This commentary is relatively easy to write. However, I am quite aware that the few who bother to read it will be moved to do anything other than continue to immerse themselves in the theater of the absurd that is the current election cycle.
As I have noted so many times in the past, though, my writing is intended to address root problems and to provide a frame of reference for those who desire to read commentaries such as this one dispassionately so that they can view the world more clearly through the supernatural eyes of the Holy Faith rather than through the lens of the naturalist agitation that used to beset the nation biennially but has now become a permanent feature of daily life and the means by which gaggles of talking heads who know nothing about First and Last Things to make oodles and oodles of money. The agitation produced by the needless conflict engendered and division engendered by the errors of naturalism make many people wealth in this life while impoverishing the souls of those who believe that is possible to have some “short term” respite from plunging further into the abyss by means merely natural.
While I admit right readily that there will be no getting the “toothpaste back in the tube” again if one of the socialists vying for the presidential nomination of the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist left winds up getting elected on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, it is only a matter of time before one of their number does managed to capture the White House. The demographics of the country are changing, and the very fact that the likes of the Jewish-born atheist and supporter of Marxism-Leninism despite labeling himself as merely a “socialist,” something that is evil in and of itself, United States Senator Bernard John Sanders (Independent, People’s Republic of Vermont), has the kind of enthusiastic support that he does is yet another proof of the effective nature of the ideological brainwashing and programming that has been taking place in America’s concentration camps, which go by the official euphemism of “public schools,” and of the constant drumbeat of leftism that is promoted by the so-called entertainment industry and by the mainslime media.
Another contributing factor to the rise of the “left” is the very prominent role played by the lords of conciliarism and their embrace of the naturalist, religiously indifferentist, Pelagian and anti-Incarnational civil state of Modernity that is the logical byproduct of Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry. Most, although not all, of the formerly Catholic elementary and secondary schools, colleges and universities and graduate and professional schools are run by “leftists” of one sort or another, which is why the curriculum of formerly Catholic educational institutions is almost indistinguishable from their state-run counterparts.
The lies of “global climate warming” and environmentalism, statism, socialism, communism, relativism, utilitarianism, materialism, hedonism, religious indifferentism, pantheism, paganism and positivism are interwoven into the very fabric of public programs of state-sponsored, taxpayer subsidized indoctrination and ideological programming, noting that it is parishioners in formerly Catholic parishes in the control of the conciliar revolutionaries who subsidize the systematic destruction of even vestigial remains of the sensus Catholicus by lying about, misrepresenting and distorting the genuine history of the Catholic Church while extolling every false religion and atheism itself as superior to the true Faith. The sin of Sodom and all its perverted vices are now being promoted by the very same kind of ideologues whose predecessors sought to undermine the inherent innocence and purity of children by immersing them even in “pre-school” programs in the most vile, vulgar instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments, an immersion that is continued throughout the indoctrination process. Loads upon loads of children thus indoctrinated have grown up to be “Bernie Bros” or supporters of that eminent Biblical “scholar,” the sodomite named Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg, the reprobate who remains in perfectly standing in the counterfeit structures of conciliarism Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., the hideous screech of a socialist who advanced her career by touting herself as having “Native American” heritage, Elizabeth Ann Herring Warren Mann (Madam Pocahontas: My late mother’s race is listed as American Indian on her marriage and death certificates, a categorization based on her adoptive maiden name as Norma Florence Red Fox, whose adoptive father was a vaudevillian performed who claimed, falsely, to be a Sioux Indian chieftain, but I never once used these documents in any manner as to do so would be to engage in a deception such as the one you perpetrated to boost your own career), the egregious pro-abort and a serial thrower of binder and temper tantrums (see Former Kobuchar Staffers Complain of Mistreatment and Bad Temper) named United States Senator Amy Jean Klobuchar Bessler or, among the other minor played, Michael Rubens “Nanny State” Bloomberg, about whom an entire section of this commentary will be devoted. Those devoid of any understanding of First and Last Things are prone to seeking utopia on earth, heedless of the fact that the entirety of creation has been resent asunder by Original Sin and is worsened further still by the Actual Sins of men. Such people are likely to blame the Cornavirus, no matter its probable origins in a Red Chinese laboratory in Wuhan, or the locusts that have devoured entire farms in Africa before passing into Dubai and traveling to Red China itself on the current president of the United States of America, Donald John Trump, rather than see them as plagues sent by the good God to chastise His rational creatures so that those who are in need of conversion will do so and those members of His true Church who have lapsed into Mortal Sins and show no sign of repentance or a desire to amend their lives will to go Confession and do penance for their sins.
Sadder still, the lies of Americanism are propagated even in many fully traditional Catholic venues, predisposing the young to believe that “democracy” provides us with an “opportunity” to thwart the very evils that have received protection under the cover of the civil law and are promoted with abandon throughout all the crooks and nannies of what passes for popular culture precisely because of the lie called “popular sovereignty.” Such Catholics are taught, whether wittingly or unwittingly, to seek their secular salvation, if you will, in “conservatism” and to believe that an election will hold back the gates of hell if it turns out the “right” way.
Despite all the agitation, however, evil keeps getting advanced in greater or lesser increments. It is not exactly “good” that President Donald John Trump, who has certainly been and continues to be the target of disinformation campaigns and the politically-driven prosecution of people in his orbit in whom he placed unwarranted trust as he did not care about their amoral ways, has appointed a sodomite, Richard Allen Grenell, currently the United States Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany, to be the United States Director of National Intelligence.
The “lesser evil,” if not an absolute “good” or “essential” in the eyes of many of those who support the president reflexively and without any degree of critical evaluation, has done much to mainstream the homosexual collective’s agenda. It is tragic that so few seem to care or notice that silence about the incremental increase of evil is blameworthy as it is easy to speak out against the caricatures of evil that are seeking the nomination of an organized crime family of naturalism that would have warmed the hearts of the late Eugene Victor Debs, still late Norman Mattoon Thomas or the equally late Arvo Kustaa Halberg (Gus Hall). It is not easy to avoid being blinded by the excitement of the moment. One must come to realize that the dangers to one’s nation, no less one’s own immortal soul, are usually crafted by the adversary to advance evils so gradually as to go undetected until they become part of everyday living. In other words, according to the adage, “the devil without his tail is more dangerous than the devil with his tail.”
This is not to understate the dangers posed by the current crop of miscreants and misfits who were featured in some kind of sideshow in a city that made me physically ill when passing through it in 1997 and again when giving a talk at a Society of Saint Pius X venue on Sunday, February 13, 2006, Las Vegas, Nevada. Not at all. However, it is to point out that that we seek in vain for a permanent way to retard an inevitable slid into leftist totalitarianism that seeks to eradicate all dissent from the false opposite of the naturalist “right” even though that bloodlust will be turned upon their fellow “leftists” soon enough.
First Principles First
The remote cause for all human problems, both personal and social, is Original Sin. The proximate cause of human problems, both personal and social, is Actual Sin. Human beings are wounded by Original Sin. Those of us who are baptized suffer from the vestigial after-effects of Original Sin (the darkened intellect, the weakened will, a disordering of the balance between our higher rational faculties and lower sensual passions). Those who are unbaptized suffer all of the ravages of Original Sin in their immortal souls that are captive to the devil and his minions. There is no legal, political, constitutional, electoral, interdenominational, nondenominational, secular, philosophical, ideological, naturalistic way to solve problems that are caused by the sin of Adam and the sins of us all.
Men will descend into the depth of madness and violence over the course of time as men and their societies move more and more away even from the vestigial influences of Catholicism in the world. Is it any accident that the chief Marxist in the presidential race, Bernard John Sanders, and the man who the mucky-mucks in the Democratic Party “establishment” believe can stop his “big mo” (see Bush, George Herbert Walker, 1980: Now they will be after me, howling and yowling at my heels. What we will have is momentum. We will look forward to Big Mo being on our side, as they say in athletics.” He lost to Ronald Reagan—George Herbert Walker Bush and the "Big Mo"), Michael Rubens Bloomberg, are unbaptized men of Jewish origin who are, despite their differences, militant supporters of baby-killing?
It is indeed true that there were social problems during the era of Christendom in Europe. The difference between then and now is simple: most men understood that they were sinners in need of cooperating more fully with the graces won for them on the wood of the Holy Cross by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, and that flow into their hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. Men knew that they had to amend their lives, that social order depended upon order within their own souls.
Is there any such understanding today?
Consider Pope Pius XII's concise description of the difference between Christendom and Modernity, contained in his first encyclical letter, Summi Pontificatus, October 10, 1939:
It is true that even when Europe had a cohesion of brotherhood through identical ideals gathered from Christian preaching, she was not free from divisions, convulsions and wars which laid her waste; but perhaps they never felt the intense pessimism of today as to the possibility of settling them, for they had then an effective moral sense of the just and of the unjust, of the lawful and of the unlawful, which, by restraining outbreaks of passion, left the way open to an honorable settlement. In Our days, on the contrary, dissensions come not only from the surge of rebellious passion, but also from a deep spiritual crisis which has overthrown the sound principles of private and public morality. (Pope Pius XII, Summi Pontificatus, October 10, 1939.)
The errors of pluralism divide people needlessly into warring camps as a permanently-established political class, composed of competing sets of naturalists, each of which believes that the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother by the power of God the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation is, at best, a matter of complete indifference to personal and social order. So many Americans live from election to election, always believing that “change,” whether it be in the direction of "progress" for naturalists of the “left” or in the direction of “constitutionalism” or “liberty” or “limited government” for naturalists of the “right.”
Although divisions on some matters will always occur until the General Judgment of the Living and the Dead on the Last Day at the Second Coming of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, it is also true that men today have been needlessly divided about matters pertaining to First and Last Things, oblivious to the fact that they have been given a spotless mother, Holy Mother Church, to serve as their mater and magister (mother and teacher) in this passing, mortal vale of tears. Most men today believe that they are automatons, either independent of any concept of God or “free” from the “dictates” of a hierarchical church.
Personal and social disaster cannot but be the result of such a brew of error. Men resort more and more to violence today because they do not know of the tender mercies of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus. They do not know that they have a Blessed Mother who made possible their salvation by her perfect fiat to the will of God the father at the Annunciation. They do not realize that the supernatural helps they need to overcome all sin in their lives and to pray for the conversion of those who are promoting evil in society flow through the loving hands of that same Blessed Mother, who gave the Rosary with her own blessed hands to Saint Dominic de Guzman so that we could be more closely united to her Divine Son, Christ the King, through the mysteries contained in her psalter, the Rosary.
Most men today do not realize that there is nothing that any of us can suffer, whether personally or socially, that is equal of what one of our least Venial Sins caused Our Lord to suffer in His Sacred Humanity on the wood of the Holy Cross and that caused those Seven Swords to be thrust through and through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. They tend, therefore, to dwell on their own pain, whether real or imagined, and to stew in their own juices as they conjure up hatred for their fellow human beings, each of whom is made in the image and likeness of the Most Blessed Trinity and for whose salvation we must pray fervently as one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy.
Living in a world that has been deprived of a superabundance of Sanctifying and Actual Graces as a result of the barren liturgical rites of the counterfeit church of conciliarism, most men today are "catechized" by television or the internet or what passes for "entertainment" in popular culture. They are tossed about from one thing to another without having any clear, coherent understanding of their identity as redeemed creatures and that each of us will have to make an accounting of our lives at the moment of our Particular Judgments. Men who lack the Catholic Faith, you see, must descend more and more into a coarseness of life and culture that produces a class of neo-barbarians who are not only at the gates but who are well inside of the fort of the city.
As been noted exhaustively on this site for the past sixteen years—and for more than a decade before that in printed journals (and for decades in my college classrooms), the descent into neo-barbarism just did not happen suddenly. It has been gradual, almost imperceptible at times. Having ridden the shock waves of the Protestant Revolution, which was a violent and very blood revolution against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him through His Catholic Church as they order their own lives and the laws of their nations in accord with His Deposit of Faith, men descended by steps into theological relativism, religious indifferentism and the worldliness that feeds on an ethos of naturalism and an unbridled licentiousness that passes for what libertarians tell us is “civil liberty.”
The result of this has been the rise of what can be called the incessant and ever-escalating battle between the false opposites of the naturalist “left” and “right,” which, no matter differences in approach are based in the same fundamental error from which flow their idiosyncratic variations on a naturalist theme of human self-redemption:
I refer to the “false opposites” of the "left" and the “right” because, despite their differences over the powers "government" over that of the "individual," both the “left” and the “right” reject Catholicism as the one and only foundation of personal and social order.
