As the presidential election season progresses and candidates proceed from state to state vying for support, there is much talk about the “Battle of Wisconsin,” portraying the primaries occurring here this Tuesday as being particularly crucial in determining the Republican nominee for the presidential election of 2016.
On the one hand, every primary/caucus in every state since Iowa gets built up by the press to heighten the excitement of the race and to boost network ratings.
On the other hand, Wisconsin does feature some characteristics that may be reflective of the evolving mind of the American people at large, and thus might give us a glimpse into what is to come.
Why is Wisconsin a Good Model for the National Struggle Between Right and Left?
It could easily be argued that Donald Trump’s rapid rise to popularity is a consequence of progressive bullying and Alinsky tactics of Democrats. Trump’s bold outspokenness and willingness to fight fire with fire, his unintimidated attitude, is garnering widespread support across the nation.
Wisconsin is where our unintimidated conservative governor was sustained by the support and gratitude of his people, where he balanced the budget and restored solvency, and where conservative values continue to return via legislative change.
Wisconsin is where Scott Walker went on to to win the progressive attempted recall by a landslide with more support than he got when first elected, and where Scott Walker went on to get re-elected yet one more time.
So It’s Also in Wisconsin Again…
So it’s also in Wisconsin where the Republican nomination will also be tested. In this case, the choice will be between two candidates who share some of Scott Walker’s values.
Donald Trump certainly demonstrates the valuable quality of “unintimidation” needed to face today’s progressive agenda.
Sadly, his commitment to conservatism is newfound, and yet to be tested.
His flip-flop on important values has been highlighted just this week, with contrasting statements on abortion, which change with the media pressure that is placed on him.
Donald Trump would make an infinitely better President than any progressive opponent, like Hillary or Bernie.
But he pales by comparison with most other Republican competitors, particularly in the area of “social issues-” or, in my book, ethics – religious liberty, abortion, and marriage.
He also has me slightly nervous about the possibility of being a Trojan Horse.
Ted Cruz also demonstrates the unintimidation needed today. He gets much better marks than The Donald on ethics – on religious liberty, abortion, and marriage.
If we are limited to the three Republican candidates today, he is unquestionably the best choice.
At the risk of almost omitting poor John Kasich from the discussion, Kasich has a significantly lower probability of success than Trump or Cruz. He is too liberal for my taste, but I would vote for him any day above Hillary or Bernie. And God bless his heart, he helps both major candidates to remain short of the magic number of 1237 delegates. This fact increases the probability of a brokered convention, for which I am rooting, and which would make it possible to return some very fine candidates into consideration– including Scott Walker, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, and many others.
(Stay tuned for another article coming very soon on the Brokered Convention and why that is a Godsend during this 2016 election, despite all the media hype that portray it as a looming catastrophe.)
But now back to the Wisconsin Primary of Tuesday, April 5, 2016, which is being veiwed by some as a pivotal “Battle of Wisconsin” in the Republican presidential nomination of 2016.
So What Are the Candidates’ Chances?
What are the candidates’ chances, nationally and in Wisconsin?
One indicator of the candidates’ chances is the (speculative) number of delegates each candidate has accumulated.
Despite attempts by Donald Trump’s campaign and by much media to imply that Donald Trump is entitled to being declared the Presumptive nominee of the Republican Party because he (speculatively) has accumulated 736 delegates in the primaries so far, Donal Trump is still far short of any such assumption.
The Republican nomination is not a horse race, and the winning candidate does not win by a nose. Republican nominations, as are most elections, including the general election, require the support of more than half of the Republican Party. When races are close, or candidates are numerous, runoff elections occur, designed to home in on a candidate on whom 51% of America can agree.
Looking at the (speculative) distribution of delegates won so far by various candidates below, it becomes pretty obvious that Donald Trump has no guarantee whatsoever of receiving the support of half of Republicans in the United States, and a runoff election, otherwise known as a brokered convention, is highly likely to be required.
Incidentally, the brokered convention is not an evil plot concocted by the Republican elites, as Donald Trump’s campaign and some media would have you believe. The brokered convention is the natural result of numerous candidates, close races, or a split party – all of which are occurring in 2016 – and rules specifying brokered conventions have been around since Abraham Lincoln’s election. Those rules are not stacked in favor of anybody, not “establishment” Republicans, not liberals, not conservatives, but are simply rules, like Robert’s Rules of Order (which govern the Rules of the Republican Party), which have been refined by experts and statisticians over decades to specify the fairest way to operate a runoff election.
NOTE: Looking at the pie chart above, you can see not only that neither Trump nor Cruz are the Presumptive nominee by any means, but also that Wisconsin’s contribution to the number of delegates up for grabs is not overriding, either.
So What’s the Fuss About Wisconsin?
