hand...

What? Not Russia?
OF COURSE RUSSIA!

Back in 2002, I studied Russian for a year. (I couldn't continue for a few reasons... but that is besides the point). People made fun of me telling me how studying Russian, is like "learning how barn doors keep cows in." What they meant was that I should be studying Spanish or Arabic, as those would be more helpful in the coming years.

I said that contrary to their belief, Russia was not our ally, they were not forever beaten and a democratic capitalist country... they were simply "re-financing." When we "Beat" the Soviet Union in the Cold War, what we really did was out spend them and out militarize them. In other words, we drove them to bankruptcy.

So days after Obama and the President of Russia, Medvedev, signed a Nuclear weapon  reduction treaty... this report comes out:

A reactor being built by Russia at Iran's Bushehr nuclear power plant is scheduled to open in August, the head of Russia's state nuclear corporation said on Wednesday.

"The launch is scheduled for August. We're on schedule," Sergei Kiriyenko told reporters in Argentina during a visit. "Bushehr doesn't threaten the regime of nonproliferation in any way. No one has any concerns about Bushehr."

No one has concerns about Bushehr? Let's see.... raise your hand if the fact that  RUSSIA helping Iran build a power plant gives you concerns:

Granholm on the list to Replace Justice Stevens?!?!?

Justice Stevens is retiring from the Supreme Court as many of you know. So until we get an official word on who will replace  him comes down, the best we can do is guess. Here is what the Wall Street Journal Law Blog thinks:

Of the other nine or so people reportedly on Obama’s list, the AP managed to confirm seven of them. In addition to Thomas, they are: former Georgia Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, federal appeals court judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Wait, what? Jennifer Granholm? Really? I won't mention the whole Canadian thing (no offense to my readers from the southeast.) But her legacy in Michigan is AWFUL! She is known for saying the wrong things at the wrong time. Michigan has tanked... and as an alleged Roman Catholic... woah. I can ONLY imagine the things she would purport the faith to stand for if she is given the nod.

I don't know what Obama's lust is for non-judicial nominees, but it appears he is looking for a non-judge female for the most part. These early lists though have a way of posturing more than actually being the true list. Let's hope that is the case, because this list is seriously lacking.

Can You Hear My Head Exploding?

What else should we expect from the NYTimes? (As a preliminary note, I am not linking to the article simply because it's far too inflaming.)

Maureen Dowd. What a piece of work. Today, she uses her soap box to proclaim to the world that the Church is now in the business of "spin." Please re-read that. The Catholic Church. Spin. New York Times Op-Ed page. Oh the irony. Yes, she unequivocally states that "Catholics around the globe," are calling for the Pope's "own confession and penance about the cascade of child sexual abuse cases that were ignored," Citation needed, Maureen. But, being an Op-Ed columnist citations, and fact checking aren't really needed, right?

But if you think Dowd making the global proclamation - for what apparently she feels are all Catholics - of a "Papal confession" (BTW, when did the Church dispose of the confessional for the Op-Ed page of the Times' Ms. Dowd?) is good, wait 'til you hear what else she has to say. This week, we aren't celebrating Holy Thursday or Good Friday. No. We apparently are celebrating "Cover-Up Thursday" and "Blame-Others Friday." Is your head exploding yet? If it's not now, it will shortly.

The poor (and that's just me being nice) reporting and fact-checking of the Times' is astounding. If you go back a few posts, you will find out just what happened in Wisconsin. But, asking a person who was actually involved in a case would just be far too much work for the Times'. Or, perhaps, if it's not too much work maybe it's just because if someone actually did talk to Fr. Brundage, it would completely undermine their whole "story"! My guess is that it's the latter. But why should the vitriol stop there?

"If church fund-raising and contributions dry up, Benedict’s P.R. handlers may yet have to stage a photo-op where he steps out of the priest’s side of the confessional and enters the side where the rest of his fallible flock goes."

Uhhhh, does anyone want to take a guess at the last time Ms. Dowd picked up the Catechism? My guess is it's been awhile. "The rest of his fallible flock"? Does she even know what Papal Infallibility means? "Church fund-raising"? Are there bake sales at the Vatican I don't know about? Maybe we should just give Ms. Dowd the benefit of the doubt, and assume that she does understand Papal Infallibility and just couldn't find a better word.

"Or maybe 30-second spots defending the pope with Benedict’s voice intoning at the end: 'I am infallible, and I approve this message.'"

Never mind.

Oh, take a look at this one!

"The Vatican is surprised to find itself in this sort of trouble."

Again, the top-notch reporting of Ms. Dowd never ceases to amaze. Did she talk to anyone at the Vatican about this? She probably could have gotten better insight from a pigeon that hangs out in St. Peter's square than her sources (read as "none").

At Palm Sunday Mass at St. Patrick’s, Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York bemoaned that the “recent tidal wave of headlines about abuse of minors by some few priests, this time in Ireland, Germany, and a re-run of an old story from Wisconsin, has knocked us to our knees once again.”

A few priests? At this point, it feels like an international battalion."

Yes, an international battalion. Who needs facts when you have puffery!?

Then, Dowd moves on to "exposing" the Church's "P.R. spin plan". As number 4, Dowd explains that by demonizing gays, and "making the abuse issue about gays," the Church is trying to take the heat off itself, even though they are "defending pedophilia". Yeah, because the Times' never defends pedophilia. Also, don't forget that the Church is in fact, NOT defending pedophiliac priests. In fact, the Church is taking the necessary steps to prevent further abuse .

The next one is a gem too. "#5 Blame the victims". Dowd uses a quote from Catholic League President Bill Donohue that talks about the Fr. Murphy victims that didn't come forward for twenty years. But that's it. Just the quote. No explanation of how the Church was supposed to do stop abuse about which it had no idea. Apparently the reader is supposed to figure that out? Or perhaps Dowd wants her readers to believe that the Church somehow knew about it. Which actually surprises me that she didn't come out and say that because, as we already know, facts are unimportant.

Finally, Dowd gives away the Vatican lawyers' secret game plan in defending against civil suits. By claiming that the argument will be the Bishops were not employees, and the Pope is immune as a head of state. Wow. I was unaware that Dowd had a law degree, and a source in the Vatican's council.

The New York Times' is losing their credibility by not attempting to fact-check, and by making outlandish statements that have absolutely no grounding in reason. It is further disappointing that Ms. Dowd, with an education from Catholic University of America, has so little understanding of the Catholic Faith.

But, I guess when your paper and job are threatened to be obsolete, perhaps resorting to mud-slinging, lies and false reporting are the only way to stay afloat. Good luck with that.

Obama says: "Drill, baby drill?" - Win-Win?

Rumor has it the Obama Administration is going to open up off-shore drilling?
"Gov't to unveil off-shore drilling"

... wait? Conservatives can't stand the Obama-Care Administration because they are Marxist. And now he plans on embracing a "Palin-esque" energy plan? Really?

Wow... this guy is a goof. But this might be a win-win for us... Especially if the drilling policy is good because it will get us much needed oil; and it will upset the extremist liberals.

Something tells me this is too good to be true...

No "News" is "Good News"

Check out Dan, from Gun Lovin' Alaskan Catholic Club's, take on how a few "bad apples" seem to gobble up all the attention in the media... regardless of the situation.

I think it is quite telling, and does a great job of showing that the media's problem is bigger than just the Church.

From Gun Lovin' Alaksan Club: A few bad apples... Red Meat to the Left