The adherents of the “left” and the “right” believe that it is neither prudent or necessary to acknowledge that the Incarnation of the Second Person of the Most Blessed Trinity in the Virginal and Immaculate Womb of His Most Blessed Mother has changed human history. Such adherents also reject any suggestions that both men and their nations must be subordinate to Christ the King and the authority of His true Church on all that pertains to the good of souls and that the civil government has an obligation to pursue the common temporal good in light of man's Last End.
No matter the differences between “conservatives” and “liberals,” my friends, they both have one mind and one heart in the belief that man does not need the teaching and sanctifying offices of the Catholic Church to guide them in their private and social lives. This is, of course, the triumph of the Judeo-Masonic spirit of naturalism that was dissected so well by Pope Leo XIII. It matters little as to who is or is not a formally enrolled member of the “lodges” when most Catholics and non-Catholics alike are infected with the ethos of naturalism.
Similarly, any civil leader who believes that can, either by himself or with others, pursue genuine order without the help of Our Lady and the use of her Most Holy Rosary is a fool. We must give public honor to Christ the King and to Our Lady, she is the Queen of both men and nations.
No one on the public stage does this as even most Catholics who are said to be “pro-life” even though they believe that at least one "exception," if not three, can be made to the binding precepts of the Fifth Commandment, to the protection of innocent preborn and are complete supporters of the vivisection of human beings under the aegis of the medical industry’s manufactured, profit-making myth called “brain death” and of “palliative care” have no understanding of the necessity of pursuing the common temporal good in light of man’s Last End. The vicious cycle of agitation between “left” and “right” in recent years that has broken out into violence at times (see Overthrow the Social Reign of Christ the King, Live In A World Awash With Hatred and Blood for a commentary after the shooting of United States Representative Stephen Scalise (R-Louisiana) on June 14, 2017, by a supporter of Bernard John Sanders, James Hodgkinson) will continue until the “left” vanquishes the “right” when older voters die off and are replaced by the younger voters who have been programmed to be ideological “leftists” and ahistorical enemies of truth. Such neo-barbarians have quite an ally in the person of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who has signaled his own support for international socialism on many occasions.
This is why the “left” will triumph for a time until the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary as is it impossible to fight the forces of darkness with the very evils from which they arose in the first place.
As the anti-Catholic Russian nationalist Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn noted at Harvard University on June 6, 1978:
As humanism in its development became more and more materialistic, it made itself increasingly accessible to speculation and manipulation at first by socialism and then by communism. So that Karl Marx was able to say in 1844 that "communism is naturalized humanism.'
This statement turned out not to be entirely senseless. One does see the same stones in the foundations of a despiritualized humanism and of any type of socialism: endless materialism; freedom from religion and religious responsibility, which under communist regimes reach the stage of anti-religious dictatorship; concentration on social structures with a seemingly scientific approach. (This is typical of the Enlightenment in the Eighteenth Century and of Marxism). Not by coincidence all of communism's meaningless pledges and oaths are about Man, with a capital M, and his earthly happiness. At first glance it seems an ugly parallel: common traits in the thinking and way of life of today's West and today's East? But such is the logic of materialistic development.
The interrelationship is such, too, that the current of materialism which is most to the left always ends up by being stronger, more attractive and victorious, because it is more consistent. Humanism without its Christian heritage cannot resist such competition. We watch this process in the past centuries and especially in the past decades, on a world scale as the situation becomes increasingly dramatic. Liberalism was inevitably displaced by radicalism, radicalism had to surrender to socialism and socialism could never resist communism. The communist regime in the East could stand and grow due to the enthusiastic support from an enormous number of Western intellectuals who felt a kinship and refused to see communism's crimes. When they no longer could do so, they tried to justify them. In our Eastern countries, communism has suffered a complete ideological defeat; it is zero and less than zero. But Western intellectuals still look at it with interest and with empathy, and this is precisely what makes it so immensely difficult for the West to withstand the East. (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart. June 8, 1978.)
Solzhenitsyn, who is should be pointed out, was a Russian nationalist and thus had a bias against the Catholic Church and her teaching authority, especially as pertains to Papal Primacy and to her constant condemnation of contraception, which he, Solzhenitsyn supported in the name of “population control,” explained forty-one years that his condemnation of socialism did not mean that he could recommend the Western culture of consumerism and materialism as the model for his own country should Communism end there (as it supposedly did on December 25, 1992, as the flag of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was lowered and the tri-color flag of Russia was raised up a flagpole in its place):
But should someone ask me whether I would indicate the West such as it is today as a model to my country, frankly I would have to answer negatively. No, I could not recommend your society in its present state as an ideal for the transformation of ours. Through intense suffering our country has now achieved a spiritual development of such intensity that the Western system in its present state of spiritual exhaustion does not look attractive. Even those characteristics of your life which I have just mentioned are extremely saddening.
A fact which cannot be disputed is the weakening of human beings in the West while in the East they are becoming firmer and stronger -- 60 years for our people and 30 years for the people of Eastern Europe. During that time we have been through a spiritual training far in advance of Western experience. Life's complexity and mortal weight have produced stronger, deeper, and more interesting characters than those generally [produced] by standardized Western well-being.
Therefore, if our society were to be transformed into yours, it would mean an improvement in certain aspects, but also a change for the worse on some particularly significant scores. It is true, no doubt, that a society cannot remain in an abyss of lawlessness, as is the case in our country. But it is also demeaning for it to elect such mechanical legalistic smoothness as you have. After the suffering of many years of violence and oppression, the human soul longs for things higher, warmer, and purer than those offered by today's mass living habits, introduced by the revolting invasion of publicity, by TV stupor, and by intolerable music.
There are meaningful warnings which history gives a threatened or perishing society. Such are, for instance, the decadence of art, or a lack of great statesmen. There are open and evident warnings, too. The center of your democracy and of your culture is left without electric power for a few hours only, and all of a sudden crowds of American citizens start looting and creating havoc. The smooth surface film must be very thin, then, the social system quite unstable and unhealthy.
But the fight for our planet, physical and spiritual, a fight of cosmic proportions, is not a vague matter of the future; it has already started. The forces of Evil have begun their offensive; you can feel their pressure, and yet your screens and publications are full of prescribed smiles and raised glasses. What is the joy about? (Dr. Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn, A World Split Apart, June 8, 1978, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts .)
The Nobel Laureate gave this address nearly eleven months after riots had broken out in the Borough of Brooklyn in the City of New York, New York, when the inept utility company, Consolidated Edison, suffered an outage at a power plant in Astoria in the Borough of Queens on Wednesday, July 13, 1977. Solzhenitsyn was saying in his address, in effect, that Americans are in trouble if the only thing keeping the masses from rioting and looting is Consolidated Edison, known colloquially in New York and environs as “Con Ed.”
Neither liberalism or its variants nor socialism and its variants are the foundation of social order. Catholicism, though not a guarantor of order given the vagaries of fallen human nature, is alone the only means that can provide men and their nations with the foundation for a just social order.
Comments on the Statists Seeking the Presidential Nomination of the Organized Crime Family of the False Opposite of the Naturalist “Left”
Although I will not offer detailed comments about the likes of Elizabeth Ann Herring Warren Mann or Amy Klobuchar Bessler as all one needs to know about these women is that their support for the innocent destruction of innocent human life in the womb and after birth disqualifies them from holding any position of public trust anywhere in the world, including here in the United States of America, noting also that each is a statist who is committed to the agenda of the homosexual agenda, I do think that four individuals, Bernard John Sanders, Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., and Michael Rubens Bloomberg.
Case-in-point: the seventy-eight year old Jewish born Marxist atheist named United States Bernard John Sanders (D-Vermont, by way of Brooklyn, New York, originally).
Bernard John Sanders: Unlike many in the commentariat, I do not believe that one can presume that Marxist-Leninist named Bernard John Sanders, who would be older than Dwight David Eisenhower was at his death at the age of seventy-eight on March 28, 1969, if he is elected on November 3, 2020, would lose in a landslide to President Donald John Trump. Sanders has a hard-core base of supporters, including the aforementioned ignoramuses who are the products of the American mis-educational system.
One of the consequences of the flawed premises upon which the United States of America is that “freedom of conscience” permits the free flow of so many errors that even those errors and ideologies that have been proven by empirical historical evidence within the lifetimes of many of us to be monstrously disastrous can be revived when an articulate advocate arrives who can count on the ignorance of the masses eager for “free goodies” and waiting for an “economic justice” that that is yet one of the many delusions promoted by Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin.
Marxism contends that human beings are simply a higher form of animals who lack an immortal soul. “Religion,” particularly the true religion, Catholicism, is dismissed as means to keep the masses waiting for what is said to be the “myth” of eternal happiness in Heaven so that they can be exploited by capitalists to accumulate wealth from the sweat of their brows. This why Sanders and his ilk, including office-holders who are wholly-owned subsidiaries of the so-called “People’s Republic” of [Red] China such as United States Senators Dianne Emiel Goldman Berman Feinstein Blum (D-People’s Republic of California), Mazie Keiko Hirono (D-Hawaii), Kamala Devi Harris (D-People’s Republic of California), are as one with the atheist Marxist Bernard John Sanders, who, not to be outdone by non-professed socialists, took a Baptist man, Russell Vought, to task in a United States Senate confirmation hearing on Vought’s nomination to serve as President Donald John Trump’s Deputy Director of the Office of Management and the Budget in 2017.
“Bernie,” as he likes to be called, was upset that Vought had expressed support in 2016 for the decision of officials at his baccalaureate alma mater, Wheaton College, Wheaton, Illinois, to suspend a professor because of her beliefs that Mohammedans have a “relationship” with God, which, of course, they do not.
This is what Vought wrote in a publication called The Resurgent:
This is the fundamental problem. Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned. In John 8:19, “Jesus answered, ‘You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.” In Luke 10:16, Jesus says, “The one who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” And in John 3:18, Jesus says, “Whoever believes in [the Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.” (Russell Vought's Efforts to Preserve "Theological Clarity".)
Mr. Vought was indeed correct. Mohammedans do not know the true God of Divine Revelation because they deny the Sacred Divinity of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and, of course, deny the existence of the Most Blessed Trinity.
There are two ironies about this.
First, the Baptist Vought holds to the invalidity of Mohammedanism whereas the supposed “Catholic,” Jorge Mario Bergoglio (aka Francis), commends each false religion and even atheism.
Second, however, Vought himself does not know the true God of Divine Revelation because he does not know Him as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through the Church that His Co-Equal and Co-Eternal Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, founded upon the Rock of Saint Peter, the Pope. Despite his sincerity, Vought holds heretical beliefs about Divine Revelation and thus does not really know Our Lord or what He teaches to us through His Catholic Church.
Having noted these ironies, however, “Bernie” Sanders, the pro-abort, pro-perversity, self-described atheist from a Jewish background, had no business applying a religious test to Vought in full violation of the terms of Article VI of the Constitution of the United States of America. Sanders’ Christophobic bigotry is such that he presumes no one who believes that salvation is to be found in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, no less, of course, in His true Church exclusively, can possibly treat people who deny Our Lord’s Sacred Divinity justly.
Here is the transcript of the exchange that Sanders had with Vought on Whit Wednesday, June 7, 2017, as found an article written by a Calvinist, Todd Starnes, who does not realize that we are simply witnessing the ulitmate and inexorable consequences of the false Protestant and Judeo-Masonic principles of the American founding:
Sen. Sanders: "'Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ, His Son, and they stand condemned.' Do you believe that that statement is Islamophobic?"
Mr. Vought: "Absolutely not, Senator. I'm a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith...
Sanders: "...Forgive me, we just don't have a lot of time. Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned? Is that your view?"
Vought: "Again, Senator, I'm a Christian, and I wrote that piece in accordance with the statement of faith at Wheaton College..."
Sanders: "I understand that. I don't know how many Muslims there are in America. Maybe a couple million. Are you suggesting that these people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?"
Vought: "Senator, I'm a Christian..."
Sanders [shouting]: "I understand you are a Christian, but this country [is] made of people who are not just -- I understand that Christianity is the majority religion, but there are other people of different religions in this country and around the world. In your judgment, do you think that people who are not Christians are going to be condemned?"
Vought: "Thank you for probing on that question. As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect regardless of their religious beliefs. I believe that as a Christian that's how I should treat all individuals..."
Sanders: "...Do you think that's respectful of other religions?... I would simply say, Mr. Chairman that this nominee is really not someone who this country is supposed to be about." (Sanders Attacks Vought.)
In this regard, you see, Bernard John Sanders was showing us that militant atheism cannot coexist with any expression of religious belief, true or false, if such expression conveys disapproval of their beliefs or the beliefs of those who deny Our Lord’s Sacred Divinity. Anyone who puts into question the heresy of “universal salvation” or who believes that truth is to be found in one place and in none other is thus disqualified from holding public office.