So what’s the fuss about Wisconsin?
The fuss is two-fold:
Wisconsin has succeeded in reversing a progressive liberal trend and restoring Wisconsin safely and efficiently to a more rational conservative government. It serves as a model for the changes needed in our Federal government today.
Wisconsin has also succeeded in rescuing it’s Supreme Court from radical takeover by progressives who were using Alinsky tactics. This also serves as a model for the changes needed in our Federal Supreme Court today.
As goes Wisconsin, so might go the United States.
Or at least we hope so.
Our Lady of Good Help, help us!
The Wisconsin Vote
So What Will Happen in Wisconsin?
Republican presidential candidates are polling 40% Cruz, 33% Trump, and 19% Kasich.
One might add that conservatives are sometimes reluctant to participate in polls, pariticularly in the aggressive progressive Alinsky tactic climate we are presently in. So polls often underestimate the magnitude of conservative support a conservative candidate might receive. This happened to Governor Walker in the recall election of 2012, which Governor Walker won by a landslide.
So it will be no surprise if Ted Cruz wins Wisconsin by a landslide.
Let’s hope this happens, and that it is indicative of national attitudes.
However, it is most probable that nobody, neither Trump nor Cruz, will get the (speculative) 1237 delegates nationally, and a runoff election will be needed.
Again, a welcome development, which might even return Scott Walker, Wisconsin’s governor (or anybody else) into the running if Trump or Cruz cannot get 51% of the delegates in the first vote at the convention.
Vote for Ted Cruz, who supports Religious Freedom, opposes Planned Parenthood and abortion, and supports traditional marriage. He’s a patriot who supports the Constitution of the United States.
Vote for Justice Rebecca Bradley, who is committed to the rule of law and applying the law fairly and impartially.
Vote for Ted Cruz on April 5th in Wisconsin!
. Vote for Justice Rebecca Bradley on April 5th in Wisconsin!
Dave Cieslewicz used to be the mayor of Madison, WI.
He lost this position in the last election, and now blogs for a local radical rag in Madison called Isthmus, under the name of Citizen Dave (as opposed to Mayor Dave), where he frequently discusses his feelings about Madison.
Citizen Dave was mayor of Madison in 2011, when unions were trying to intimidate the Wisconsin State Legislature and Governor Scott Walker into favoring unions during Wisconsin’s struggles with its faltering economy.
As Mayor, Citizen Dave did his best to assist unions and radicals in Madison.
When angry mobs broke into Madison’s State Capitol, Mayor Dave ordered Madison’s Police Chief not to allow his officers to participate in removing demonstrators from the building.
Then, Mayor Dave issued an official City of Madison statement supportive of the demonstrators, referring to crowds “peacefully assembled to exercise democracy and First Amendment rights.”
Police help Wisconsin Assembly members to escape Madison from angry crowds.
The phrase “dereliction of duty” sure comes to mind.
Long Story Short
Long story short, Mayor Dave lost his next election, and Governor Walker was reelected during the attempted recall by a way bigger margin than the margin with which he was first elected.
Madison had spoken.
Wisconsin had spoken.
Not only most of Wisconsin, but also most of usually liberal Madison, had had enough.
Mayor Dave was gone, Governor Walker stayed.
Now Citizen Dave talks about his feelings in the local progressive rag, the Isthmus.
The Isthmus specializes in far left advocacy journalism, and it’s contributors and editors are often funded by George Soros-funded organizations like the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism.
Citizen Dave Fails Catholicism
Wearing his new Citizen blogger hat at the Isthmus, Dave discusses many things.
But one of his favorite topics seems to be criticizing the Catholic Church.
His efforts range from criticizing the Bishop of Madison for not putting up a shopping mall on the arson-destroyed Cathedral property on which the Church in Madison plans to rebuild a Cathedral, to his latest diatribe, which expounds on the immature rebellious attitudes which he apparently directed toward the Catholic Church in his teens. A position from which he has apparently not evolved at the age of 53.
The Amoeba
The diatribe is launched from Citizen Dave’s disapproval of the Church’s banning of two heretic nuns from teaching in Madison’s Catholic parishes. In Citizen Dave’s mind, if God (and his Church) do not satisfy the challenges of a rebellious high-schooler, then Church history, God’s revelation, and our Madison Bishop’s experience and moral expertise are to be summarily dismissed. Citizen Dave does not appear to realize that if, in fact, a God exists, and is by definition responsible for the presence of the solar system, this planet, and Citizen Dave himself, that such a God would necessarily have an intellect so superior to Citizen Dave’s that Citizen Dave’s intelligence next to God’s, even during Dave’s apparently very enlightened high school life, would be as meager as the intelligence of an amoeba next to that of a human being.
