Syte Reitz

The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world…….

Top Republican Officials Have Decided They No Longer Want to Wait Around for an Official Nominee?

or

Are We Still Living in a Democracy?

or

Republican Party Issues a Mandate

.

.

.

From today’s Wall Street Journal:

Top Republican officials have decided they no longer want to wait around for an official nominee.

WHAT?!

Do radicals own the Republican Party, too?
What happened to the people’s vote?
With only 45% of the votes in, and the conservative candidate Santorum seriously gaining on the author of RomneyCare, Republican Officials are now issuing a mandate?

God help us!

BTW…

What to Do:

Vote for Rick Santorum, a conservative who still respects the Constitution and the will of the people.
There is still hope.
The people can still (just barely) recover control of this nation.

and PRAY like your life depended on it; it does.

The No Religious Freedom Mandate

and

The President Can Issue Unilateral Mandates Mandate

and

The Let’s Sneak Abortion into ObamaCare While Nobody’s Looking Mandate

Timothy Cardinal Dolan of New York, President of the USCCB

The recent conflict, which erupted between President Obama and the Catholic Church in March 2012, over Obama’s insertion of a “Contraceptive Mandate” into ObamaCare, has raised a number of important questions.

We will explore below, how this actually represented an attempt by the Obama administration to sneak in control measures over the American population into previously passed legislation, while using the age-old distraction tactics practiced by movie villains and by villains in real life.

Background

  • When in previous American history has a President included new mandates (dictates, as in dictatorship) into legislation that has already been passed?
  • When in previous American history has an administration required all Americans to purchase a product, which is controlled by the federal government?
  • When in previous American history has a President violated, by issuing his own mandate, the mandate of the First Amendment which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. ?

What does the Obama Administration Want?

The Obama Administration clearly wants a federal health care system, ObamaCare.
They also clearly support abortion.
They have a record of promoting gay “rights,” for example in the military.
Clearly, the Obama Administration has a radical liberal agenda.

But there’s an obstacle.
It’s called democracy.
America is mostly conservative (Gallup 2012: 40% Conservative, 30% moderate, and 21% liberal).  Gallup: Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
So voting, or democracy, will not work in furthering the Obama administration’s radical agenda.

However, establishing the right of a President to mandate stuff would work much better.  That way, you don’t have to mess with getting the people’s approval.

So President Obama wants to exert more control over American citizens.
He wants to establish the right to issue mandates unopposed.
He wants to issue mandates favoring his favorite causes; government health care, abortion and gay “rights” are included.
Who stands in his way?
Christians.  (80% of America)
Which Christian denomination has the most members in the U.S.?
Catholics.
Which Chirstian denomination has the biggest national organization/communication network in place?
Catholics.

So What’s the Battle Plan?

If you could issue a mandate, while creating a diversion so nobody notices it, and weaken your biggest opponent in the process, wouldn’t that be a brilliant plan?
Yes, and that is exactly what the Obama administration has attempted.

You issue a mandate that forces U.S. Citizens to do something.

Pick something that would weaken your biggest opponent; something that will weaken Catholics.
Something that will either make them surrender their beliefs to comply, or close most of their largest institutions if they cannot comply .
AND, find something on which the Church is divided, so there is confusion in the ranks when the attack occurs.
Yes, we have it!
Require that the Catholic Church pays for Contraception.
What a brilliant plan; that covers all the bases.

For good measure, make sure you catch them unprepared.
Invite them into the White House, assure them that their rights and liberties are foremost in your agenda, and send them home satisfied that they do not have to prepare for a fight.  That way, when your announcement comes, it will be a surprise attack and they will not be prepared.

The Distraction Tactics

  • By introducing contraception, you divert discussion to an inflammatory side issue.
  • By attacking conservative political pundits who discuss the issue publicly, you distract the American public from the real issues: Presidential proclamations (mandates) and violations of religious freedom.

How Obama Implemented the Plan

This is exactly what happened.

President Obama invited the President of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to the White House, assured USCCB President/now Cardinal Dolan that he will respect the rights of Catholic institutions, and invited President Dolan to relay the message to all the other bishops.  The Wall Street Journal interview in which Cardinal Dolan describes the November 2011 Oval Office meeting included the following excerpt:

“I [Cardinal Dolan] said, ‘I’ve heard you say, first of all, that you have immense regard for the work of the Catholic Church in the United States in health care, education and charity. . . . I have heard you say that you are not going to let the administration do anything to impede that work and . . . that you take the protection of the rights of conscience with the utmost seriousness. . . . Does that accurately sum up our conversation?’ [Mr. Obama] said, ‘You bet it does.'”

The archbishop asked for permission to relay the message to the other bishops. “You don’t have my permission, you’ve got my request,” the president replied.