Here is another irony:
Bernard John Sanders and others of the false opposite of the naturalist “left” believe that they are in possession of the truth about statism, income redistribution by means of the confiscatory taxing and economic regulatory powers of the civil state, the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn, the moral legitimacy of perverted practices (sodomy, lesbianism, the surgical mutilation of men to “become” women or women to “become” men), climate change, evolutionism, feminism, et al. Sanders and his ilk act as the high priests and priestesses of Modernity, believing that they alone are the true judges of who is considered “qualified” to hold public office and who is considered to be a “hater” for having the audacity to disagree with any of their preconceived falsehoods that they accept as true.
Sanders and his ilk are simply playing the same role at a time when Holy Mother Church is in the catacombs during the period of her mystical body as the minions of the Roman Empire played when she was in her infancy during the first three centuries.
Saint Alphonsus de Liguori wrote that there were over eleven million Catholic martyrs between the time of the persecutions that had begun by Nero in the year 67 A.D. and the time that Constantine issued the Edict of Milan in the year 313 A.D. Among those who were martyred were four saints who were commemorated on the Feast of Saint John of San Facundo yesterday, Saints Basilides, Cyrinius, Nazarius, and Nabor:
Basilides, Cyrinus, Nabor, and Nazarius were Roman soldiers, of illustrious birth, and distinguished gallantry. Having embraced the Christian Religion, and being found publishing that Christ was the Son of God, they were arrested by Aurelius, Praefect of Rome under the Emperor Diocletian. As they despised his orders to sacrifice to the gods, they were committed to prison. While they were at prayer there, a brilliant light broke forth before the eyes of all that were there, and shone in all the prison. Marcellinus the keeper of the prison and many others were moved by this heavenly glory to believe in the Lord Christ. Basilides, Cyrinus, Nabor, and Nazarius were afterwards discharged out of the prison. However, in the reign of the Emperor Maximian, when they set light by his commands also, and had ever in their mouth that there is but one Christ, one God, and one Lord, they were tormented with whips loaded with metal, and again cast into chains. Thence, on the seventh day, they were brought out, and set before the Emperor, and there still persisted in mocking at the foolish idols, and declaring that Jesus Christ is God. They were accordingly condemned to death and beheaded. Their bodies were given to wild beasts to eat, but, as the creatures would not touch them, (Matins, The Divine Office, June 12.)
Although Bernard John Sanders was not demanding the life of Russell Vought, he was demanding for his political life, and for the political life of anyone who believes that Our Lord is the Divine Redeemer even though the person making this profession may hold heretical beliefs about Our Lord and His Divine Revelation. Sanders believes that those who are believing Christians of any kind are unfit for office, and in this, you see, he is playing the role of Diocletian himself.
Let us be honest: the American founding was designed to make the United States of America safe for Talmudism, which the adversary himself had chosen long ago to be the his instrument of turning men into atheists, whether actual or practical, and their nations into instruments of persecuting those who dare to call evil by its name, and among the chief evils we face in the world today is the emboldening of Talmudists and their allies to determine who is “qualified” to participate in public life.
Ah, then again, of course, it is the Talmudists who have long called the shots in the counterfeit church of conciliarism. Indeed, the march of militant atheism could not have been as successful as it has been had not the conciliar revolutionaries created a false religion that is designed to placate Talmudists by condemning “proselytism” and the very theoretical concept of a civil state that recognizes the Sacred Divinity of Christ the King and the authority of His true Church in all that pertains to the good of souls.
Bernard John Sanders is a bigot. He is a dangerous man as he is a true, red believer in Marxism-Leninism. He is not the hapless, monotone Soviet apologist named George Stanley McGovern, and it is not 1972 at the height of the Cold War. Most of those who fought in World War II are dead. The electorate has changed thanks to death of the aged, contraception, abortion, sterilization, illegal immigration and the steady drumbeat of statist, globalist, environmentalist, evolutionist, socialist and Communist messaging in American centers of public indoctrination and the idiot box to which so many Catholics are still glued. Such a dangerous, bigoted ideologue can be dismissed only at the peril of underestimating him and his appeal to those who are looking for salvation—secular salvation—in places where it can never be found as there is simply no such thing as “secular salvation.” This is a little something about which I spoke even during my thirty years as a college professor of political science, and it is a theme that has been discussed many times on this site.
Socialism is evil, and it is a very telling commentary about the state of the United States of America that a man such as Bernard John Sanders has such a loyal and intense following. Those who would want to read a bit more about this false ideology can review "No One Can Be At the Same Time a Good Catholic and a True Socialist", which I wrote seven months ago to deal with the rise of “The Squad” and of Sanders himself.
Readers should understand that one of the great hazards of so many people in traditional Catholic circles is to universalize from the particular. That is, many Catholics are prone to thinking that some kind of secular “restoration” is at hand because Donald John Trump got elected on November 8, 2016. This, too, is illusory as the current president won the presidency by winning the states of Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan by relatively slender pluralities, thus securing their aggregate of thirty-six electoral votes. Anything can happen in an election, and even the president himself was surprised that he had won as he had told Melania Trump on the evening of November 8, 2016, that it was going to be a “disaster” (see Honey, this is going to be a disaster").
Although the polls are certainly skewed against the president, it is not inaccurate to state that he is very unpopular with a hard-core of around forty-five to forty-seven percent of the American electorate. This does not give him a lot of margin for error even when the organized crime family of the naturalist “left” is as fractured as it is at present, a fracture that could result in the nomination of Madame Defarge herself if the convention of statists that will take place in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, during the week of July 13, 2020.
Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg: One of the ways that evil has taken hold of the minds of so many in this country is that sodomy and its related vices are accepted by a majority of Americans as part of the so-called “mainstream.” Yet another alarming development is that even many believing Catholics use the word “gay” to refer to sodomites, lesbians, mutants and other carnal deviants who practice perverted vices that cry out to Heaven for vengeance and are destructive of souls of thus of the entirety of social order.
The “married” Buttigieg is militantly pro-abortion and, as Mayor of the City of South Bend, Indiana (where I lived from January 11, 1973, to December 17, 1973, as I was studying for and completing my Master of Arts degree in political science from the University of Notre Dame du Lac, Notre Dame, Indiana), took three full days five months ago to formulate a carefully crated response to the discovery of the bodies of 2, 236 butchered babies in the home of a baby-killer, Ulrich Klopfer, after he had died of September 3, 2019:
Following days of silence, 2020 Democrat Pete Buttigieg Wednesday addressed the discovery of thousands of fetal remains in the home of late abortionist Ulrich Klopfer, who worked in the mayor’s hometown of South Bend, Indiana, for decades.
"Like everyone, I find the news out of Illinois extremely disturbing, and I think it’s important that it be fully investigated," Buttigieg said on Wednesday. "I also hope it doesn’t get caught up in politics at a time when women need access to healthcare. There’s no question that what happened is disturbing. It’s unacceptable. And it needs to be looked into fully."
Law enforcement officials on Friday said that they found 2,246 medically preserved aborted fetuses in the Illinois home of Klopfer, who died on Sept. 3. He operated three Indiana clinics in South Bend, Fort Wayne, and Gary, the last of which closed in 2016 in the midst of a state licensing board trial on documentation and reasonable care violations.
Buttigieg's campaign previously ignored inquiries from the Washington Examiner about the Klopfer revelations and faced pressure to speak out about the fetal remains. Fox News host Tucker Carlson featured Buttigieg's lack of a public statement in a Tuesday evening segment.
Republican National Committee spokeswoman Liz Harrington highlighted Buttigieg's "extreme" views on abortion. “Buttigieg invokes the Bible to justify abortion up until a baby takes a breath. Will he use it to condemn the evil acts of an abortionist who operated unlicensed out of his home town?" Harrington said to the Washington Examiner, adding that for today’s Democrats, "nothing gets in the way of a radical, no-limits abortion agenda."
Buttigieg, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, declines to support any third-trimester abortion restrictions, saying, “These hypotheticals are set up to provoke a strong emotional reaction.” Earlier this month, he used the Bible to support abortion: “There's a lot of parts of the Bible that talk about how life begins with breath,” Buttigieg said.
Republican Indiana Rep. Jackie Walorski, who represents South Bend, said in a statement that Klopfer’s “careless treatment of human remains is an outrage” and called for state and federal authorities to conduct a full investigation.
The White House also called for an investigation to “determine whether crimes were committed and if anyone else was involved,” with White House deputy press secretary Judd Deere adding that the White House is “horrified by the news that thousands of fetal remains have been discovered” in Klopfer’s home.
Republican Indiana Rep. Jim Banks, whose district encompasses Fort Wayne, told the Washington Examiner that he hoped Buttigieg would "explain why he chose to oppose alternative pregnancy care options for women just after we learned some of Dr. Klopfer's violations."
Indiana's health board suspended Klopfer’s medical license in 2016 after it found that he did not give pain medication to all patients and failed to timely report abortions on two girls under the age of 14 within the required three-day time period, among other issues. Testimony revealed that Klopfer used “the same abortion and sedation procedures from the 1970s and 1980s,” according to the South Bend Tribune.
Banks said that Buttigieg’s 2018 veto of a zoning change that would have allowed a pro-life pregnancy center to operate next to a new South Bend abortion clinic, Whole Woman’s Health, “deserves a lot more scrutiny” in light of the Klopfer revelations.
Buttigieg said at the time that “it is far from clear that a neighborhood benefits from co-locating facilities with such opposite views,” prompting some critics to say that the veto violated free speech. The pro-life clinic later found a new location close to the building it originally wanted.
“I’m sure Pete had presidential politics on his mind when the veto occurred,” Banks said. “I think that’s the larger issue here, is that Mayor Pete always tried to portray himself as more moderate.”
The Indiana health department rejected a license for Whole Woman’s Health, citing a failure to show “reputable and responsible character” and disclose information, but the clinic is operating under a federal injunction.
South Bend physician Laura McGuire in 2017 argued that Whole Woman’s Health has “the same kind of profile as Dr. Klopfer.” Original state license application paperwork showed that the administrator for Klopfer’s former clinic, Liam Morley, was listed as the administrator for the new abortion clinic. Whole Woman’s Health told the Washington Examiner that Morley is no longer an employee and no other former Klopfer employees are or have been employees of the new clinic.
Despite Whole Woman’s Health’s license issues, Buttigieg publicly supports the abortion clinic.
“The mayor is deeply concerned by what he views as a new and extreme assault on Roe v. Wade in legislatures across the country,” Buttigieg campaign national press secretary Chris Meagher told the Chicago Tribune in August. “The South Bend clinic would be the only one for a radius of several counties."
The new clinic on Tuesday addressed news of Klopfer keeping aborted fetuses in his home.
“All of us at Whole Woman’s Health Alliance are shocked by the news. We join the community seeking more information and awaiting the results of the investigation,” Amy Hagstrom Miller, president and CEO of Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, said in a statement. (Buttigieg speaks after days of silence after the bodies of thousand aborted babies foun in the home of a dead baby butcher.)
There are several aspects of this story that bears for a bit of commentary.
First, Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg is Scripturally illiterate. He is an ignoramus, something that will be demonstrate in great depth a bit later in this commentary.
Human life begins at conception. This is a matter of scientific fact, not a matter of theology.
Every human being has a specific genetic code contained in his Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). Nothing else is added to the physical development of a human being after conception except time, nutrition and hydration.
Kill a preborn baby, Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg?
Kill a living human being.
No mother has any “decision” to make, difficult or otherwise, when she learns that he is carrying a child in the sanctuary of her own womb. In full obedience to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law, a mother must nurture her baby throughout his gestation and after his birth as she surrounds him with unconditional maternal love and seeks to bring him as soon as possible to the Baptismal font for the generation of his immortal soul as a member of the Catholic Church, outside of which there is no salvation and without which there can be no true social order.
Perhaps the sophomoric Buttigieg, who owns a very apt “Alfred E. Newman” nickname courtesy of President Donald John Trump, would argue that no one knows when the ensoulment of a baby takes place. Buttigieg even contends that it not the “government’s business” to “tell a woman” what “to do” if she discovers that her baby has some illness or deformity after birth, meaning that he is all right with the killing of a baby after birth who has indeed drawn his first breath (see Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg Cites Religion to Defend Late-Term Abortion of Disabled Children.)
Although Holy Mother Church has never dogmatically pronounced on the matter of ensoulment, she does teach that Our Lady’s immortal soul was preserved from all stain of Original or Actual Sin at the moment of her conception and that the hypostatic union of the two natures in one Person of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ took place at the Incarnation as His Most Blessed Mother consented to the will of God the Father and conceived Him by the power of God the Holy Ghost at the Annunciation.
