"Hail to thee, blithe Spirit! Bird thou never wert, That from Heaven, or near it, Pourest thy full heart In profuse strains of unpremeditated art."
Six signs from all over the world. For instance:
Hamas’s Al-Aqsa TV channel in late July broadcast a Friday sermon in which an imam issued a chilling threat to Jews: “We will not leave a single one of you alive. Our doctrine in fighting you is that we will totally exterminate you. We will not leave a single one of you alive.” Such savagery may be expected from Hamas, but a similarly virulent antisemitism is becoming increasingly common all over the world.
What’s he got now?
It’s blowin’ in the wind, this “justice in Palestine” stuff. Lefties’ favorite.
Persuasive argument here. Some of us were on the right side of history in 2012:
Chaos in Iraq:
. . . . Romney warned that Obama’s failure to secure an agreement to keep a residual military force in Iraq would threaten the U.S. gains made at such a high cost in American lives and treasure. “America’s ability to influence events for the better in Iraq has been undermined by the abrupt withdrawal of our entire troop presence,” Romney asserted.
. . . With no U.S. military presence to constrain Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, the Shiite politician persecuted Sunni leaders and gutted Sunni participation in government and the military .
The Russia question:
. . . . Obama mocked Romney for calling Russia America’s top geopolitical foe. Today, Russia has stolen Crimea from Ukraine, funds and provides weapons and men to Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine and even threatens an invasion of the country. President Vladimir Putin meddles in the Mideast, seeks to expand Moscow’s clout in Latin America, and harbors renegade Edward Snowden.
VA:
. . . . Romney in 2011 advanced the idea of giving veterans a voucher to obtain medical care they could not get at a Veterans Administration hospital. This year saw the VA scandal reveal that long waiting lists for hospital treatment were hidden. Legislation Obama signed this week allows vets to seek help outside the VA system.
Overseas relocation:
Romney understood that the nation’s outdated, complex tax code encourages U.S. corporations to park assets overseas and invest in other countries. He recommended tax reform to keep that money and business in America and boost the economy. Obama does nothing about reform but demagogues as “unpatriotic” corporations pressured by the tax code to seek profits and better returns for shareholders overseas. . . . .
Bipartisanship:
Obama has never demonstrated a commitment to bipartisan leadership. In the opening days of his presidency in 2009 with the nation in financial crisis, Obama rejected GOP ideas for economic stimulus by telling Sen. John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee, that “I won.” Obama’s re-election meant only further gridlock in Washington. . . . [Italics added throughout]
It’s what comes of being purely political, with no visible means of supporting or fulfilling presidential responsibilities.
Big news blew in from Montana:
Democrats suffered the latest in a series of blows to their hopes to hold Montana’s Senate seat on Thursday, when Sen. John Walsh (D-Mont.) announced after days of speculation that he’ll drop his campaign against Rep. Steve Daines (R-Mont.).
Walsh’s decision after weeks of fallout from a plagiarism scandal likely ends any hopes the party has to hold the seat, barring a miracle recruitment coup heading into the state party’s hastily organized Aug. 16 convention.
There’s more:
It’s not their only open-seat recruiting failure this cycle — they failed to get in a decent candidate in South Dakota to replace retiring Sen. Tim Johnson (D), and Rep. Bruce Braley (D-Iowa) has given national Democrats fits with his gaffes. The Democratic senators running for reelection in Republican states are fighting hard but may not all win, so if Democrats end up losing the Senate, recruiting failures early in the cycle could be their downfall.
Hope-a hope-a.
NY Times man wants to “stamp out” anti-LGBT attitudes “ruthlessly.”
To which RJ Snell in Crisis Mag:
It’s quite a statement for a public figure to make—for anyone to make—but especially one supposedly devoted to high-level journalism and policy. In a moment of “graciousness,” he clarified that he isn’t calling for anyone’s death, just that “we should make anti-LGBT views shameful like segregation. Not saying we should off people.”
He’s not even looking for a duel?
He is Robert L. Hylard, who cashed in at 86 and remained loyal to his school to the end.
Pat Hickey tells us about him.
He was
the Kid from VIZ [Visitation parish, 55th Street] who played in Leo’s Marching Band for four years, wrote for and helped edited the school news paper the Oriole, ‘trod the boards’ in every Leo Dramatic production from junior year on, and played lightweight football on the cinders and broken beer bottle glass of Shewbridge Field – the iconic home to Leo High School football, now Amos Alonzo Stagg Elementary.
He is remembered with affection.
The young African American, Mexican and Canaryville Irish kids who now attend Mr. Hylard’s Alma Mater knew him well. Bob Hylard made all of the football home games, most of the away and every Leo High School event that showcased the talents and skills of our young men a huge mark on his calendar.
Leo remains a boys’ school, vigorously supported and operated by its mostly (S. Side) Irishers, a haven of excellence in a rough neighborhood.
Was about to make a online comment about an egregiously one-sided account in Our Sunday Visitor of Catholic social teaching about compulsory unionism —
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in the Hobby Lobby case overshadowed another ruling the court issued the same day, one Catholic legal scholars and activists fear might undermine the ability of public-sector unions to collectively bargain.
On June 30, the high court ruled 5-4 that home health care workers in Illinois could not be compelled to pay union dues because that requirement under Illinois state law violated the workers’ free speech rights.
etc. — when I (naturally) checked out already-made comments, which frequently give you a good idea of what an article says, where I found this:
jagnote: This is not a question of collective bargaining and it is certainly not a question of Catholic Social Teaching [but] a question of labor union leaders taking money from people forced to be in a union and then using the money . . . to funnel political donations to the Democratic party. . . . union members are forced to support the Democratic political party even if they are fundamentally opposed to its positions….for example, abortion, contraception, same-sex marriage, removing God from any mention in the party platform.
Do you want an example of the end game for American public sector unions? I give you Detroit. Collective bargaining might have been necessary in the nineteenth century but today America has been “collective bargained” out of competitive salaries and benefits.
Most of us faithful Catholics are appalled at how the “social teaching” of the Church is continually used to support political positions which are diametrically opposed to the true teachings of Christ. To quote Pope Benedict XVI (Deus Caritas Est, section 28): “. . . Catholic social doctrine . . . has no intention of giving the Church power over the State. . . . Its aim is . . . to help purify reason and to contribute, here and now, to the acknowledgment and attainment of what is just.” [I]t is not just to force people to give their hard earned money to support an ideology in which they do not believe.
To which five readers responded, all in support of the first, of which two stand out:
Jim F: Precisely! The days when James Cardinal Gibbons openly and correctly supported the union movement are long gone. Corporate greed has been replaced (or supplemented) by union greed. Does no one note that “women’s health care” (i.e. abortion) is always on the union agenda? “Activists” are concerned because their ability to compel others to pay for their activism may now be restricted.
Pamela: It’s bad enough that we have to fight progressivism from outside our fold…but seeing it held up and praised as “Catholic social teaching” is an outrage.
To which I added a sixth:
I would have found this article/essay/column far more interesting if it gave even lip service to differences of opinion among Catholic scholars about compulsory unionism as discussed in official Catholic documents.
Michael Novak comes to mind (The Catholic Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, which I have not read) but more to the point Thomas J. DiLorenzo, professor of econ at Loyola College-Maryland, and Thomas E. Woods Jr., author of The Church and the Market: A Catholic Defense of the Free Economy.
Even one of these could have offered an arresting comment or two. As it is, you have here a sort of catechism piece or pamphlet, nicely done but a trifle lame for all that.
So it goes. Oh, and that article. As I say, comments often tell it all, but you deserve a closer look, right here —
OK?