Cardinal Dolan

Then the axe fell at the end of January, when President Obama declared that the contraception mandates would remain in place and no religious exemptions would be granted to the Catholic Church.

Details of the deception can be found in the Wall Street Journal Interview and in the FOX video Interview of Cardinal Dolan.  Of course, the Cardinal refrains from calling the President a liar and shows utmost respect for the office of the Presidency.  But the interviews expose the facts, which we can evaluate ourselves and determine whether intentional deception was part of the plan.

Imagine inviting the head of the Catholic Church to the Oval Office 3 months in advance of issuing the Contraception Mandate, and assuring him, and inviting him to inform all United States Bishops that President Obama is very serious about the protection of the rights of conscience of Catholics, then issuing mandates violating those rights.  That took some premeditated planning.

A Double Standard

The Amish have an exemption to ObamaCare

Religious exemptions have been granted to various groups on various issues at President Obama’s discretion; exemptions to Native Americans to kill eagles for religious ceremonies (for which the U.S. government facilitates and stores feathers and eagle body parts at taxpayer expense), as well as exemptions for Amish (as well as Muslims and Christian Scientists) from ObamaCare

Further Villainy

After Cardinal Dolan and the Catholic Bishops stood up to the President’s Contraceptive Mandate, President Obama pretended to compromise, by requiring the insurance company to pay for the free contraceptives, and claiming that the Catholic Institutions will not have to pay for the free contraceptives (and abortifacients and sterilizations) which violate the moral beliefs of Catholics. (See how abortion got snuck in there, oh, so subtly!)

"We Inside Yet?"

  • Never mind that most Catholic Institutions are self-insured or employ Catholic insurance companies, so Catholics are still being forced to pay for immoral services.
  • Never mind that Obama did not even speak with the head of the US Catholic Church, Cardinal Dolan, before making this final pronouncement.
  • Never mind that President Obama has surrounded himself with “Catholics” in name only in an effort to legitimize his proclamations (Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Kathleen Sebelius and Sister Carol Keehan, who have all publicly opposed the Catholic Church’s teachings and policies and are better described as dissidents, not Catholics).

President Obama has challenged the chain of command in the Catholic Church, by choosing to communicate with hand-picked dissidents, then pretending that his has Catholic support.  Separation of Church and State?  Obama reorganized the chain of command in the Catholic Church!

Summarizing the Attack.

O.K.
So the President managed to issue his dictatorial command.
He managed to dictate what the Catholic Church must do against their conscience.
With a double standard that was not applied to Native Americans or to Amish.

He also managed to divert the issue from Presidential dictatorial powers and from violation of freedom of religion by the President to national discussion of a topic that is controversial in the United States; a topic on which more Americans are likely to agree with the President, but which actually has nothing to do with the dictatorial and freedom of religion issues at hand.

The final blow was to attack a popular national conservative spokesman, Rush Limbaugh, when he ridiculed the need for exaggerated quantities of birth control on college campuses.  This attack has now morphed into a serious attempt by the left to get Rush Limbaugh’s voice off the airwaves.  Wouldn’t that be nice for the President?  What about freedom of the press?  Hey, the White House can blast the first amendment simultaneously  on TWO counts; religious freedom and freedom of speech!

More discussion of the national liberal attack on Rush Limbaugh at Knights in Shining Armor.

The Main Point Was Almost Lost

Lost Point

Meanwhile, the main point was almost lost.

The President of the United States has issued a proclamation in opposition to his previous promises to Congress (promising Stupak that abortion would not be included in ObamaCare, and that an Executive Order would be issued to that effect).

  • A proclamation that controls what the largest Church in the US (28% of U.S. citizens belong) must do against it’s conscience.

Americans are not Stupid

President Obama overstepped his authority, and miscalculated on several fronts.
He miscalculated the courage of the American Bishops.
He miscalculated the gullibility of the American people.
He miscalculated the cost of his bluff.

The American Bishops did not back down, but dug in, in defense of religious freedom in America.  Jews and Baptists and many others have joined them.  Obama has singlehandedly managed to achieve a unification of Judeo-Christian believers, which we have struggled to accomplish with decades of ecumenical efforts.  Now, Rabbis stand up before Senate panels and defend the religious freedom of Catholics.

The American people are jumping ship as well.  The Wall Street Journal indicates that Obama has gone too far for most moderates who supported him in the last election.  His dictatorial disregard for the religious freedom of Catholics, combined with his cavalier delusional palling around with Russians in front of hot mics in defiance of his electorate, followed by jocular references to the embarrassing mic incident, have been just too much.  Peggy Noonan writes, in an article entitled Not-So-Smooth Operator –  –  “the level of dislike for the president has ratched up sharply the past few months… and it’s his fault, too.”