As I noted recently, there is nothing “moderate” about supporting even a single, solitary abortion, whether chemical or surgical, under the cover of the civil law, and Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg is a firm, unequivocal and intellectually dishonest support of the genocide of the innocent preborn here in the United States of America He is a eugenicist who does not believe that that a disabled child makes it possible for his parents to bring him to the baptizmal font to be regenerated in the life of Sanctifying Grace as a member of the Catholic Church and surrounded by an unconditional love and self-denial that will have its reward by the Divine Master at the moment of the Particular Judgment.
Second, the direct, intentional killing of an innocent human being is not “women’s healthcare,” Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg. It is murder.
No, Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg is not a “moderate” about anything, and he is as committed to the same socialist agenda as Bernard John Sanders and Elizabeth Ann Herring Warren Mann despite all the efforts this thirty-eight year-old nerd has employed to make himself seem like a “centrist,” whatever that is:
What are Pete Buttigieg’s politics?
If you read CBS, The Atlantic, The New York Times, The Guardian, and a host of their friends, the former mayor is decidedly a moderate. According to The Washington Post and a few more, he’s “a traditional centrist” who embodies “the Democratic primary’s rightward drift.” And if you listen to the left-wing activists trailing him around, he’s “Wall Street Pete” and “will kill us.”
His supposed moderation and support (almost solely) among white liberals torments Lucy, a white liberal who graduated high school more than a decade ago but writes for Teen Vogue. “Why I’m Not Here for Pete Buttigieg’s Moderate Politics in the 2020 Primaries,” she proclaims in the delightfully self-serious magazine.
But just what is so “traditional centrist” or “moderate” about Mayor Pete? From health care and abortion to guns and immigration, and from the Supreme Court to the Electoral College, the man is decidedly a radical. Behind all his carefully selected scripture quotes that so easily confound coastal reporters is a politician whose justifications are difficult to recognize through the eyes of any of the world’s major Christian religions.
But let’s start with health care, where Buttigieg has rejected his prior embrace of the socialist-favored “Medicare for All” in favor of a “glide path to Medicare for All” that, The Washington Post reports, “hinges on [a] ‘supercharged’ version of [the] unpopular Obamacare mandate.” The individual mandate, you might recall, was the most hotly debated aspect of President Barack Obama’s radical takeover of the American health-care system, and was repealed by the 2017 tax-reform bill.
On abortion, Buttigieg leaves even less to the imagination. At Fox News’s Jan. 26 town hall, he assured a lifelong Democratic activist who opposes abortion, “I’m not going to try to earn your vote by tricking you.” Oh, phew. Then he declined to commit to altering the party’s platform language, which rejects Democrats like Kristen Day, the questioner. “He refused — twice — to even answer that part of my question,” she wrote afterward in USA Today, “and instead focused on his unyielding support for abortion and did not really seem to want the vote from me or people who share my view
his should not have surprised Kristen very much. At the same town hall, Mayor Pete called late-term abortions “hypothetical.” On the sixth day of Advent the month prior, he told a seven-year-old girl he’s all in for abortion. How adorable.
As the anti-abortion LifeSite News points out, as mayor of South Bend he vetoed the opening of a pro-life pregnancy center near an abortion clinic. When the corpses of 2,246 babies were uncovered at the Illinois office of a deceased South Bend abortionist, he fretted the evidence of abortion’s “disturbing” brutality would impact women’s “need to access health care.”
“There’s a lot of parts of the Bible that talk about how life begins with breath,” Buttigieg said in September, defending late-term abortion with the Bible. This, we can safely agree, is not an endorsed Christian tenet.
“Here’s something to think about this Sunday morning,” he thoughtfully posited on CNN the month prior. “Is a gun a tool or is it an idol?”
“If the gun corporation lobby, which is what the NRA is, now has people viewing guns as a thing to be loved, a thing to be protected, a thing that is the source of our freedom and power and a thing to which we are willing to sacrifice human life,” he continued, “isn’t that the definition of a false God?”
A novel interpretation of safeguarding hard-fought American freedoms? Certainly. Traditional? Not so much.
On immigration, Mayor Pete glide-pathed away from decriminalizing the border toward refocusing “prosecution resources on real criminal threats” and amnesty for illegal immigrants who have not “committed serious crimes.” He also wants to “eliminate the five-year waiting period for green card holders” to get welfare, “withdraw regulations that restrict or deter access” to that welfare, and “expand access” for illegal immigrants to get taxpayer-funded college grants they don’t need to pay back.
“For a party that associates itself with Christianity,” he sneered in a June debate, “to say that God would smile on the division of families at the hands of federal agents, that God would condone putting children in cages, has lost all claim to ever use religious language again.” The Christian God, of course, is on the record supporting laws, nations, and borders, but it was a good line and the applause was raucous.
“The Republican Party,” Pete explains, “likes to cloak itself in the language of religion.”
Buttigieg supports packing the high court with as many six additional justices, placing him to the left of noted leftist Julian Castro. Court-packing also puts Buttigieg in league with President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose Supreme Court power grab so repulsed his Democrat-controlled Congress the policy was rendered politically dead for nearly a century.
The former mayor of a college town in Indiana also wants to abolish the Electoral College, which seems strange as the system is specifically designed to protect the voice of places like Indiana, supported by the rationale that her citizens have an essential right to not be overruled by distant coastal cities. It’s part of a system called a republic, which has been under relentless attack since the Progressive Era, when radicals and presidents decided it was time to dispense with our carefully constructed government and give pure democracy another shot.
“We’ve got to repair our democracy,” Buttigieg declared shortly after announcing his run. “The Electoral College needs to go, because it’s made our society less and less democratic.”
Now, it’s completely understandable that most reporters don’t understand the ancient Greek word “hairesis.” It means “to take, capture,” or “to choose,” and it is the root of the word “heresy.” After all, it’s easy to get lost in the muck. It is more difficult, however, to understand how professional political observers can call any of the above policies “traditional,” “centrist” or “moderate,” yet every day on television and in print those descriptors are repeated and repeated like a drum march into a wall.
To borrow from another media moderate, President Barack Obama, let me be clear: The moderate mayor is no such thing. (The Myth of Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg as a moderate.)
Even this analysis, however, begs the question as the website entitled The Federalist after the collection of eighty-eight articles written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison and published pseudonymously under the name “Publius” misses the pint rather entirely as Federalism is not defense against the incremental advancements of evils under cover of the civil law when the mantra of “states’ rights” and popular sovereignty are used to justify their unjust and immoral enactments by the elected representatives of “the people” in the states.
This has particular relevance in the case of Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg as the members of the state legislature in the Commonwealth of Virginia is considering legislation that would make it a criminal offense for anyone, including priests of the underground church in this time of apostasy and betrayal and presbyters in the counterfeit church of conciliarism, to oppose sodomy and its related vices. Here is a “news alert” from the Protestant run organization known as the Family Research Council that was sent to me by a reader of this site a few days ago. The bold graphics and italics are part of the article itself and not the editorial judgment of this writer:
I wish I had better news for you today, and that the title of this email was an exaggeration, but we really have found ourselves in a dire and urgent situation in Virginia, and we MUST act now to save Christian churches, schools, and non-profit ministries from the destruction the new Democrat majority is plotting for them.
HB 1663 (D-Sickles) and its Senate version SB 868 (D-Ebbin) place far-reaching special protections for “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” (SOGI) into virtually every part of our law, and EVERY TIME it creates a direct conflict with people of faith (typically Christians) who hold to a Biblical and historical view of marriage, sexuality, and human nature – including churches, private schools, and non-profit ministries.
These bills virtually guarantee that churches, private religious schools and non-profit ministries, and Christian-led businesses who will not abandon God’s Word and His design for male and female will be targeted, sued, fined, bankrupted, and ultimately shut down. (Read some of the ways below.)
Yesterday, our team sought to engage the House General Laws Committee when SB 868 came before them, and Democrats on the committee absolutely shut down discussion and ignored the concerns raised. (Watch for yourself here.) Notably, consider this exchange:
[TFF Lobbyist] “We found that there are a number of things in [the bill] that really don’t provide protections for religious entities in particular – churches, and so forth. There are some exemptions in the bill, but they are pretty narrow.
As for the punitive damages, there is no limit on the punitive or compensatory damages. There’s also an award of attorney’s costs and fees – only to the Plaintiff if they prevail, but not to the Defendant. In addition, there are fines that are pretty hefty. In totality, this makes it a Plaintiff attorney’s DREAM, to go suing everyone and everything.” [cut off at this point]
[Delegate Simon on the Committee] “I’ve actually looked at the [unlimited punitive damages] language…and I think it’s actually doing exactly what we intended for it to do. If you don’t want to be subject to unlimited punitive damages, don’t discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.
I mean, this wasn’t meant to be a non-punitive bill. We created a private right of action for a reason. And so I think that the bill accomplishes exactly what it’s intended to do in the form that it’s intended to do it. And so, at this point, I would move that we report the bill.” (To which all the other Democrats “seconded” in unison and voted to pass the bill.)
There you have it: It is absolutely their intention to destroy ALL opposition to their twisted, anti-scientific, anti-Christian sexual dogma. They’re openly admitting it.
And we shouldn’t be surprised, either. After all, that was from the same Delegate who, just two years ago, when speaking in favor of a similar bill and responding to similar SOGI concerns of religious groups and universities, said: 'There are certain sincerely held religious beliefs which are so discriminatory that we don't give them the protection of the law, and this is one of those cases.'
For them, this isn’t just about commerce or fairness or tolerance. They’ve made it abundantly clear time and time again that they intend to punish and even destroy ANYONE – even churches, schools and religious nonprofits – who will not bow the knee to the god of sexual “freedom.” We’re here doing everything we can to stand in their way, but we cannot do it without people of faith all across this Commonwealth expressing their opposition in the strongest terms. (As contained in an “Action Alert” of the Family Research Council that was sent to me by a reader of this site.)
Leaving aside for present purposes the inconvenient fact that the very evils that the Protestants of the Family Research Council are trying to fight have arisen precisely because of the unrestricted “freedom of conscience” and “religious freedom” granted by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, itself a product, as mentioned before, of the Protestant Revolution’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the subsequent rise of the welter of naturalist “philosophies” and political ideologies engendered by Judeo-Masonry, these sorts of legislative measures that are designed to silence us all are being proposed at the state level.
Which one among the “conservatives” in the commentariat who champion “states’ rights” so frequently can have any intellectual honesty by opposing measures that are proposed by the elected representatives of the people?
It is no defense to claim that the measures such as the one under consideration in the Commonwealth of Virginia are unconstitutional as a violation of the “free exercise of religion” and “free speech” clauses of the Constitution of the United States of America and will be declared as such under the current membership of the Supreme Court of the United States of America since the process of judicial review hangs on the slender threads of mere mortals whose exercise of jurisprudence is not founded in overarching principles that recognize the Sovereignty of God as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His true Church, the Catholic Church. There will come a day when the current “originalists” will die, be impeached or removed from office or simply be outvoted by increasing the number of Supreme Court justices. It is not an accident that Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg is a rabid support of what was term, quite properly, as “court packing” when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt proposed on February 5, 1937, adding an additional seat on the high court for every justice over seventy years, six months of age under the aegis of a “Judicial Procedures Reform Act” that even Democrats in Congress opposed as dictatorial.
Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg would be, if he spoke his ignorant mind on the matter, in full support of the measure under consideration in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Sodomites are fascists who desire to silence anyone and everyone who would dare to singe their tender consciences by telling them that they are in rebellion against God and against the salvation of their own souls by persisting in sins of unnatural vice in violation of the binding precepts of the s Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Try as this pathetic creature of immorality and positivism may, he can never justify his perverted behavior by having recourse to Sacred Scripture.
Perhaps someone might like to send the Biblically illiterate Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg the following quotations from Sacred Scripture that make clear that sodomy is an evil and leads to the destruction of men and their nations:
 If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them.  If any man after marrying the daughter, marry her mother, he hath done a heinous crime: he shall be burnt alive with them: neither shall so great an abomination remain in the midst of you.  He that shall copulate with any beast or cattle, dying let him die, the beast also ye shall kill. (Leviticus 20: 13-15.)
For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them. (Romans 1: 18-32.)
 Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers,  Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6: 9)
 And the angels who kept not their principality, but forsook their own habitation, he hath reserved under darkness in everlasting chains, unto the judgment of the great day.  As Sodom and Gomorrha, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and going after other flesh, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.  In like manner these men also defile the flesh, and despise dominion, and blaspheme majesty.  When Michael the archangel, disputing with the devil, contended about the body of Moses, he durst not bring against him the judgment of railing speech, but said: The Lord command thee.  But these men blaspheme whatever things they know not: and what things soever they naturally know, like dumb beasts, in these they are corrupted. (Jude 1 6-10.)