AMOEBA
So the amoeba is not in a great position to dismiss the existence of God with the sole justification that his amoeba brain cannot comprehend the mind of God. “If I don’t comprehend it, it does not exist.” If Citizen Dave does not comprehend it, it does not exist. What else does not exist? Quantum physics? The Mandarin language? Brain surgery? And so, an amoeba goes on to blog attitudinally against the Catholic Church, which he abandoned in his teens.
Apparently, in Citizen Dave’s mind, the idea that the Catholic Church might forbid false teachings in it’s parishes does not seem to be obvious. Or that the Catholic Church and it’s experts might know a bit more about religion than he does. Citizen Dave wants to insist on the right to determine which individuals are permitted to teach in the Catholic Church that he has abandoned.
Teaching Fallacious Math
Wonder if Citizen Dave would insist similarly on the retention of math teachers who insist on teaching fallacious arithmetic in Madison’s schools, or on the retention of City engineers who advocate that Madison roads should be built from toothpicks?
Citizen Dave is not only a misinformed and lapsed Catholic, he’s not even a very logical man.
Bottom Line
Citizens Dave’s latest rant can be found at the Isthmus.
The article is high on resentment towards a bishop who is doing his job accurately and well, and is low on accuracy or information on the Catholic Church, or on Catholic nuns. Citizen Dave declares at the outset that he is not a “church hater.” Protesting a bit too much, methinks. His article comes across quite hateful, and completely intolerant. Wonder if he would write that way about other groups, say Muslims, or women, or blacks?
Citizen Dave’s resentment of Bishop Morlino comes off a bit greedy; his previous Isthmus article berated Bishop Morlino for not putting up a shopping mall and parking ramp which Dave wanted on the Cathedral property. Was he fantacising that he’s still mayor, and looking for resources he can commandeer for the City’s use, in typical progressive fashion?
In this latest article, Dave recalls the Bishop’s inability, on a $3 million dollar budget, to maintain the charitable MultiCultural Center when the recession hit several years ago. Citizen Dave neglects to mention that the City of Madison, which Mayor Dave was running at the time on a $200 million dollar budget, provided no equivalent charitable center for the citizens of Madison. Moreover, when the Catholic Church’s center started to fail, the City of Madison only contributed $13,500 towards the saving of the failing Catholic center. Perhaps Mayor Dave wished that the Diocese of Madison would do all his charitable work for him, despite a 10-fold lower budget than his.
Now, Citizen Dave, a “progressive Catholic,” (BTW, that’s an oxymoron), resents that the Bishop of Madison does not allow heretics to teach in Madison’s parishes.
Citizen Dave should stick to what he knows best.
I’m not sure what that is, but he should stick to it.
For sure, he should quit dissing my Church.
He did a pretty sad job of it in his Isthmus article on Bishop Morlino.
Egg on face, Dave.
Not very tolerant, no-longer mayor, of not very tolerant Madison.
Show some respect.
One of the prime goals of this cultural values blog is to defend my religion, Catholicism, against the regrettably frequent and unjust attacks we suffer, particularly in Madison, WI.
One of this blog’s first blog categories was “Don’t Diss My Church.”
And in Madison, the Wisconsin State Journal has provided more than it’s fair share of imbalanced reporting on Catholics, frequently fueling my blog.
Why Pray the Rosary at Madison’s Capitol Square?
Catholics praying the rosary at Capitol Rosary Rally
Now that the Obama administration has embarked on restricting the religious freedom of Catholics, Madison Catholics have begun praying the rosary on Thursday evenings on the Madison Capitol steps, to beg God’s help in the restoration of religious freedom to our nation.
Madison’s Rosary Rally gatherings attract 150-300 quiet, polite people each week. The crowd includes families with small children, young singles, and many grandparents as well. The Catholics gather quietly after business hours, do not disrupt Capitol business, leave no litter behind, do no shouting, carry no vuvuzelas, whistles or drums, and don’t even carry signs. They come, they pray for our nation, and they leave quietly, leaving no damage in their wake.
Who Heckles Children Praying the Rosary?
About 3 to 10 ne’er-do-wells have started showing up at these rosary events, attempting to disrupt them. Their tactics include shouting four letter words from across the street, mocking the rosary, carrying rude signs mentioning private body parts, and all the usual aggressive radical left tactics Wisconsin has witnessed at recent teacher union protests, and at Madison Pro-Life rallies (which radicals have routinely tried to disrupt in recent years, and where they have even been known to get up in pulpits at Library Mall and perform strip-tease dances in front of children with literally only God knows what motivation).
Teacher union protest tactics:
.
Is the Wisconsin State Journal Heckling the Rosary?