The cost of Obama’s bluff can also be calculated in dollar terms; some estimate $100 billion costs to the US associated with the closing of Catholic hospitals; others estimate  higher.  The Fiscal Times writes : “it would create a disaster for the delivery of health care in the country, and rapidly escalate the public costs of health care.

So, Catholics vs. Obamacare is NOT About Birth Control

There is also the cost of reigniting the cultural wars.
John Leo of The Fiscal Times writes:

The mainstream press keeps telling us that the struggle of Catholics vs. ObamaCare is about birth control.  This is partly ineptitude, partly an effort to depict the controversy as irrelevant, since Catholics use contraceptives at almost the same rate as the general population.  And, consciously or not, this ordinary bit of journalistic malpractice pins an anti-contraceptive label on Republicans in an election year.

Leo also discusses Jean Bethke Elshtain’s theories on  establishment pressure, called “liberal monism:”
Liberal monism
refers to the fact that those who talk the most about diversity and pluralism are often the most willing to mandate that all private and religious institutions conform to one ideological framework, theirs.

Why Would an American President Intentionally Sow Division in the Nation?

Some shocking new theories are surfacing to explain President Obama’s agenda.
Obama does not seem to adhere to the American Dream of our Founding Fathers.
He does not seem to adhere to the Dream of Martin Luther King, Jr., of a society which does not judge by the color of the skin but by the content of the character, and in which the sons of former slaves and slave-owners can sit down together at a table of brotherhood.

Dinesh D’Souza, the President of the King’s College in New York, an Indian born in Mumbai who came to America and profited from the American Dream, proposes a theory that Barak Obama does not adhere to the American Dream, nor to Martin Luther King Jr.’s Dream,  and not even to American liberalism, which seeks to take money from rich Americans and redistribute to poorer Americans, but adheres instead to a concept many Americans are not familiar with, anti-colonialism.

Anti-colonialism is an angry attitude found in some places across the globe, in which America’s success is viewed not as a product of America’s moral and religious hard work ethic, but as a product of imperial exploitation of other nations.  An exploitation by America which needs to be reversed and to be “atoned for” at any cost. An attitude fueled more frequently by envy, than by fact.  A philosophy that seeks to take America down a few pegs, not build her up.

An anti-colonial President would not have America’s best interests at heart, but would be more devoted to taking America down a few pegs.  A President who would serve as Judge, Jury and Executioner of the American people.  A President who would gladly violate his oath of office to defend the Constitution, because he has “higher” loyalties.  A president who is a traitor.  A President who does not adhere to an absolute morality.  A President who believes that the ends justify the means, and any means toward humbling America is justifiable.

Whether there is any truth to D’Souza’s theories about Barak Obama’s destructive agenda for our nation, we can examine for ourselves by reading Obama’s autobiography, Dreams From My Father, and by watching D’Souza’s movie, 2016, produced by the producer of Schindler’s List, Jurassic Park and Brave Heart, and which will be released in June, 2012.  The trailer for the movie, followed by a 12-minute background presentation by Dinesh D’Souza has been viewed by almost 1 million people on You Tube already.

Time will tell, and President Obama’s actions will tell, whether there can be even a shred of truth in D’Souza’s claims.

The Triple Mandate

Speculations on Barak Obama’s motivations for Issuing what is now commonly known as the Contraception Mandate aside, it is important to realize that whatever the motivations, the contraception mandate is actually a triple mandate, and is much more important than simply a contraception mandate.

Obama’s Mandate is actually the:
No Religious Freedom Mandate
and
The President Can Issue Unilateral Mandates Mandate
and
The Let’s Sneak Abortion into ObamaCare While Nobody’s Looking Mandate

This Mandate Cannot Stand

Whether this Triple Mandate is taken down by the Supreme Court decision to be released in June on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare, or whether this mandate is considered separately by the Supreme Court under religious freedom violation considerations, or whether the November 2012 election removes President Obama from office and replaces him with someone who will steer us in a different direction, the Triple Mandate cannot stand.

If it does, we are in the U.S.S.R. We have opened the doors wide for communism under which the State has most power,  in the place of democracy, under which the individual has most power:
The government will tax and hold all the money.
The government will decide who can have money and how much and when.
The government will decide who can have health care and who cannot.
There will be little free enterprise.There will be lots of black market.
There will be little religious freedom.
Churches will be marginalized.
Religion will be eliminated from education
Conservative thought will be declared bigoted and illegal.
Mandating (dictating) will determine what we can and cannot do.
Mothers will probably be required to work outside the home.
Children will probably be required to attend school, like in Germany today.
Schools will probably be required to teach mandatory radical liberalism.
Home schooling will probably be outlawed.
Children will probably be encouraged/required to report on parents who stray from the compulsory New Order.

Ridiculous?

It’s happened more than once during the past 100 years.
My parents lived through it.
Pope Benedict lived through it.
My grandparents were sent to Siberia for 20 years under the USSR.