It matters not that the country, according to Rush Hudson Limbaugh, about whom more will written in the second part of this commentary, may not be “ready” for a sodomite to become president as there will come a day when most people in the country will be “ready” for one. Arguments about whether the “people” are “ready” to accept this or that evil are completely irrelevant as it is not given to mere mortals who did not create themselves and whose bodies are destined one day for the corruption of the grave to argue about that which is inarguable, that which is contained in the nature of things as created by God and do not admit of any “right” exercised by His rational creatures to “amend” or “defy.” One may have the ability to defy the laws God and suffer the consequence, but no human being—whether acting individually or collectively with others in institutions of civil governance—has any authority to do so.
Finally, it is perhaps to sound redundant (imagine that?) to readers of this website, but the point should be made that is not to “hate” anyone to remonstrate with a person steeped in a life of unrepentant sins to cease his behavior, convert to the Holy Faith if he is not a Catholic or make a perfect Act of Contrition and get to Confession as soon as possible to a true priest in the Sacred Heart of Penance. Indeed, it is one of the duties of the “Spiritual Works of Mercy” to admonish the sinner.
True love is an act of the will, not an expression of empty-headed sentimentality.
No one loves another if he says or does anything, whether by omission or commission, that reaffirms him in that which is inimical to the sanctification of his immortal soul and thus of being lost in the flames of hell for eternity if he does not repent.
Men such as Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg are cry babies who are stuck in a phase of emotional development that I call “terminal infantilism.” Men such as Buttigieg—as well as pro-abort women—are wont to claim “You hate me. You don’t want me to be ‘happy.’ Well, I hate you!”
Those who are steeped in lives of perverse sin are actually some of the worst “haters” in the world as they hate their own immortal souls and will spend their eternity hating God and those with whom they have sinned so perversely.
Who cares when the nation will be “ready” for men such as Peter Paul Montgomery Buttigieg to be president?
The public promotion and celebration of sin is a grave evil and can never be justified before the Divine Judge, Christ the King, Who will judge us all at the time of our Particular Judgments.
Michael Rubens Bloomberg: The pro-perversity, pro-abortion, whiny “nanny state” Michael Rubens Bloomberg is an arrogant boor of a human being who has made his billions upon billions of dollars while treating his employees very crudely at times and who governed as the Mayor of the City of New York, New York, from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2013, as a “nanny state” bully after becoming a Republican so that he could run in a Republican Party primary in 2001 against a former Democrat, Herman Badillo, who was the Borough President of the Borough of the Bronx from December 28, 1965, to December 31, 1969 and a member of the United States House of Representatives from January 3, 1971, to January 3, 1977. Bloomberg’s money defeated Badillo in a primary that was delayed two weeks by the tragic events of September 11, 2001, and then went on to defeat a Ralph Nader acolyte, City Advocate Mark Green by 35,489 votes out of 1,480,532 votes cast.
Here is what I wrote in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos shortly after Bloomberg’s election to succeed the pro-abortion, pro-perversity, serial adulterer and thrice “married” lowlife of a Catholic apostate named Rudolph William Giuliani, who was term-limited from seeking a third term as the Mayor of the City of New York, New York, even though he tried to get the New York State Legislature to repeal the term-limits legislation he had once endorsed:
Giuliani's star power is such, however, that it blinded many Catholic New Yorkers into voting for Michael Bloomberg to succeed him as mayor in the November 6, 2001, elections. Bloomberg had pronounced himself to be as thoroughly pro-abortion as Giuliani.
Alas, Giuliani's hold on the electorate was such that many Catholics of Irish and Italian and Polish descent, grateful to the mayor for the support he showed to the families of the firefighters and police officers and rescue workers killed in the terrorist attacks, just followed his lead without giving the matter of abortion any thought whatsoever. After all, these voters had supported Giuliani himself in 1989 (when he lost narrowly to City Clerk David N. Dinkins) and 1993 and 1997 despite his unapologetic pro-abortion stance.
Why should they abandon their political hero and cast a vote on the Right to Life Party line for mayor of New York when could show their solidarity with and gratitude to Giuliani by voting for the man he endorsed, Michael Bloomberg?
What difference did it make that Bloomberg is alleged to have said, "Kill it! Kill it!" to a pregnant employee of his Bloomberg media and financial empire whose services he did not want to lose to maternity leave?
No, Bloomy was Rudy's boy. That was good enough for most of the ethnic Catholics who remain as residents of the five boroughs of the City of New York.
Well, the new mayor is proving his pro-abortion bona fides very early on in his new administration.
He is advancing a plan to require all residents (recent graduates of medical colleges) serving in the city's 11 publicly run hospitals who specialize in obstetrics and gynecology to receive training in how to kill babies as a mandatory part of their residency program. Oh, he would provide a "conscience clause" for those who would want to opt out of such a program. However, it should come as no surprise that a man who supports abortion so militantly as Bloomberg would seek to curry favor with his political base by proposing a program that was actually drafted by the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARRAL) itself. [For a contemporary reference, please see: Bloomberg to Force Abortion Training in all New York City Hospitals.]
Even the New York State Right to Life Committee, an affiliate of the National Right to Life Committee, found this too much to ignore. Although the New York State Right to Life Committee has given the pro-abortion Republican Catholic governor of New York, George Pataki, a free pass by refusing to endorse Right to Life Party gubernatorial candidates Robert Walsh in 1994 and Michael Reynolds in 1998, it is pretty hard for its leaders to ignore Bloomberg's blatant effort to continue the process of politicizing the training of doctors for purposes of making them killers of innocent human lives. However, it is doubtful that even Bloomberg's outrageous decision is enough for the New York State Right to Life Committee to abandon its reflexive support of pro-abortion Republicans while actually opposing candidates of conscience who run on the New York State Right to Life Party line.
Indeed, if Bloomberg had taken the lead of the pro-abortion Rick Lazio and said he was opposed conditionally to partial-birth abortions, that would have been good enough for the New York State Right to Life Committee to endorse his candidacy. For, sadly, all it takes for a candidate to receive the endorsement of the National Right to Life Committee's political action committee (or the endorsement of its state affiliates' political action committees) is to proclaim himself conditionally opposed only to a certain form of child killing in the later stages of pregnancy. That is all it takes to be considered "pro-life" by the National Right to Life Committee and its state affiliates. Thus, the dumbing down of what it means to be pro-life makes it easier for out-and-out pro-aborts to trade upon the reputation of other pro-aborts whose support for abortion is ignored by prelates (such as Cardinal Egan) or rationalized by "pragmatic" organizations (such as the National Right to Life Committee).
Some pro-lifers, who must be living in a fantasy world worthy of Al Gore, said that Bloomberg had "shown his true colors." What are these people using for brains? Bloomberg said he was pro-abortion.
Isn't that enough?
Have we reached such a nadir in our cultural life that we refuse to be outraged when an aspirant for elected office says matter-of-factly that he supports child-killing under cover of law?
Does such an aspirant, once elected, have to do something to stir our outrage?
When are we going to accept the simple fact that anyone who supports even a single abortion under
cover of the civil law is not pro-life, and those who support Roe v. Wade unconditionally are the sworn enemies of objective justice founded in the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law? (Excerpted from the printed pages of Christ or Chaos, January 16, 2002. Obviously, this was written at a time when I was just moving into “resist while recognize” circles from which I was able to extricate myself solely by Our Lady’s graces four years, three and one-half months later.)
As has been well documented, Michael Rubens Bloomberg sought as Mayor of the City of New York, New York, sought to ban the sale of “supersized” sodas and salty snacks at movie theaters and, among other fascistic efforts of “Nanny State” limitation and/or control of legitimate human liberties, to force New Yorkers to separate food scraps from the rest of their garbage. An entire website, Meet Bloomberg—Nanny State, has been created to document just some of Bloomberg’s Nanny State effort were documented contemporaneously by Forbes magazine during the last year of his third and final term in office, 2013:
Since New York City Mayor Bloomberg announced the 20-ounce soda ban last fall, the controversy has garnered national attention. But, this is just the latest example of his attempt to expand the “nanny state” that has become New York City. Emboldened by his mayoral powers, Bloomberg has decided to methodically push his idea of good living by regulatory fiat—a grand social engineering project that presumes he knows what is best for each of us. From banning smoking and large soft drinks to regulating sodium and trans fats, if he thinks it is bad for you, it simply has to go.
It would be different if he was simply offering thoughtful advice. But instead he desires to exercise government control over the decision-making rights of consumers because apparently we cannot be trusted to make our own lifestyle choices. The good news is that—unlike many abroad who are still forced to live under authoritarian states and dictatorships—we have a judicial system in the United States that generally attempts to hold the rights of individuals above the extremes of government power.
The good news is that the soda ban was recently overturned by a New York State Supreme Court judge because it arbitrarily, and unfairly, applies to some businesses while inexplicably exempting others—apparently those businesses with the political prowess to lobby for exemptions. The judge stated that “the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the stated purpose of the rule.” How is it that big businesses like 7-Eleven and Whole Foods were able to secure exemptions from the new law, while hot dog stands and mom and pop restaurants were forced to bear the brunt of its impact?
The soda ban regulation not only threatens small business’ sales, but it would also compel these businesses to alter what products they buy wholesale and change the way they deliver them to consumers. And beyond attempting to control consumer behavior, the soda ban unfairly picks winners and losers among vendors and businesses. So we were pleased to see the law was struck down in its entirety. But the Mayor is now appealing the decision.
Perhaps the judge’s ruling will prove to be the first step in a city-wide pushback against the New York Nanny State. Fortunately, many of Bloomberg’s “reforms” have not crossed city boundaries into the rest of America yet, but if Bloomberg is successful here, we can expect bureaucrats and regulators in other communities to begin implementing similar bans.
It may be a good idea to consume less sugar, salt, trans fat and tobacco, but should government tell us what we can and can’t eat and drink? At a time when we often toss around rhetoric about taking rights away like its yesterday’s newspaper, Bloomberg actually is taking away New Yorkers’ rights to decide what to drink, eat and consume with increasing regularity. It begs the question: what is next? It is not much of a stretch to imagine Bloomberg requiring sandwich shops to serve only whole grain bread (more fiber), employees to use stairs instead of elevators (more exercise), or Girl Scouts to sell crates of apples instead of Thin Mints (more vitamins).
Our government was not created to interfere in our lives or restrict our freedom of choice in such a way. Americans are intelligent enough to make suitable choices without government deciding for them. As our federal, state and local governments consider public policy decisions, let’s hope that common sense can prevail over Nanny State politics in the future. In the meantime, the National Federation of Independent Business, other industry groups—and consumer advocates—are fighting back against these Nanny-State regulations in court with the hope that we can preserve liberty in America in the courts. (The Michael Bloomberg Nanny State in New York: A Cautionary Tale.)
According to a report on the Clinton News Network (CNN), Nanny State Bloomberg is “quietly” trying to position himself to win on the second ballot at the Democratic Party National Convention in Milwaukee in less than five months if Bernard John Sanders does not win the nomination outright on the first ballot (see Bloomberg's Brokered Convention Strategy). A Bloomberg nomination on the second ballot would drive Sanders and his supporters to the point of sitting out the election and, given the violent nature of some, be the impetus of nationwide rioting. Bernard John Sanders is not going to go “gently into that good night” if Bloomberg is nominated.
Bloomberg, however, is no “moderate.” Indeed, he hates “conservatives” and he has just contempt for parental rights that he rammed through a horrific program of graphic classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that caused me to write the following in 2010:
It should come as no surprise, therefore, that Michael Bloomberg, the pro-abortion, self-professed "billionaire playboy" who supports every manner of moral evil imaginable under cover of the civil law while serving as a glorified "nanny" of the bodily health of the City of New York (forcing restaurants to eliminate the use of saturated fats, imposing smoking bans of various sorts, seeking now to force restaurants to cut their use of salt in their entrees), sought to pin blame for the failed bombing in Times Square on someone who was "mentally deranged," someone who was probably angered by ObamaCare:
CBS Evening News Anchor Katie Couric asked New York's Mayor Mike Bloomberg if the bombing attempt could be a precursor to a bigger attack.
"There is no credible evidence so far that this attack was more than at least one person, the driver," said Mayor Mike Bloomberg. "After that there is no evidence that anyone else was involved. It may be, but we can't say that it is."
"There is some speculation that the materials in the Nissan Pathfinder were similar to ones that were found to some failed attacks in the U.K.," Couric asked.
"There's a limited number of things you would need," Bloomberg said. "You'd need a timer, you'd need a battery as an energy source you'd need some explosive and you'd need something to enhance it. That's going to be true no matter where or when the...another attack took place. So, anything would have enough commonalities for the conspiracy theorists to blow it up if you don't mind the pun and make something out of it."