So, Doug Erickson, the “religion” reporter for the Wisconsin State Journal (WSJ), instead of covering the story from the perspective of the hundreds of Catholics participating in the Capitol Rosary Rally who represent one quarter of America, covered the story instead from the perspective of the handful of rude hecklers.
Catholics Pray for Restoration of Religious Freedom
Families Pray for the Coming Election
Family Values Defended in Public Prayer
Prayer Brought to Madison’s Downtown Capitol
New Peaceful Standard Set for Disagreeing With Government
Prayer and Civility Replaces Anger and Rage at Madison’s Capitol
Contrasting Teacher Union Protests and Capitol Rosary in Madison
I have participated in many of the Rallies, and I can attest to the fact that Doug Erickson’s implication that Rosary Rallies are “pep-fests” could not be further from the truth.
WSJ Rosary Rally Article- Thinly Disguised Radical Dem Propaganda
Thinly Disguised Radical Dem Propaganda Headline
The Wisconsin State Journal’s misleading headline was amplified by a factor of 118,000 through its State-wide circulation, and the whole of Wisconsin was misinformed. Not to mention online readers, or readers of spin-off articles such as those at the LaCrosse Tribune, Yahoo News or the Orlando Sentinel.
Here’s a You Tube showing the Capitol lunch protesters with whom Craig Spaulding participated frequently and which forced Capitol Tour Guides to wear ear plugs; the group whose perspective the Wisconsin State Journal favors over the perspective of Catholics praying the Rosary at the Capitol:
.
Second Rosary Critic
Annie Laurie Gaylor of FFRF at Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally, Madison, W
Second Rosary Critic
Another individual quoted by the WSJ article is one of the co-presidents of the Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF), Annie Laurie Gaylor, who personally protested at the Stand Up For Religious Freedom Rally last June 8th, and who made no objections while her husband and co-President of FFRF Dan Barker repeatedly heckled praying children and scandalized them by shouting sexually suggestive remarks addressed to the children.
Dan Barker (FFRF) at Madison’s Freedom From Religion Rally; and what was Dan Barker doing? Shouting rude things at children.
Annie Laurie Gaylor and FFRF are in a minority not only because they are atheists, but particularly because they are a miniscule minority among atheists themselves. They constitute only 0.1 of 1% of atheists, or one out of a thousand atheists. That’s right, 999 out of 1,000 atheists, unlike Gaylor and FFRF, are tolerant of 80% Christian America, of 25% Catholic America, and have no problem with our legally established American right to public prayer which President Obama periodically exercises. Gaylor and her FFRF, whom the Wisconsin State Journal chose to quote in this article, constitute the angry radical fringe, which represents only one out of 33 thousand people, or 0.003 of 1% of the population of America.
Third Rosary Heckler
Another Rosary heckler (not mentioned by the Wisconsin State Journal article) made herself known to me when her braggadocio arrived in my inbox, through an online discussion in which I had participated. She belatedly joined a discussion which I had previously viewed as a reasonable and constructive conversation with a Madison LGBT activist, and which started when I objected to the activist’s treatment of the first Capitol Rosary Rally and of Bishop Morlino on his blog.
Aside:Since that time, the LGBT activist has begun censoring comments published on his blog, selecting supportive radical comments for publication, and declining to publish further discussion with me. I guess there are limits to the “Bluebird’s” willingness to discuss truth, after all, particularly when he and his friends start losing the argument. Turns out, he’s also a regular at the Lunchtime Solidarity Singers at the Capitol, who drive tour guides to wear ear protection.
Back to the third Rosary heckler: her name is Genie Ogden. Genie bragged in the online discussion that she heckles the Rosary Rally weekly, boos, and sings “Solidarity Forever” at Catholics who are singing hymns. Genie, like Craig Spaulding, was also a regular member of the Capitol lunchtime “Sing-a-Longs,” the fringe minority who continues to make noise at the Madison Capitol at lunchtime, despite Governor Walker’s re-election by an even larger majority in Wisconsin than he enjoyed in his first election.
Perhaps Genie is looking for new outlets for her anger, now that the recall is over. The You Tube of “Solidarity” protesters (to which Craig and Genie belonged, the noise of which drove people to wear ear protection) was presented above.
Schoenstatt Sister after the first Capitol Rosary Rally
Do these rosary hecklers/solidarity singers really believe that such actions would be persuasive and would bolster their cause?
.
Genie, like Doug Spaulding and FFRF, tried to claim that the Rosary Rallies are political, and that they constitute a violation of separation of Church and State. What she does not seem to realize is that neither she, nor other liberals, can divine the thoughts of others, and that the mention of Governor Walker and of Paul Ryan once in the course of thirteen Rosary Rallies, in the context of being answers to prayers, reflects a pro-life, not a Republican position. Democrat Stupak and his 11 Democrat supporters were an equal blessing and an equal answer to prayer when they stood up for the exclusion of abortion from ObamaCare. The pro-life beliefs of Catholics are not political; they are ethical.