People can recognize the signs, and the Contraception Mandate is certainly a big one.

What makes you think that the US is immune to despots who want to eliminate democracy and freedom, and who want to control our nation, instead of being accountable to it’s people, as the Constitution was designed to ensure?

Could the fact that 47% of America already pays no federal tax and many live off government handouts, be part of a devious plan calculated purposely to ensure the dependence (and the votes) of numerous people on radical government

Next Step

Obama has already taken the next step today.

Remember the division of powers in the U.S. Constitution which sets up a system of “checks and balances,” and prevents one branch of the government from exercising too much power?  The balance between the Executive Branch, the Legislature and the Judiciary that we all learned about in grammar school?

Previoiusly, Obama, the Executive, commandeered the Legislature’s approval for ObamaCare in 2009 by lying to Stupak and “stealing” the votes of the legislature with false promises.

Today Obama called the Supreme Court “unelected,” and warned them against striking down the health law.  This constitutes an attempt to control the Judiciary.

Evidently, what we now have is   Obama: Executive, Legislature and Judiciary, Rolled Into One.

The Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves.

The Solution:

Read
Pray
Vote

Calling the shots

>

Fortune cookie:


This is your day to call the shots, so you should.

O.K., if I had an ounce of self-restraint left before the Wisconsin primary coming up this Tuesday, this fortune cookie just eliminated it.
I’m going to call the shots.
What shots would I like to call today?
The 2012 Presidential election, of course.
Something I have little control over, so the results are bound to be amusing.

Calling the Shots

If you call the shots, you are in charge and you tell people what to do.
But calling the shots can also mean using a psychological trick: you “call the shot” in advance, forecasting a result, hoping to influence people’s choices, so that you encourage your favored result.

Calling the Shots in Advance

And that seems to be what the Republican Party is doing right now- calling the shots in advance.
The Republican establishment probably never planned that Mitt Romney would get serious competition from any of his running mates, and now that he’s getting some serious competition from Rick Santorum, they are scrambling to discourage that.  They are bringing out the big guns, party leaders who are endorsing Mitt Romney prematurely, when Mitt has only 565 of the necessary 1144 delegates to win the primary.

Republicans have not bargained on an awakening of the American people, a scenario in which politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle would have to become more responsive to their electorates (and responsive to Tea Party supporters) than they previously had been.  It’s a lot easier to sit in comfy chairs making small polite concessions to opponents followed by socializing after work, than to implement the big changes and make the big cuts that many Americans want in 2012, and which will cut some of the frills in Washington, too.

So many Republicans are rallying behind Mitt Romney prematurely, hoping to discourage Rick Santorum, and hoping that Rick Santorum will concede and quit.  This would avoid a long, drawn-out primary, followed by a “brokered” or “contested” convention, during which the Republican establishment will have less control over the results, and the American people will have more control over the results.

Election 2008

Calling the shots in advance did not work so well 4 years ago, when everybody was forecasting that Hillary Clinton would be the nominee. Obama was a nobody.  Yet we have President Nobody issuing mandates today, and the Supreme Court struggling to read the 2700 pages of his NobodyCares for ObamaCare. Calling the Shots in advance backfired on the Democrats in 2008.

Election 1920

President Harding

Then there was President Harding in 1920, who was a nobody with only 20% of the candidates compared with his opponent (General Leonard Wood) in the primary.  If anybody were calling the shots in advance back then, he would have lost the primary.  But what happened?  Nobody won the initial race,  and they went to a contested or brokered convention, where Harding got 70% of the votes and became President.

Election 2012

Now, for the first time since 1920, we could be heading for a contested or brokered convention again. Although Mitt Romney unquestionably has the most delegates at this time, it is not clear whether Romney will be able to reach the 1144 required to win.

1144 out of 2286 total delegates are needed to win; Romney has 565; Santorum has 256; Gingrich has 141; Paul has 66, and thus 1258 delegates are still up for grabs.  In other words, any candidate, including one starting with zero delegates today, could still be the winner.

Top Republicans are panicking and calling for an end to the primary battle, uniting behind Romney.

Newt Gingrich has slowed down his campaign, planning to sit out the fight between Romney and Santorum, then join back in for the contested convention.

Rick Santorum vows to stay in the race, even if he does not win Wisconsin this Tuesday.

My Call

Everybody wants to forecast events before they occur.  I will join them.

Gallup Polls

  • Santorum is rapidly gaining on Romney:   Gallup Polls indicate that Romney and Santorum are competing closely, and are alternating in the lead during the last two months.
  • Santorum plans to stay in the election.  So, there could well be a brokered convention.
  • Santorum is a true conservative. Tea party likes him.  Evangelicals like him.
  • Gallup also says that most Americans are conservative:  40% conservative, 35% moderate, and only 21% liberal.   Conservatives Remain the Largest Ideological Group in U.S.
  • Romney is a question mark.  Romney has a shifting record that does not guarantee his sticking to promises any better than Obama has done. He takes direction well and changes direction well.  He would be better than Obama, but not better than Santorum.