"Are you concerned about the impact this might have on tourism?" Couric asked.
"I think people today understand we live in a dangerous world," Bloomberg said. "And you can't let the terrorists win by locking yourself in a room. What I can guarantee you is we're doing everything that we can. Whether or not we will have somebody in exactly the right place at exactly the right time to prevent something down the future nobody can do that - nobody can guarantee you."
"But there is no evidence here of a conspiracy. There is no evidence that it's tied in to anything else. It looks like an amatuerish job, done by at least one person," Bloomberg added.
But if another attack were to occur, Mayor Bloomberg and the heads of all emergency response agencies would be in the city's situation room. It's powered by its own generator and allows the team to monitor video feeds, television coverage - even the corner of 45th and Seventh Avenue, where a crisis was averted.
Law enforcement officials don't know who left the Nissan Pathfinder behind, but at this point the Mayor believes the suspect acted alone.
"If I had to guess, twenty five cents, this would be exactly that," Bloomberg said. "Homegrown maybe a mentally deranged person or someone with a political agenda that doesn't like the health care bill or something. It could be anything." (Bloomberg: "No Evidence" Anyone Else Involved - CBS Evening.)
The suspect, by the way, turned out to be a Mohammedan man, Faisal Shahzad, who used his sentencing in 2013to proclaim that his failed bombing was indeed part of a jihad despite the then United States Attorney General Eric Himpton Holder's denial of Shahzad's having any to Mohammedan terrorism:
A Pakistani immigrant to the US who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square was sentenced today to serve a life term in prison.
District judge Miriam Goldman Cedarbaum said she hoped Faisal Shahzad spent some of his time behind bars thinking "carefully about whether the Qur'an wants you to kill lots of people".
Shahzad and the judge sparred repeatedly over his reasoning for giving up his comfortable life in the US to train in Pakistan and carry out a potentially deadly attack in the heart of New York City on 1 May.
Instead of exploding, however, his bomb, hidden in the back of a sports utility vehicle, made a sputtered sound. This attracted the attention of a street vendor, who alerted police. The discovery set off an evacuation of the area and an investigation which resulted in his arrest two days later as he sought to flee the country.
Under federal rules, the mandatory life sentence will keep Shahzad behind bars until he dies. After delivering it, Cedarbaum told Shahzad: "You appear to be someone who was capable of education, and I do hope you will spend some of the time in prison thinking carefully about whether the Qur'an wants you to kill lots of people." Shahzad, 31, responded that the "Qur'an gives us the right to defend. And that's all I'm doing."
Earlier, Shahzad offered a lecture of his own for Americans, and said he felt no remorse for his actions.
He told them: "We are only Muslims …but if you call us terrorists, we are proud terrorists, and we will keep on terrorising you." At another point, he said: "The defeat of the US is imminent."
Cedarbaum said her sentence was important "to protect the public from further crimes of this defendant and others who would seek to follow him".
During Shahzad's statement, Cedarbaum cut him off at one point to ask if he had sworn allegiance to the US when he became an American citizen last year.
"I did swear, but I did not mean it," said Shahzad, a former budget analyst from Connecticut who was born in Pakistan.
"So you took a false oath," the judge told him.
Shahzad demonstrated throughout the half-hour proceeding in Manhattan that he had not wavered in the months since June, when he pleaded guilty to 10 terrorism and weapons charges, some of which carry mandatory life sentences.
"I want to plead guilty and I'm going to plead guilty 100 times forward," he said in June.
On Tuesday, he picked up where he left off. "If I am given 1,000 lives, I will sacrifice them all for the life of Allah," he said at the start of a statement that lasted several minutes and was interrupted several times by the judge, who said she wanted to hear what he had to say about his sentencing.
He asked: "How can I be judged by a court that does not understand the suffering of my people?"
Shahzad, who last year received explosives training in Pakistan to prepare for his bombing attempt, said attacks on Americans would continue until the US left Muslim lands.
"We do not accept your democracy or your freedom because we already have sharia law and freedom," Shahzad said.
Two deputy US marshals stood behind Shahzad throughout the sentencing.
Shahzad had instructed his attorney not to speak. When a prosecutor tried to speak, the judge told him it was unnecessary.
Asked by the judge whether he had any final words, Shahzad said: "I'm happy with the deal that God has given me." (Times Square bomb attempt man jailed for life.)
Yet Michael Rubens Bloomberg tried to pin the blame for the Times Square boming in 2010 on an anti-government "right winger."
Michael Rubens Bloomberg is a politically "correct" leftist ideologue of the first order.
It is also useful to point out that Bloomberg was once sued by a female employee of his Bloomberg financial and media conglomerate for harassment when he responded as follows upon learning she was expecting a child, "Kill it! Kill it!" (See New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg Testifies in Pregnancy Discrimination Case.) This episode was even too much for the pro-abort protege of Ralph Nader, Mark Green, who brought it up in a campaign advertisement when running as the Democrat Party nominee for Mayor of the City of New York, New York, in 2001 against Bloomberg, who had the endorsement of Republican Party even though he had been a lifelong Democrat until earlier that year and thendeclared himself in 2008 to be an "independent." As noted in article from eighteen years ago quoted above, one of the first things that Michael Bloomberg attempted to do as Mayor of the City of New York in 2002 was to impose mandatory training in methods of surgical baby-killing in all of the obstetrics/genealogical residency programs in all of the city's public hospitals, permitting no one to opt out of the program as a matter of conscience (see Kathryn Jean Lopez on Med Students and Abortion).
Michael Bloomberg is a reprobate. He is a spineless, gutless coward who speaks out exclusively in behalf of abject moral evils and in favor of a radical form of social engineering designed to curb legitimate human freedoms as he spends almost as much of his free time in his mansion on the island of Bermuda as had the late United States Representative Adam Clayton Powell, Jr., spent in The Bahamas after he was found guilty in a civil trial of slandering a woman named Esther James, whom he called "bag woman for the police" (see Little Caesars All (Pizza, Pizza)).
Even with horrific record, however, Michael Rubens Bloomberg, who was, as noted above, endorsed in 2001 by President George Walker Bush, and it thus not surprising that there are a few “conservative” and “moderate” Republicans who are more than willing to vote for the “normalcy” represented by a moral reprobate who would bring Nanny State to the front door of every American household. Although, I do know if George Walker Bush or his younger brother, John Ellis (JEB!) Bush, would vote for Bloomberg this year if he received the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. However, it is fact that former Florida Governor John Ellis Bush was the founding director of the Bloomberg Family Foundation:
It was four years ago that we learned of the Bush family’s continued support for the “educational expert,” Michael Rubens Bloomberg:
Presidential candidate Jeb Bush was founding director of the Bloomberg Family Foundation. He was named to that post in 2010 and resigned in 2014 as he prepared to announce his candidacy. While he was on the board, this foundation gave tens of millions to Planned Parenthood and funded international abortion efforts. Michael Bloomberg had always been up front about his vision for the foundation. It would be intellectually dishonest for anyone to insinuate that Bush had no knowledge of the foundation's pro-abortion fundings. I had discounted Bush as a candidate long ago; this news only confirms my instincts. (DO GOP Officals Support Planned Barrenhood?)
A few Republicans defended John Ellis Bush (JEB!)’s tenure at the Bloomberg Family Foundation even though it gave lots of money to Planned Barrenhood. Indeed, why in the world would a supposedly "pro-life" Catholic such as "JEB!" want to have any association whatsoever with the pro-abortion, pro-perversity Nanny State Michael Rubens Bloomberg in the first place?
Michael Rubens Bloomberg an "expert" on education?
I think not, and readers who are interested can read a commentary, No Pot O'Gold At The End Of This Rainbow, I wrote in 2011 about Bloomberg's efforts to introduce an even more graphic form of explicit classrom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments than the one that was being used at the time.
What a system.
What a farce.
Michael Rubens Bloomberg is just as much as a statist as Bernard John Sanders. He simply lacks something called a personality as he is a totally-programmed and, at this point, focus group-controlled robot who is trying to evade his own record as he presents himself as a “moderate.” As noted before in this commentary, there is nothing “moderate” about supporting grave evils under the cover of the civil law.
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr: Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., is a poster boy for how the heresy of Americanism has trumped Catholicism in the minds of Catholics, both clergy and laity alike, here in the United States of America. Biden, who was sworn in as the junior United States Senator from Delaware on January 3, 1973, just a short while after his wife and infant daughter were killed an automobile accident, was initially pro-life when he ran for the Senate in 1972 against incumbent Republican Senator J. Caleb Boggs.
That did not last long.
Biden became a full-throated supporter of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United Stats of America (SCOTUS) in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, January 22, 1973, that overturned the laws of forty-four state legislatures that forbade or restricted the surgical dismemberment of preborn children in their mothers' wombs. Biden and fellow United States Senator, Edward Moore Kennedy (D-Massachusetts), were among the first Catholic officials in public life to "switch" their positions from pro-life to pro-death, finding that they did not jeopardize their standing within the counterfeit church of conciliarism that presents itself to the world yet as the Catholic Church.
Indeed, Biden and Kennedy became among the first to parrot the approach to the surgical dismemberment of innocent preborn children under cover of law that was enunciated by then United States Representative Hugh Leo Carey (D-Brooklyn, New York) in his campaign for the Governorship of New York against then Governor Malcolm Wilson, who opposed abortion but nevertheless signed the State of New York's 1970 law permitting surgical killing in the first twenty-four weeks of pregnancy when serving as Lieutenant Governor of the State of New York at a time when the then Governor, the egregious Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller, was out of the state. Carey helped to popularize the phrase "I'm personally opposed but abortion but cannot 'impose' my concept of morality' upon others" approach that Biden and Kennedy and Carey's own protege, one Mario Matthew Cuomo, who said in a debate in Albany, New York, on August 25, 1974, when he was running an unsuccessful primary race to be Carey's lieutenant governor running mate that he would have voted against that 1970 abortion bill had he been in the New York State Legislature at the time, were among the many Catholics in public life who forsook the truth for a lie, choosing to serve as enablers of the assassinations of millions upon millions of innocent preborn children.
Biden has "refined" his position over the years. He did support the conditional, partial ban on the procedure known as "partial-birth" abortion in 1999 and 2003, something that might have qualified him as being "pro-life" in the judgment of the Republican sycophants who run the various political action committees associated with the National Not-So-Right to Life Committee (which supports the execution of children under cover of law in cases where it is alleged that a mother's life is in danger and which takes no position against the chemical abortion of children by means of various abortifacient pills and devices) and its state affiliate committees. Remember, my friends, former United States Representative Eric Anthony "Rick" Lazio (R-West Islip, New York) was considered "good enough" by the New York State Right to Life Committee despite his being fully supportive of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Roe v. Wade. It was "good enough" that Lazio was opposed to the conditional, partial ban on partial-birth abortions. Biden says now that he favors a policy of "abortion neutrality," that is, that the civil law should never prohibit nor endorse the taking of innocent preborn human life.
Biden's sophistry in this regard has been supported, at least in a de facto manner, by all manner of Catholic clergy.
Biden has been particularly close to the Oblates of Saint Francis de Sales, at whose invitation he spoke at Allentown College of Saint Francis de Sales in April of 1980 as I was completing my one and only year of teaching there.
Biden was unwilling to examine his obligation as a Catholic to oppose the mystical dismemberment of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the persons of preborn children when I questioned him on the matter during the question-and-answer forum that followed his presentation. One student of mine said, "That's the only reason I came here tonight, to see you take on Biden on abortion." Biden was, of course, nonplussed. He was thoroughly supported by my chairman at the time, the late Father Bernard Donohue, O.S.F.S., who had invited Biden to speak at the then named Allentown College, which is now called DeSales University.
Biden was thus in the first generation of Catholics attached to the agency of naturalism known as the Democrat Party to escape relatively unscathed from the officialdom of the counterfeit church of conciliarism despite his support for chemical and surgical baby-killing. It was because the conciliarist bishops, most of whom at the time were indeed genuine bishops consecrated prior to the change of Annibale Bugnini's 1968 rite of episcopal non-consecration, enabled that first generation of Catholics in public office who were members of the Democrat Party that some Catholics attached to the agency of naturalism known as the Republican Party began to realize that they could put the exigencies of their own careerist expediency above fidelity to the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural as these have been entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ exclusively to the Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible explication and maintain their own "good standing" as "Catholics."