.Rosary Hecklers in General
The Rosary Hecklers and critics above exhibit a bigoted and tyrannical attitude, denying to others the rights that the hecklers enjoy themselves.
Madison Teacher’s Union Protesters
Solidarity union activists like Craig and Genie, and LGBT activists like the Bluebird, reserve the right to use Madison’s Capitol Square for themselves to promote their own (minority) views and social agendas, but they seem to miss the hypocrisy in denying the use of the Capitol Square to praying Christians, who represent many more people than they do- a fact ignored by WSJ reporters.
The feeble attempts made by Craig, Annie and Genie to label Rosary Rallies events as political
Progressives Misjudging Catholics?
also reflects a judgmental attitude; they claim to know the motivation of others. After misjudging their target’s motivation, many “progressives” continue by attacking and violating the rights of those with whom they disagree. The Constitution does not guarantee a Right to Hateful Harassment. Moreover, the effectiveness of such tactics in promoting one’s cause are highly dubious.
I am proud to say that I have never gone to any Madison Capitol Square event to boo, heckle, curse, scream, disrupt or to counter-protest. I don’t engage in hateful behavior towards those with whom I disagree. Prayer is a much more civilized (and more productive) response. My sentiments are representative of those of Rosary Rally attendees.
Ignoring Two Thirds of America
Doug Erickson missed the boat completely by covering the Rosary Rally story from the perspective of a few radical protesters, and by omitting the concerns of two thirds of America.
The Rosary Rallies actually represent the majority of Wisconsin and of America.
The Catholics at the Rally represent all religions in America, which were recently galvanized and united by the religious freedom violations of the HHS Mandate. Numerous religions joined Catholics in opposing these violations of the First Amendment, an amendment which all religions value. Orthodox Christian Bishops, Protestant Theological Seminary chancellors, Presbyterian Bishops, Southern Baptists, Lutherans Evangelical Lutherans and the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America have rallied to support the Catholic Church in upholding the Catholic position on the HHS mandate. This is what Doug Erickson has failed to cover in his reporting.
The Rosary Rallies are large, peaceful, sustained, and they represent the reasonable Judeo-Christian views and the civilized demeanor of at least two thirds of America.
Numerous religions, including Baptists, Evangelicals and Jews, support the Catholic position in Stand Up for Religious Freedom, the program which gave birth to this Rosary Rally.
In ignoring the perspective of Catholics at the Rosary Rally in favor of the perspective of a couple fringe radicals, Doug Erickson has ignored 2/3 of America. He has ignored the majority of America’s opposition to federally funded abortion policy, and he has ignored the social consequences of such abortion policy, which has already resulted in shocking coerced abortion rates of 64% . Abortion is a much bigger deal than most people think .
Ignoring Religious Leaders:
Evangelical Pastors Join Catholics in the Defense of Religious Liberty
The national Religious Liberty debate has been ignored by WSJ, in favor of reporting speculations by a couple of “progressives” on the motivations of Catholics at prayer.
“THIS AREA HAS BEEN SET ASIDE FOR NON-PROFIT GROUPS TO EXERCISE THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL 1ST AMENDMENT FREE SPEECH RIGHTS.”
Evangelical Christian pastors have just organized a bold and courageous protest against the muzzling of moral leaders in America, and in support of religious freedom. On October 7, 2012, “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” will be celebrated. More than 1,000 pastors will preach sermons from the pulpit talking about the candidates running for office and then making a specific recommendation. The sermons will be recorded and sent to the IRS. The pastors expect the IRS to try to enforce a 1954 IRS tax code amendment forbidding tax-exempt organizations from participating in discussion of candidates for public office. When the IRS tries to revoke tax-exempt status and to impose an excise tax on them, the pastors will welcome the court battle. They claim that the 1954 IRS tax code amendment is blatantly unconstitutional, and they welcome an official evaluation of the amendment in court.
This effort is sponsored by the Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal ministry formed 18 years ago for the defense of religious freedom through strategy, training, funding and litigation.
Not the First Time WSJ Has Slanted the News
Slanted reporting in the Wisconsin State Journal is not new, nor surprising. Their coverage of the 2011 Teacher’s Union Protests was equally misleading and predisposed toward the “progressive” viewpoint. Lawlessness and misconduct was not reported, both on the part of demonstrators who trashed the Capitol, and on the part of Democrat officials who conspired to block the legal process. WSJ coverage was so slanted and misleading, that this blogger took to reporting what’s really happening in Wisconsin on my blog.