Put it all together, and I say:

  • There will be a brokered convention.  Romney will not get 1144 delegates.  Santorum will not quit the primary.
  • At the brokered convention, people will choose what they want: a conservative, Rick Santorum.
  • The Republican establishment will have to make a correction to accommodate the Tea Party: less frills for everyone in Washington.
  • We will all celebrate the fact that our system of government did in fact protect the people of the United States as the Founding Fathers designed it to do.

Vote for Rick Santorum for President!

>

And if I’m Wrong?

If I am wrong, Mitt Romney will be the Republican nominee.

If he beats Obama, since trying to prove why he is different from Obama on central issues like ObamaCare and Abortion will not be easy, he will do one of two things:

Fulfill all the promises he made during the election, unlike his predecessor Obama.

or

Change his mind and continue Obama’s policies, or something akin to them.

>

.

A Society Built on Illusion Cannot Stand…

.

Sharing a find…
Quoting from Salvo MagazineThe Illusionist, by Robin Phillips:

The ancient Greeks had a school of philosophers known as the Sophists, who took pride in their ability to prove impossible things. Some sophists even hired themselves out at public events, where audiences could watch spellbound as they proceeded to prove propositions that were obviously false.

The sophist philosopher Gorgias (4th century b.c.) invented an ingenuous argument to prove that: nothing exists; and even if something exists, nothing can be known about it; and even if something exists and something can be known about it, such knowledge cannot be communicated to others; and even if something exists, can be known about, and can be communicated about, no incentive exists to communicate anything about it to others.

It would be nice if such sophistry had been limited to ancient Greeks. However, the 20th century saw a thinker whose nonsense rivaled and even surpassed anything produced by the sophists. His name was Herbert Marcuse (1898–1979), the guru of the 1960s counterculture.

.

The article continues, exposing the fallacies underlying the contradictory secular culture of 2012 brilliantly.
Robin Phillips clarifies the connection between the sexual revolution and Marxism, points out the roots  of liberal media bias, and explains the trend of silencing opponents through diagnosis rather than through dialogue.  Phillips has written an analysis of our present societal predicament which amuses, informs, and intrigues.

Finish reading the article here.
Then subscribe here.
Promise, I am not related to them, I don’t own stock, and I am not getting paid!

I was positively delighted to discover this article, to subscribe to Salvo magazine, and to learn of the existence of the Fellowship of St. James, an alliance of authors, professors, clergy members, lay men and women, and writers—from various Christian denominations—who promote orthodox Christianity, the natural law, and traditional Christian morality. Editor: James M. Kushiner.

Salvo magazine’s stated goals:

Blasting holes in scientific naturalism, marveling at the intricate design of the universe, and promoting life in a culture of death;

Critiquing art, music, film, television, and literature, interrupting mass media influence, and questioning the sanity of our consumerist lifestyle;

Countering destructive ideologies, replacing revisionist fictions with undeniable facts, and paring away political correctness;

Debunking the cultural myths that have undercut human dignity, all but destroyed the notions of virtue and morality, and slowly eroded our appetite for transcendence;

Recovering the one worldview that actually works.

What a refreshing new form of journalism!
Guess what everybody’s getting from me for their next birthday?
A subscription.

Santorum Equals Sanity

or

The Cap Times Published My Letter

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

The Cap Times Published My Letter

The Cap Times Published My Letter, which reads:

Santorum Family

Santorum Equals Sanity

Dear Editor: President Obama is out of control.

He is plagued by spending illness, and now it seems by delusions of grandeur, palling around with Russians in defiance of his electorate.

Mitt Romney is a giant question mark. “A political and cultural enigma,” according to Neil .Swidey.

Rick Santorum represents all the values most Americans have grown up with and admire: responsibility, thriftiness, honesty, truthfulness, faithfulness, and he’s a devoted .family man.

No wonder America is flocking to Santorum against all campaign spending predictions. If . Santorum wins, it will be proof that the Founding Fathers constructed a system that does . allow the people to control their own destiny.

Syte Reitz
Madison

.

Why did the Cap Times Publish a Conservative Letter?

When a liberal newspaper like the Cap Times, which is called the Progressive Voice of Madison, WI publishes a conservative letter endorsing Rick Santorum,  something is up.
  • They could be filling a quota of “conservative” items to prove how “balanced” their reporting is.
  • They could be setting up the conservative author for ridicule (a favorite pastime for Madison’s radical liberals).
  • Or, they could actually be reporting in earnest, reflecting the fact that President Obama has really gone too far, and even the progressives of Madison are scratching their heads.
.