Former Vice President Biden continues to maintain his “good standing” in the structures of the counterfeit church, and he also continues to demonstrate his total disregard for truth, exemplified by the way he has always sought to finesse his disregard for the norms of ethical behavior, something he demonstrated as early as his time at Syracuse University Law School in 1965:
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., fighting to salvage his Presidential campaign, today acknowledged ''a mistake'' in his youth, when he plagiarized a law review article for a paper he wrote in his first year at law school.
Mr. Biden insisted, however, that he had done nothing ''malevolent,'' that he had simply misunderstood the need to cite sources carefully. And he asserted that another controversy, concerning recent reports of his using material from others' speeches without attribution, was ''much ado about nothing.''
Mr. Biden, the 44-year-old Delaware Democrat who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee, addressed these issues at the Capitol in a morning news conference he had called expressly for that purpose. The news conference was held just before he presided over the third day of hearings on the nomination of Judge Robert H. Bork to the Supreme Court.
To buttress his assertions of sincerity and openness, Mr. Biden released a 65-page file, obtained by the Senator from the Syracuse University College of Law, that he said contained all the records of his years there. It disclosed relatively poor grades in college and law school, mixed evaluations from teachers and details of the plagiarism. (Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not 'Malevolent'; see also Joseph Biden's Plagiarism)
This revelation took place in September of 1987 after John Sasso, then the campaign manager for Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis's campaign to secure the 1988 presidential nomination of the Democratic Party, had aired an "attack video" that placed side-by-side, split-screen footage of speeches given by Neil Kinnock, the Trotskyite leader of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom, and the then Senator Biden on foreign policy that were identical. Kinnock was then the leader of the Labour Party, which was out of power in the United Kingdom from May 4, 1979, to May 2, 1997, at which point the party, then led by Tony Blair, defeated the Conservative (or Tory) Party in the general elections, ousting Margaret Thatcher's successor, John Major, as prime minister. Biden and Kinnock were soulmates on matters of foreign policy.
Why not steal Kinnock's speech?
After all, it was "much ado about nothing."
Well, despite Biden's willingness to let his fellow pro-abortion Catholic, Edward Moore Kennedy (D-Massachusetts), to his bidding for him by demonizing United States Judge of the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Judge Robert Bork during the latter's confirmation hearings in 1987 to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America, he had to fold up his presidential aspirations for 1988 soon after the plagiarism became known, following the departure of former United States Senator Gary Hart (D-South Dakota), whose "monkey business" forced him out of the race on May 8, 1987 (he reentered seven months later principally to become eligible for Federal matching funds to pay off his campaign debt). The gaffe-prone Biden thought that he could win that presidential nomination he so coveted if he only waited a little while, having to settle for the vice presidency under Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, a first-class demagogue in his own right, after in 2008 campaign fizzled out after receiving four percent of the vote in the Iowa caucuses on January 3, 2008.
The loose-mouthed, foul-mouthed (see When "Boys Will Be Boys" They Grow Up to Be Men Like Joe Biden) was a walking demagogue throughout the course of his eight years as the nation's forty-seventh vice president. It was in 2011 that Biden accused House Republicans associated with the loosely-organized Taxed Enough Already movement (TEA Party) of being "terrorists" for seeking to achieve significant cuts in Federal spending in exchange for the raising of the national debt ceiling. True to his lying self, Biden denied that he used the word terrorism:
Vice President Joe Biden joined House Democrats in lashing tea party Republicans Monday, accusing them of having “acted like terrorists” in the fight over raising the nation’s debt limit, according to several sources in the room.
Biden was agreeing with a line of argument made by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-Pa.) at a two-hour, closed-door Democratic Caucus meeting.
“We have negotiated with terrorists,” an angry Doyle said, according to sources in the room. “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.”
Biden, driven by his Democratic allies’ misgivings about the debt-limit deal, responded: “They have acted like terrorists.”
Biden’s office initially declined to comment about what the vice president said inside the closed-door session, but after POLITICO published the remarks, spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said: “The word was used by several members of Congress. The vice president does not believe it’s an appropriate term in political discourse.”
Biden later denied he used that term in an interview with CBS.
“I did not use the terrorism word,” Biden told CBS Evening News anchor and managing editor Scott Pelley.
Earlier in the day, Biden told Senate Democrats that Republican leaders have “guns to their heads” in trying to negotiate deals. (Joe Biden likened tea partiers to terrorists.)
Although the "conventional wisdom" is that President Donald John Trump's rhetoric is "divisive," Biden has been and continues to be one of the most divisive, demagogic men in public life in the past fifty years, and he has ever sought to position himself as a "leader" in support of sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance.
Indeed, Bidenannounced his support for “marriage” between people of the same gender engaged in perverse sins against nature in 2012, thus stealing the spotlight from his boss, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetro (no slouch of a statist in his own wretched right), who had wanted to announce his own support for “marriage equality” at the Democratic National Convention in Tampa. Florida, three months later:
DAVID GREGORY: You raise social policy. I'm curious. You know, the president has said that his views on gay marriage, on same-sex marriage have evolved. But he's opposed to it. You're opposed to it. Have your views-- evolved?
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Look-- I just think-- that-- the good news is that as more and more Americans become to understand what this is all about is a simple proposition. Who do you love? Who do you love? And will you be loyal to the person you love? And that's what people are finding out is what-- what all marriages, at their root, are about. Whe-- whether they're-- marriages of lesbians or gay men or heterosexuals.
DAVID GREGORY: Is that what you believe now? Are you--
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: That's what I believe.
DAVID GREGORY: And you're comfortable with same-sex marriage now?
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: I-- I-- look, I am vice president of the United States of America. The president sets the policy. I am absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women, and heterosexual men and women marrying another are entitled to the same exact rights, all the civil rights, all the civil liberties. And quite frankly, I don't see much of a distinction-- beyond that.
DAVID GREGORY: In a second term, will this administration come out behind same-sex marriage, the institution of marriage?
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, I-- I-- I can't speak to that. I-- I-- I-- I don't know the answer to that. But I can tell you--
DAVID GREGORY: It sounds like you'd like to see it happen. If that's what the president would get--
VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, the president continues to fight, whether it's Don't Ask, Don't Tell or whether it is making sure, across the board, that you cannot discriminate. Look-- look the the executive orders he's put in place. Any hospital that gets federal funding, which is almost all of them, they can't deny a partner from being able to have access to their-- their-- their partner who's ill or making the call on whether or not they-- you know-- it's just-- this is evolving.
And by the way, my measure, David, and I take a look at when things really begin to change, is when the social culture changes. I think Will and Grace probably did more to educate the American public than almost anything anybody's ever done so far. And I think-- people fear that which is different. Now they're beginning to understand. They're beginning to understand that this as a base--
I-- I was with-- speaking to a group of gay leaders in-- in Los Angeles-- la-- two, two weeks ago. And one gentleman looked at me in the question period and said, "Let me ask you, how do you feel about us?" And I had just walked into the back door of this gay couple and they're with their two adopted children. And I turned to the man who owned the house. I said, "What did I do when I walked in?" He said, "You walked right to my children. They were seven and five, giving you flowers." And I said, "I wish every American could see the look of love those kids had in their eyes for you guys. And they wouldn't have any doubt about what this is about." (Transcript of Meet the Press, National Broadcasting Company, Sunday, May 6, 2012.)
This is what passes for “moderation” in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist “left”?
Obviously, President Donald John Trump supports sodomite relationships, which is why he has no problem with appointing sodomites to positions in his administration and to seats on the Federal bench.
Biden, though, is old enough to know better as he was the beneficiary of the true Sacraments until he was twenty-seven years of age in 1969. Truth matters to him as little as it does to the “bishops” and priests/presbyters who have enabled him throughout the course of his nearly five decades in public life, which began on November 4, 1970, when he was elected as a member of the New Castle, Delaware, County Council, a position he held for two years until being elected to the United States Senate on November 7, 1972, at the age of twenty-nine, thirteen days before his thirtieth birthday, which is the minimum age set by Article I of the Constitution of the United States of America that a senator must attain before taking his oath of office.
Finally, it should not be forgotten that Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., has a penchant for helping his relatives to capitalize on the family name and his own connections over the decades. Here are a few examples:
James Biden isn’t a big name in the business of residential housing development, so what exactly qualifies him to work at a construction company and share in the winnings of a $1.5 billion project to build affordable homes in Iraq?
If you said it has something to do with his last name, the one shared by his older brother Vice President Joe Biden, you wouldn’t be far off. At least that’s the guess of some Wall Street analysts who cover the Marlton, NJ-based company Hill International and think they’ve seen yet another sordid tale of crony capitalism.
Hill has been around for decades; its main business is managing construction projects in the Middle East and here in America. It’s built a good reputation over the years, as has the father-son team who run it, Irv and David Richter.
But the bursting of the real-estate bubble took its toll; Hill shares are down 80 percent since 2008. Since 2011, the company has reported losses. Its Middle East business has also been stymied by the Arab Spring uprisings; in Libya alone, Hill is out $60 million in payments that it’s still trying to recover.
But it got some good news not long after its housing subsidiary hired James Biden as an executive vice president in late 2010. Just six months later, Hill won one of its biggest contracts ever, a $1.5 billion deal to build at least 100,000 affordable homes in Iraq.
A good deal for Hill, a relative newcomer to building homes — and for James Biden, who as one partner will get a good share of that $1.5 billion.
The deal is contingent on the Iraqi government providing financing, which it has yet to do, but Hill execs tell analysts the money could start flowing by the end of the year. That’s when everyone involved, James Biden included, will start collecting on tens of millions of dollars in profits.
One friend of James Biden’s estimates his net worth at around $7 million, yet he seems to have a remarkable lack of concrete business experience. An attorney who’s done work for him called him a “serial entrepreneur,” but didn’t name the startups he was responsible for.
Hill chief Irv Richter called Biden a “good salesman” and the firm’s Web site describes “40 years of experience dealing with principals in business, political, legal and financial circles across the nation and internationally.”
(James Biden also had a relatively short and somewhat controversial run as a co-owner of a hedge-fund company with Joe’s son Hunter. The company, as it turns out, was marketed by companies controlled by now convicted Ponzi schemer Allen Stanford. Neither Biden was charged, but the fund company is now winding down its operations.)
No, James Biden’s obvious value comes from his connection to the Obama administration. Richter assures me that James’ ties to Joe played no part in landing the plum assignment in Iraq or any of the other government-related jobs Hill has received recently.
Really? Connect these dots: Both the Iraqi government and the Obama State Department played roles in helping Hill win the assignment, Richter concedes. And Joe Biden is President Obama’s point man on Iraq — a country where people expect politicians’ families to be “taken care of.”
Also key is TRAC Development, a South Korean firm that won the master contract for the Iraq work. And — huh! — James Biden and his wife were guests of President Obama and Michelle for last October’s state dinner honoring the president of South Korea, Lee Myung-bak.
All one big coincidence?
Well, Richter insists that, while Biden’s name and connections might open doors when government business is on the line, that doesn’t guarantee success. “If he had the name Obama, he would get in the door easier,” Richter joked.
During this month’s vice-presidential debate, Joe Biden told Americans to just ignore all that stimulus money that went to administration-connected failures like Solyndra. Crony capitalism, he insisted, hardly exists with Joe Biden and Barack Obama watching the store.
Maybe that’s why the veep, after making that dopey statement, was laughing so much that night. (Crony Capitalism and Joe Biden's Brother.)
Political figures have long used their families to route power and benefits for their own self-enrichment. In my new book, “Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America’s Progressive Elite,” one particular politician — Joe Biden — emerges as the king of the sweetheart deal, with no less than five family members benefiting from his largesse, favorable access and powerful position for commercial gain. In Biden’s case, these deals include foreign partners and, in some cases, even US taxpayer dollars.
The Biden family’s apparent self-enrichment involves five family members: Joe’s son Hunter, son-in-law Howard, brothers James and Frank, and sister Valerie.
When this subject came up in 2019, Biden declared, “I never talked with my son or my brother or anyone else — even distant family — about their business interests. Period.”
As we will see, this is far from the case …
oe Biden’s younger brother, James, has been an integral part of the family political machine from the earliest days when he served as finance chair of Joe’s 1972 Senate campaign, and the two have remained quite close. After Joe joined the US Senate, he would bring his brother James along on congressional delegation trips to places like Ireland, Rome and Africa.
When Joe became vice president, James was a welcomed guest at the White House, securing invitations to such important functions as a state dinner in 2011 and the visit of Pope Francis in 2015. Sometimes, James’ White House visits dovetailed with his overseas business dealings, and his commercial opportunities flourished during his brother’s tenure as vice president.
Consider the case of HillStone International, a subsidiary of the huge construction management firm Hill International. The president of HillStone International was Kevin Justice, who grew up in Delaware and was a longtime Biden family friend. On Nov. 4, 2010, according to White House visitors’ logs, Justice visited the White House and met with Biden adviser Michele Smith in the Office of the Vice President.