The WSJ also gives the tiny Freedom From Religion Foundation quite a bit of favorable press. Again, a fringe radical group (0.003 of 1% of Americans) gets favored coverage over mainstream Wisconsin.
Twisting and Misrepresenting Catholicism
Coverage of Catholicism in the WSJ has frequently been unprofessionally imbalanced.
Just this week, Doug Erickson did a “moral analysis” of the Catholic vote.
He gave equal weight and space to dissident national co-chairman of Catholics for Obama, as he did to Bishop Morlino of Madison, who is a legitimate and accurate representative of the Catholic Church.
So in Doug Erickson’s world, barakobama.com, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and a couple thousand petition signatories carry the same moral authority as a Catholic Bishop and 78 million real American Catholics. Doug is equating the fringe 0.06 of 1% of Catholics whose theology is steered by Obama, with legitimate Catholic officials and faithful Catholics. (Bishop Morlino’s education includes a doctorate in Moral Theology from the Gregorian University in Rome, with specialization in fundamental moral theology and bioethics.)
Doug Erickson: Reporting on the 0.06 of 1% of Madison Diocese Catholics (Holy Wisdom) – and relegating the 99.94% (real) Catholics to the last paragraph, entitled “detractors.”
Another Doug Erickson report focused on pair of previously Catholic nuns at Holy Wisdom Monastery, who appear to be recruiting Catholics to join their feminist Sunday services in place of attending the Mass. These nuns retain the name Benedictines, despite having rescinded their Benedictine vows and having separated themselves from the Catholic Church. Doug Erickson reported on this fringe minority group of two very favorably, but relegated input from real Catholics, including from the Diocese of Madison, to a last paragraph entitled “detractors,” where he quoted Catholics minimally, and out of context. A minority of two dissidents was portrayed in a favored light, while real Catholics were again downplayed.
The misrepresentation of Catholics in the Wisconsin State Journal could fill numerous blog posts (and has in the past), but the above three examples will suffice here.
For a Truthful Report on the Capitol Rosary Rally: see You Tube
The Capitol Rosary Rally, which the Wisconsin State Journal did not bother to portray accurately, and which reflects the Christian views and the civilized demeanor of the majority of Christian America can be seen here:
Come join Catholics in the 14th Capitol Rosary Rally tonight, Thursday, Sept 20, 2012, at the State Street steps of the Madison Capitol at 7 PM. Come watch what real Americans do (they act civilized and pray), stand in solidarity with Christians for religious freedom in America. All are welcome to watch, to listen, or to pray.
Discussing the Actual Issue
Something else Doug Erickson failed to do in his Capitol Rosary article was to discuss the question that his progressive friends raised; is it legal for Catholics to pray the rosary at Madison’s Capitol Square?
So public prayer is legal, and public gatherings at the Wisconsin State Capitol are legal.
Public gatherings at Madison’s Capitol have included Farmer’s Markets, restaurant showcase events (Taste of Madison), and Wisconsin Capitol Pride, an event promoting LGBTQA acceptance and rights.
Why would Catholic gatherings be forbidden? Why would promoting prayer for religious freedom be forbidden?
Discussing the Double Standard
WSJ failed to address this double standard of progressive Rosary critics in the article.
The progressive Rosary Hecklers quoted by WSJ demand freedom of belief and freedom of speech for themselves, but not for others. They want the right to scream four-letter words at others across Capitol Square in the presence of children, but to forbid the words “Our Father, who art in heaven.”
Further Important Issues Omitted by the WSJ report:
Validity of Christian claims regarding the violation of religious freedom by the HHS mandate
Evaluation of the position of America’s moral leaders on the religious freedom issue
Reporting the obvious differences in behavior, lawfulness and respect for the rights of others between the rosary participants and the heckling critics.
Definition of “separation of Church and State.”
Discussion of whether a once-in-14-prayer-rallies mention of two pro-life politicians constitutes a “violation of separation of Church and State.”
Discussion of the very pertinent 1954 IRS code amendment, which has been used by the IRS to silence Christian pastors, but has not been subject to an examination of constitutionality by the courts.
The effect that restrictions on religious freedom would have on the rights of progressives when in the future conservative Presidents are elected, and the effect on this country’s historical role as the safe haven for the world’s émigrés.
Suggestion: if Doug Erickson is to be the WSJ “religion” reporter, he must examine the serious issues affecting religion, rather than using his status at the WSJ to spread progressive propaganda. He should provide some professional and journalisticly ethical analysis of real religious issues.
Shame on the Wisconsin State Journal for Ethics Violations
Come tonight, and every Thursday night at 7PM through November 1st.
Join Catholics today in the 14th Capitol Rosary Rally – Thursday, Sept 20, 2012, on the State Street steps of the Madison Capitol at 7 PM.