Unlikely?

Not according to the Wall Street Journal, in an article entitled Not-So-Smooth Operator, in which Peggy Noonan states that Obama is increasingly coming across as devious and dishonest.  She reports that the “broad, stable, nonradical, non-birther right” is starting to dislike President Obama personally.  A dislike that is arising solely from Obama’s own behavior, that of an “operator who’s not operating in good faith.”
.
According to Noonan, this shift toward disliking President Obama started with his devious behavior over the contraception mandate, and continues to be fueled with recent events such as the open-mic conversation with Russian President Medvedev and with his personalization and manipulation of the the tragic death of Trayvon Martin.
.

Some of My Best Friends are Liberal

I am surrounded with liberals in Madison, WI, home of the University of Wisconsin, Madison.
I am surrounded with liberals among my relatives, many of whom are products of University propaganda machines.
I myself was a product of a University propaganda machine quite similar to UW Madison; the State University of New York at Stony Brook.   And yes, the propaganda worked at first.
.
I am aware of the fact that most liberals are very nice and well-intentioned people.
But I am also aware of the fact that a radical element has taken over leadership among liberals, an element that is extreme and dangerous, and which is leading the Democrat Party, a party which used to be equally good/bad as the Republican Party, to ridiculous and dangerous extremes.
.
I have confidence in the good people of this country, the majority, the non-radicals, on both right and left.  We have more in common with each other than we do with our respective far rights or far lefts.
80% of us pray regularly.  80% of us are broad, stable, and non-radical. 80% of us look for logic and for reason.
.

Broad, Stable, Non-radical, Right and/or Left

Caught in own snare

My fondness of, and my confidence in my “broad, stable, non-radical, non-Marxist left” friends, has led me to blog on conservative issues, laying out the logic and explaining some of the foundations of  conservative thought which I have unearthed during my recovery from my University brainwashing.  Confident that truth and logic wins over reasonable people, I chip away at the misinformation spread by conniving radical leaders like Pelosi and Obama.

.
Now, based on Peggy Noonan’s argument, Obama is actually doing the job of dismantling his agenda himself.  Much faster than we could dismantle the lies the left has been spreading.  Obama is shooting himself in the foot; he is stepping into his own snares.  I do not enjoy watching a man self-destruct, any man.  But it does give me hope for the non-radical, normal and healthy future of America; a future determined by the people, not by a radical dictator.
.
.

Back to Reality

Back to my Cap Times letter.

Democrats Voting in the Republican Primary?

.
I know that the editors of the Cap Times are not likely to be broad, stable, non-radical left types like my neighbors, friends and relatives.
.
Yes, I know, there’s a fourth possibility, the most likely one: that the Cap Times decided that support of Santorum would be most damaging to the upcoming Wisconsin Primary, and that by publishing my letter they would influence voters, both conservatives and also the liberals who plan to sneak in to manipulate the primary as well, to vote for Santorum.  They think that Santorum will have a lesser chance of defeating Obama in November.
.
But they, too, will soon be stepping into their own snares.
That’s what radicals do best.  Set snares for others, but get caught in them themselves.
.

An Invisible Player

And, most important, there is a invisible player, God.  And God has a wicked sense of humor.
I am watching political developments with great anticipation, as America continues to pray.
.
It would be wickedly satisfying to see the Constitution of the United States, which was based on the Ten Commandments and on Judeo-Christian morality, and which was written by the Founding Fathers centuries ago, still allowing us, the people, to take charge of our own destiny and to defeat the efforts of power-mongers on both sides.
.
The broad, stable, non-radicals of both right and left who value Christianity over Marxism, and who value real tolerance over imposition of radical values, could back a man like Rick Santorum, who does not advocate imposing his views on others, but advocates hands-off government.
.
Some think that Rick Santorum is too conservative.
But good, broad, stable, non-radical conservatives such as Rick Santorum (and such as me) do not try to legislate their views onto others.
They are tolerant.
Tolerant with limits: the Constitution of the United States defines the limits.
And that’s a very good thing.
.

Constitutional Limits

McNaughton: One Nation Under Socialism

The limits of the Constitution are Judeo-Christian limits.
These are the limits that radicals want to test and to reverse.
.

.

.

.

Commitment to Truth

or

Romney vs. Santorum?

.

.

Fortune Cookie

.

Fortune cookie yesterday:

If you tell the truth you don’t have to remember anything.

Good advice for Presidential candidates this election year!

Truth can be, and has been analyzed both by me and by more noteworthy philosophers throughout millennia of history.  Cultures have differing attitudes towards truth and toward its value.

Without embarking on a long philosophical discussion, suffice it to say that the foundations of European and United States governments rest on Christian principles; that Christ is the Word and the Truth; and that our innate common sense indicates the importance of truth during an election year.  A vote is meaningless if it is cast for a lie.