Come watch what most Americans do (they act civilized and they pray).
Stand in solidarity with Christians for religious freedom in America. All are welcome to watch, to listen, or to pray.
Agnostics welcome.
Atheists welcome.
Baptists welcome.
Buddhists welcome.
Catholics welcome.
Evangelicals welcome.
Jews welcome.
Lutherans welcome.
Muslims welcome
Presbyterians welcome. All welcome, including any not mentioned above.
Invitation limited to well-behaved people who respect the rights of others.
All of us need, and will benefit from, freedom of religion (of belief), which is guaranteed to us by the First Amendment. This freedom has been violated by President Obama’s HHS Mandate, a mandate which must be reversed.
Why Even Atheists Should Stand Against Presidential Mandates
If Presidents of the future will be permitted to issue mandates like the HHS Mandate, without popular vote, without Senate or House vote, and without Supreme Court evaluation, what mandate will the NEXT President of the United States, who may not belong to your favorite political affiliation, decree?
I may not like President Obama’s mandates.
But others, including atheists, would not like President Romney’s mandates
or President Rick Santorum’s mandates
or President Ron Paul’s mandates
or President Michelle Bachmann’s mandates.
The next President could issue a Mandate that imposes tax penalties not on Catholics, but on International Workers Union Members, FFRF Members, Solidarity Singers, and Madison LGBT activists- severe, crippling penalties. Then were would Craig, Annie, Genie and Bluebird be? The Mandate could include penalties for Wisconsin Sate Journal reporters, too, Doug.
We all benefit from supporting freedom and democracy.
We have to coexist, so progressives should realize that in 46 days the shoe might be on the other foot.
This is still a democracy, and Presidential mandates are thinly disguised despotic edicts.
These are some of the religious, ethical and cultural issues that Doug Erickson and the WSJ should be discussing, rather than spreading the speculations of fringe progressives on the motivation of Catholics.
He’s balanced the budget and created 33,000 jobs. What more could we ask for?
Union dues should be voluntary, and the state should not be in the business of collecting them. Union certification should require a secret ballot. Collective bargaining should not be used to force extravagant pension and health benefits that cripple state budgets.
These common-sense reforms have made the union bosses desperate to disrupt Wisconsin government and overturn an election. They must not be allowed to succeed. In fact, every state should adopt Governor Scott Walker’s common sense reforms.
Vote for Scott Walker and for Rebecca Kleefisch on June 5th!
With the approach of the November 2012 election, things are really heating up.
This promises to be so much more than the usual incumbent election.
Since before 2000, America has been closely divided on some crucial issues, and elections seem to be intensifying in passion.
Divisions are deepening and polarizing, not only between left and right, but are deepening and polarizing within the two major parties, Democrat (Liberal) and Republican (Conservative).
Division
In 2000, we fought over chads.
In 2008, Democrats were floored by Obama’s displacement of Hillary.
In 2010, Wisconsin went Republican, and Governor Walker took charge of making some conservative fiscal changes.
Democrats rebelled; in March of 2011, unions converged on Wisconsin to show their displeasure.
Now, on June 5, 2012, Wisconsin faces the potential recall of a Governor– not for high crimes and misdemeanors– but for fulfilling the conservative fiscal promises he made during his election.
Many view Wisconsin as a preview and as a test of the ability of conservative fiscal policy to solve budget problems while retaining the support of voters as difficult yet responsible sacrifices are shared. What “goes down” tomorrow in Wisconsin is thought to be predictive of the direction soon to be taken by many other states, as well as by the coming Presidential election.
In 2011, President Obama took charge of implementing some liberal fiscal policies, including stimulus and ObamaCare.
This time, Republicans showed their displeasure; not through massive demonstrations, but through the filing of massive legal challenges.
Both parties are split between moderates who wish to continue attempts at compromise with the opposition, and those who are less compromising and believe that the time for stalemate and delay has expired.
The ultimate conflict will be resolved in November, when Americans vote either to keep or to discard President Obama. So far, historically, incumbent Presidents have been unseated by a challenger 10 times.
Division Over What?
The two positions, Liberal and Conservative, are stalemated on several issues for which it is difficult to imagine any compromise:
Economy: the liberal solution, spending, is not compatible with the conservative solution, cutting spending. A compromise, doing nothing, would (duh) do nothing while we watch our economy go down the tubes.
Abortion cannot be legal and illegal at the same time. It cannot be a “right” and murder at the same time.
Marriage cannot be between one man and one woman, while also being between two men or two women. A choice has to be made.
There are numerous additional issues on which now polarized liberal and conservative positions would struggle to find a middle ground.
Historical Election
With the intensification of divisions in the United States, and with escalating pressure for action by elected officials in place of rhetoric, many forecast the coming election to be historically decisive in determining the future direction of the United States.
Conservative Perspective
An increasing number of Americans, myself included, are turning more and more toward conservative approaches for the solution to the nation’s fiscal problems. Gallup polls indicate a rise in conservatism, as did Wisconsin’s “going Republican” in 2010.
Some would like to cast the trend towards conservatism as a panicked regression towards old and foolish policies. Of course, these would be Liberals, or Democrats, who view conservatism with such a negative spin.
Others would argue that the meaning of the word conservative (to conserve, or to save) is the no-brainer solution when resources, including economic resources, are in short supply, as they are today. Of course, these would be Conservatives, or Republicans.
Why Might June be Auspicious?
Few would argue that in times of famine food should be consumed at an increased rate instead of being saved and rationed. For this reason, a shift towards conservatism can only be good in tough economic times.
Generosity to the point of wastefulness characterizes prosperous times, while austere measures, and shared sacrifice characterize austere times.
See Conservative is the New Liberal for a historical discussion of the liberal-conservative shift.
And there do seem to be a number of signs of shift towards conservatism in the works, coming up right now:
Americans are praying in increasing numbers for solutions to our crises and our divisions. Individuals and groups are banding together in interfaith prayer (e.g. the Interfaith Novena to Stop the HHS Mandate) to implore God’s direction and assistance towards justice and wisdom.
Edward Klein’s new book The Amateur has just come out, describing the chaos reigning in the present White House. And no, Edward Klein is not a conservative; he is a liberal career journalist.
New York Times’ Pulitzer Prize winning Op-Ed liberal columnist Maureen Dowd has just turned on President Obama with statements like “The president who started off with such dazzle now seems incapable of stimulating either the economy or the voters.“
June 5, 2012, tomorrow, marks the Wisconsin Recall election, which shows some promise of retaining the tough-love Governor Walker, thus influencing the rest of the country to embrace conservative reforms.
Throughout all of June, including June 5 in California, Republican primaries continue. Ron Paul continues to make progress toward collecting staggering numbers of delegates after the primaries, with controversial tactics called “delegate strategy,” which is certain at least to shift the Republican Party platform towards more conservatism than a Romney nomination would imply, if not actually threaten the nomination of Mitt Romney.
June 8, 2012 brings the Religious Freedom Rally, with participants gathering in 140 cities across America to demand the reversal of the Obama administration’s contraceptive and abortifacient mandates added to ObamaCare.
The Movie 2016, based on the NYTimes best seller by Dinesh D’Souza and produced by Gerald Molen, producer of Schindler’s List, which projects the devastating effects of President Obama’s economic policies on America, and documents Barack Obama’s anti-American anti-colonialist philosophy, will be released in June. America will get a remarkable new perspective on Barack Obama, and what his (until now) baffling agenda might actually reflect.
The end of June (or early July) is the projected release date of the Supreme Court Decision on the Constitutionality of ObamaCare. This decision has the potential for nullifying ObamaCare, which many regard as a fiscal and moral catastrophe.
We Are in the Third Act
Act III comprises the final segment of a classic three act play. It is in the third act that the climax occurs, as well as the denouement, a period of calm at the end of a play where a state of equilibrium returns.
The suspense and the drama are building towards determining America’s future direction as we approach the November 2012 election, and we are in for an exciting June.
Of course, it is my optimistic hope and prayer that June will bring auspicious events, not catastrophic ones.
Time will tell.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
As the presidential election season progresses and candidates proceed from state to state vying for support, there is much talk about the “Battle of Wisconsin,” portraying the primaries occurring here this Tuesday as being particularly crucial in determining the Republican nominee for the presidential election of 2016.
and fire-fighters had to rescue a cornered senator, where conservative legislators had to be escorted out of town for safety after a Senate vote, and where Justices of the Wisconsin Supreme Court used assault and slander in attempts to progressivise the Supreme Court – it is here in Wisconsin, that Governor Scott Walker combined the necessary boldness, courage and justice to win the battle against Madison’s progressives Unintimidated (the title of the inside story). 
The Republican nomination is not a horse race, and the winning candidate does not win by a nose. Republican nominations, as are most elections, including the general election, require the support of more than half of the Republican Party. When races are close, or candidates are numerous, runoff elections occur, designed to home in on a candidate on whom 51% of America can agree.
Syte Reitz grew up in Queens, New York, in a family of Lithuanian immigrants who fled Nazi and Soviet domination during World War II. Her education includes a Ph.D. in Biochemistry, and post-doctoral work at Princeton University. Syte left her job as an Assistant Professor at Oakland University, Michigan, to devote herself to raising her children, and ultimately homeschooled them through the end of high school. She is a member of Madison's Cathedral Parish.