Democracy does not work when candidates lie.

Election year compels us to question the trustworthiness, truthfulness, and dependability of political candidates.

Barak Obama

Our President Barak Obama is not famous for truthfulness.  The issue under consideration by the Supreme Court today, the constitutionality of ObamaCare, is one prime example of Obama’s lack of commitment to truth.  ObamaCare was passed only very narrowly, and only after Obama promised Stupak, who was holding out for the exclusion of abortion from ObamaCare, that abortion would be definitely be excluded from ObamaCare.  70% of Americans oppose federal funding of abortion, yet the Obama administration has included abortion in ObamaCare.  That’s a pretty big lie, going back on a public promise, and railroading federal funding of something that half of America considers equivalent to murder and to the Holocaust, and something for which 70% of America opposes public funding.

Other lies of President Obama’s include :

  • Saying that 80% of Americans support higher taxes (actually 34% support)
  • Claiming his mother was denied health insurance (not true)
  • Pledging not to raise taxes on families making less than $250,000
  • Promising shovel-ready construction jobs with stimulus; later telling the NY Times there’s no such thing as shovel-ready projects.
  • Pledging that Americans would be able to keep their doctors under ObamaCare
  • Claiming he would not reward lobbyist with jobs
  • Making false statements about the involvement of foreign money in U.S. elections
  • Misrepresenting Arizona’s immigration law
  • Pledging transparency, then refusing 1/3 of Freedom of Information Act requests, failing to televise health-care negotiations on C-SPAN, and failing to wait 5 days so people could read the ObamaCare legislation online.
  • Violating his Oath of Office, by failing to protect the Constitution and ignoring the 10th amendment, which states that all powers, which the Constitution does not specifically allocate or prohibit, are reserved to the states (to the people).   President Obama has claimed many powers for the Executive branch; primary example is ObamaCare.
  • Additional lies
  • Obama’s biggest lies

With Obama, when it’s not lies, it’s disregard for and manipulation of the will of the American people, which is just as serious.  In fact, today, President Obama was caught on a hot microphone betraying his electorate, asking Russian President Medvedev to put off discussions of nuclear defense reductions until after the November election, when Obama would have more “flexibility” (to disregard the will of the people). continue reading…

Mitt Romney’s longtime advisor Eric Fehrnstrom blundered by comparing the upcoming general election against Obama to an Etch A Sketch toy and claiming that Romney can “shake it up” and “start over again” in the fall.

This ignited a controversy, appearing to be a public admission of Romney’s willingness to change his positions for political gain. Some conservatives continue to question Romney’s commitment to repealing ObamaCare, as well as to other conservative principles, based on his previous support of “RomneyCare” and of abortion.  Romney has even been called a RINO (Republican In Name Only) by some. One critical example of Romney’s questionable committment to conservative values is his refusal to sign the Susan B. Anthony List’s  Pro-Life Presidential Leadership Pledge, which most other candidates did sign: Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Michele Bachmann, and Ron Paul.

This can be contrasted with Rick Santorum’s views, which reflect the views of conservative Americans on life, on liberty, and on economy.  Rick Santorum’s views appear to be deep-seated and unshakable.

So here’s my endorsement and my campaign slogan:

Rick Santorum: UNSHAKABLE on Life, Liberty and Economy

Madison’s Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally

March 23, 2011

U.S. District Courthouse,
120N. Henry St.
Madison, WI

A Nationwide Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally was held on Friday, March 23rd, 2012, from noon to 1 PM.
Nationwide list of participating cities (click).
The Madison, Wisconsin rally was held at the U.S. District Courthouse in downtown Madison, at 120 N. Henry Street.
500 people were in attendance, including the Catholic Bishop of Madison and numerous priests and sisters.

Photos:

(Tom Reitz, ReitzInternet, Syte Reitz)

  • U.S. District Courthouse, Madison, WI
  • Stand Up for Religious Freedom
  • Rally at U.S. District Courthouse
  • The U.S. District Courthouse
  • Fr. John Sasse
  • Love One Another
  • Fr. John Sasse leads prayer.
  • Steve Karlen introduces the Bishop
  • Crowds hear Bishop Robert C. Morlino
  • Steve Karlen introducing the Bishop
  • 500 attended
  • Steve Karlen of Pro-Life Wisconsin
  • 500 Crowd in with Bishop
  • The U.S. District Courthouse
  • Bishop Robert C. Morlino
  • Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally
  • Stand Up for Religious Freedom
  • LIFE!
  • Bishop Robert C. Morlino
  • Bishop of Madison, WI
  • Love children!
  • Crowds
  • Madison, WI
  • Sisters attending the Rally
  • Applause for the Bishop
  • Patriotism
  • Catholic Sisters
  • \
  • Laura Karlen
  • Fr. Rick Heilman
  • Fr. Rick Heilman
  • Divine Mercy Chaplet
  • Thanking the Bishop
  • Battle Hymn of the Republic
  • Jeanne Breunig
  • Rally Over
  • Stand Up for Religious Freedom!

.

Bishop Morlino’s remarks audio (click)

.

Bishop Morlino on facebook (click)

.

Madison Cap Times coverage:

Pro-life activists react to Obama’s ‘war on women’

Elsewhere:

Washington, D.C. Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally:  Star Parker speaks:

Stand Up for Religious Freedom:  http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/

Locations near you :   http://standupforreligiousfreedom.com/locations/

Obama SO Wrong on Contraception Numbers; Could Obama’s 99% in Reality be as Low as 31%?

.

[pro-player width=’530′ height=’253′ type=’video’]http://cnsnews-test.s3.amazonaws.com/sites/default/files/videos/converted/percent.mp4[/pro-player]

President Obama telling us that 99% of all women use contraception.

.

.

“Facts” recently claimed by the Obama administration during the Contraception Mandate debate:

  • Obama: Nearly 99 percent of all women have relied on contraception at some point in their lives – 99 percent.
  • Sebelius: Made the same claim twice on national television programs.
  • Obama Campaign Manager Cutter: Made the same claim twice on CNN.
  • Pelosi: 98% of Catholic women use birth control

Yet CNS news reports: 13.9% of women have never had sex, so the above claims cannot be true. This puts the maximum possible number of women using contraception as 86.1%.

The Original Center for Disease Control Study

O.K., so CNS News went to the original government study where they found two qualifying statements:

  • Researchers only studied women who had had sex and excluded those who had not
  • Researchers listed all women who had ever, even just once in a lifetime, used any form of contraception.

By accounting for these groups, CNS news concluded that 38.2 percent of sexually active women were not using contraception at the time the study was conducted. 38.2% of 86.1% subtracted means that we are now down to 53.2 % of women using contraception.   So Obama and Co. were misquoting the study they referred to.

But it gets worse:
Here’s a graph from the study:

Center for Disease Control, Dept of Health and Human Services Contraception Use Report, page 18

Look at the figures highlighted in yellow.
Included in Obama’s 99% of sexually active women “using contraception” are 23% of all participants in the survey who are using a form of periodic abstinence; either calendar rythm or natural family planning.

Obama is Counting Women Who Use Abstinence as Contraceptive Users

THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS COUNTING WOMEN WHO ARE USING ABSTINENCE (23% of sexually active women) AS CONTRACEPTIVE USERS!

So now the number of women using contraception shrinks further. We were previously down to 53.2%.  Don’t ask me to calculate where we are now– I am not sure my math is that good! Do we lose another 23% of 53% when we don’t count those using abstinence, and are we now down to 41%?

34% of Women Have No Problem With Abstinence

Incidentally, if you count the periodic abstinence women (23% of 86.1%)  and the women who abstain totally from sex (13.9%), we find that 34% of all women are fine with abstinence.  Something that Judeo-Christian principles have advised for millennia.

25% of Women Refused to Participate in the Intrusive Study

We ALSO have not yet accounted for the 25% of women who refused to participate in the 80-minute study. The original survey, the Center for Disease Control, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services report entitled Use of Contraception in the United States: 1982-2008 actually stated that 25% of women selected did not participate in the study and that the in-home interview took 80 minutes to complete.

Theorectical Lower Limit for Contraceptive Use

That would bring us down to 31% of women using contraception, not the Obama administration’s 99%.
It also skews the population; any woman who has a moderate degree of modesty/privacy about her sex life, as well as any woman who does not have 80 minutes to spare for a survey, were not included in this study.

What is the Actual Number?

Of course, I am not claiming that only 31% of women use contraceptives in the U.S.  The above graph also shows us that many women use numerous forms of birth control which overlap.  So some of the women using abstinence techniques may have in their lifetime used another technique as well.  However, this analysis does show that Obama’s 99% number is ridiculously misleading, and that it is theoretically possible, based on the data, that the number of women using abstinence techniques could actually outnumber the number of women using contraceptive techniques; 34% vs. 31%.

We will probably never know the exact numbers, since sexuality is a usually a very private matter, and there is a large segment of the population which will never participate in such studies.

Bottom Line

The Obama administration  can choose between two explanations for this gaffe which was repeated by the administration dozens of times:

  • They are scientifically impaired and unable to read the CDC report table above.
  • They are purposely distorting the truth to their own political advantage.

Doesn’t look good either way.

Is a regime which cannot correctly read data off simple scientific charts trying to mandate dictate our national sexual mores?
Or is the regime lying to us blatantly whenever it suits their agenda of the moment?

Time for a regime change!
Vote in November!

All Posts