Less than three weeks later, HillStone announced that James Biden would be joining the firm as an executive vice president. James appeared to have little or no background in housing construction, but that did not seem to matter to HillStone. His bio on the company’s website noted his “40 years of experience dealing with principals in business, political, legal and financial circles across the nation and internationally…”
James Biden was joining HillStone just as the firm was starting negotiations to win a massive contract in war-torn Iraq. Six months later, the firm announced a contract to build 100,000 homes. It was part of a $35 billion, 500,000-unit project deal won by TRAC Development, a South Korean company. HillStone also received a $22 million US federal government contract to manage a construction project for the State Department.
David Richter, son of the parent company’s founder, was not shy in explaining HillStone’s success in securing government contracts. It really helps, he told investors at a private meeting, to have “the brother of the vice president as a partner,” according to someone who was there.
The Iraq project was massive, perhaps the single most lucrative project for the firm ever. In 2012, Charlie Gasparino of Fox Business reported that HillStone officials expected the project to “generate $1.5 billion in revenues over the next three years.” That amounted to more than three times the revenue the company produced in 2011.
A group of minority partners, including James Biden, stood to split about $735 million. “There’s plenty of money for everyone if this project goes through,” said one company official.
The deal was all set, but HillStone made a crucial error. In 2013, the firm was forced to back out of the contract because of a series of problems, including a lack of experience by Hill and TRAC Development, its South Korean associate firm. But HillStone continued doing significant contract work in the embattled country, including a six-year contract with the US Army Corps of Engineers.
James Biden remained with Hill International, which accumulated contracts from the federal government for dozens of projects, including projects in the United States, Puerto Rico, Mozambique and elsewhere.
In late March 2009, Vice President Joe Biden landed in Costa Rica aboard Air Force Two, and went to the Costa Rican presidential palace for a one-on-one with President Oscar Arias. The Biden visit had symbolic significance. The last time a high-ranking American official had visited the country was back in 1997, when Bill Clinton had come.
Joe Biden’s trip to Costa Rica came at a fortuitous time for his brother Frank, who was busy working deals in the country. Just months after Vice President Biden’s visit, in August, Costa Rica News announced a new multilateral partnership “to reform Real Estate in Latin America” among Frank Biden, a developer named Craig Williamson, and the Guanacaste Country Club, a newly planned resort. The partnership, which appears to be ongoing, was wrapped in a beautiful package as a “call on resources available to the companies and individuals to reform the social, economic and environmental practices of real estate developers across the world by example.”
In real terms, Frank’s dream was to build in the jungles of Costa Rica thousands of homes, a world-class golf course, casinos, and an anti-aging center. The Costa Rican government was eager to cooperate with the vice president’s brother.
As it happened, Joe Biden had been asked by President Obama to act as the administration’s point man in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Frank’s vision for a country club in Costa Rica received support from the highest levels of the Costa Rican government — despite his lack of experience in building such developments. He met with the Costa Rican ministers of education and energy and environment, as well as the president of the country.
On Oct. 4, 2016, the Costa Rican Ministry of Public Education signed a letter of intent with Frank’s company, Sun Fund Americas. The project involved allowing a company called GoSolar to operate solar power facilities in Costa Rica. The previous year, the Obama-Biden administration’s OPIC had authorized a $6.5 million taxpayer-backed loan for the project.
In June 2014, Vice President Biden announced the launch of the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative (CESI). The program called for increasing access to financing for Caribbean energy projects that he strongly supported. American taxpayer dollars were dedicated to facilitating deals that matched US government financing with local energy projects in Caribbean countries, including Jamaica. In January 2015, USAID announced that it would be spending $10 million to boost renewable energy projects in Jamaica over the next five years.
After Joe Biden brought together leaders for CESI, brother Frank’s firm Sun Fund Americas announced that it was “engaged in projects and is in negotiations with governments of other countries in the [Caribbean] region for both its Solar and Waste to Energy development services.” As if to push the idea along, the Obama administration’s OPIC provided a $47.5 million loan to support the construction of a 20-megawatt solar facility in Clarendon, Jamaica.
Frank Biden’s Sun Fund Americas later announced that it had signed a power purchase agreement to build a 20-megawatt solar facility in Jamaica.
During his years in the Senate, Biden’s family benefited financially in other ways as he leveraged political power. Joe’s sister Valerie ran all of his Senate campaigns, as well as his presidential runs in 1988 and 2008.
But she was also a senior partner in a political messaging firm named Joe Slade White & Company; the only two executives listed at the firm were Joe Slade White and Valerie.
The firm received large fees from the Biden campaigns that Valerie was running. Two and a half million dollars in consulting fees flowed to her firm from Citizens for Biden and Biden For President Inc. during the 2008 presidential bid alone.
Joe Slade White & Company worked for Biden campaigns over 18 years. (Peter Schweizer, How Five Members of Joe Biden's Family Got Rich Through His Connections.)
Mind you, this is not even to mention Joseph Robinette Biden’s connections to Eric Ciaramella, the man alleged to be the infamous “whistleblower” even though the President of the United States of America is not part of the intelligence community per se and thus cannot be the subject of any legitimate whistleblower complaint. Ciaramella acted as he did to protect the Biden name but wound up helping to bring discredit to a former vice president who is a discredit to the Catholic Faith and thus to the common temporal good of the nation. (For more information about Eric Ciaramella’s ties to the Bidens, please see Alleged Whisteblower Erich Ciaramella Was Biden Guest at State Department Banquet and Judicial Watch Unearths Visitor Logs from Eric Ciaramella's Time at the White House.)
As happened during Biden’s previous two tries for the presidential nomination of the organized crime family of the naturalist “right,” however, his third try will end sometime in March when it becomes clear that he has been bested by a man who is a little over fourteen months his senior, Bernard John Sanders, or one is a little over nine months he is senior, Michael Rubens Bloomberg.
Shed no tears for the Catholic renegade named Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., who has reaffirmed his own family members in lives of natural vice while promoting two of the four sins that cry out to Heaven in his public life, willful murder and the sin of Sodom. Pray for his conversion, and pray that he will take seriously these papal admonitions about his clichéd slogan of separating his public duties from his “private” beliefs and his open support for the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn:
Hence, lest concord be broken by rash charges, let this be understood by all, that the integrity of Catholic faith cannot be reconciled with opinions verging on naturalism or rationalism, the essence of which is utterly to do away with Christian institutions and to install in society the supremacy of man to the exclusion of God. Further, it is unlawful to follow one line of conduct in private life and another in public, respecting privately the authority of the Church, but publicly rejecting it; for this would amount to joining together good and evil, and to putting man in conflict with himself; whereas he ought always to be consistent, and never in the least point nor in any condition of life to swerve from Christian virtue. (Pope Leo XIII, Immortale Dei, November 1, 1885.)
Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., will have no excuses before Christ the King for the evils he has suborned in his own family or for the evils he has promoted in his public life, and no Catholic has any excuse to even consider casting a vote for him.
No Naturalist Way Out of this Mess
I have spent the time on the reprobates running for the Democratic Party presidential nomination to provide the very few readers of this site with a reminder about the depths to which the United States of America has fallen and to point out once again that we have reached this point precisely as a result of the false premises upon which the whole system was founded.
There is no electoral way out of this mess, and it is pointless to take refuge in the contention that the “best” we can do at this time is to support President Donald John Trump as the means to hold back the tsunami of socialism that will engulf the country sooner or later.
As will be noted in part two of this commentary, which will focus on the president’s State of the Union address and the remarks he gave at the so-called “National Prayer Breakfast” earlier this month, Donald John Trump’s presidency does not represent a recrudescence of a “silent majority” composed of people who are completely opposed to abortion, sodomy, statism, globalism, environmentalism, relativism. His presidency is a rearguard effort whose most lasting result will be the transformation of the Federal judiciary, but the clock is ticking and the demographics are changing. Someone along the lines of Bernard John Sanders, if not “Bernie” himself, is going to take the reins of presidential power soon enough, and there will never any chance at putting the American Humpty Dumpty back together again.
Indeed, President Donald John Trump should be careful what he hopes for as very few people took Arkansas Governor William Jefferson Blythe Clinton seriously twenty-eight years ago, especially after the Gennifer Flowers’ tape recordings surfaced. Clinton, aided by Madame Defarge, of course, proved himself to be tenacious and defeated a hapless WASP, George Herbert Walker Bush, a man who believed in nothing and could articulate less, who had a ninety-one percent public opinion approval rating after the needless Iraq War of 1991 and defeated him handily with the help of Henry Ray/Ross Perot, Jr.
The electorate of the United States of America may not be ready for “The Bern” now, but a victory by him on November 3, 2020, cannot be considered out of the question if he does indeed secure the Democratic Party presidential nomination. Even if the Marxist-Leninist atheist of Jewish birth does suffer a likely defeat, though, one can count on acts of disruption and violence from his devoted band of reflexive supporters as these people will not be denied what they think is “their time” to rule with an iron hand to enforce new Iron Curtain around us all.
Keeping Ourselves Focused on the Holy Faith
None of this, however, should cause us the least bit of agitation or despair.
It is thus very late. We are clearly in the era of the Great Apostasy. Anyone who thinks that something short of Catholicism can retard any of the evils we are facing at present, including the statist monstrosity known as ObamaCare, is simply deluding himself as not one of the naturalist commentators who believe that they can do so understands these words of Pope Leo XIII, contained in in Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890, and in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, that those who search for merely "natural' solutions to the problems of man search in vain:
The Church, it is certain, at no time and in no particular is deserted by God; hence, there is no reason why she should be alarmed at the wickedness of men; but in the case of nations falling away from Christian virtue there is not a like ground of assurance, "for sin maketh nations miserable." If every bygone age has experienced the force of this truth, wherefore should not our own? There are, in truth, very many signs which proclaim that just punishments are already menacing, and the condition of modern States tends to confirm this belief, since we perceive many of them in sad plight from intestine disorders, and not one entirely exempt. But, should those leagued together in wickedness hurry onward in the road they have boldly chosen, should they increase in influence and power in proportion as they make headway in their evil purposes and crafty schemes, there will be ground to fear lest the very foundations nature has laid for States to rest upon be utterly destroyed. Nor can such misgivings be removed by any mere human effort, especially as a vast number of men, having rejected the Christian faith, are on that account justly incurring the penalty of their pride, since blinded by their passions they search in vain for truth, laying hold on the false for the true, and thinking themselves wise when they call "evil good, and good evil," and "put darkness in the place of light, and light in the place of darkness." It is therefore necessary that God come to the rescue, and that, mindful of His mercy, He turn an eye of compassion on human society. (Pope Leo XIII, Sapientiae Christianae, January 10, 1890.)
We do not organize nations around the false principles of naturalism.
We do not restore “order” in nations by the false principles of naturalism.
We must remember that public life must be stained with crime when men and their nations do not submit themselves to the Social Reign of Christ the King and His Holy Catholic Church in all that pertains to the good of souls, something that Pope Leo XIII noted in Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900:
God alone is Life. All other beings partake of life, but are not life. Christ, from all eternity and by His very nature, is "the Life," just as He is the Truth, because He is God of God. From Him, as from its most sacred source, all life pervades and ever will pervade creation. Whatever is, is by Him; whatever lives, lives by Him. For by the Word "all things were made; and without Him was made nothing that was made." This is true of the natural life; but, as We have sufficiently indicated above, we have a much higher and better life, won for us by Christ's mercy, that is to say, "the life of grace," whose happy consummation is "the life of glory," to which all our thoughts and actions ought to be directed. The whole object of Christian doctrine and morality is that "we being dead to sin, should live to justice" (I Peter ii., 24)-that is, to virtue and holiness. In this consists the moral life, with the certain hope of a happy eternity. This justice, in order to be advantageous to salvation, is nourished by Christian faith. "The just man liveth by faith" (Galatians iii., II). "Without faith it is impossible to please God" (Hebrews xi., 6). Consequently Jesus Christ, the creator and preserver of faith, also preserves and nourishes our moral life. This He does chiefly by the ministry of His Church. To Her, in His wise and merciful counsel, He has entrusted certain agencies which engender the supernatural life, protect it, and revive it if it should fail. This generative and conservative power of the virtues that make for salvation is therefore lost, whenever morality is dissociated from divine faith. A system of morality based exclusively on human reason robs man of his highest dignity and lowers him from the supernatural to the merely natural life. Not but that man is able by the right use of reason to know and to obey certain principles of the natural law. But though he should know them all and keep them inviolate through life-and even this is impossible without the aid of the grace of our Redeemer-still it is vain for anyone without faith to promise himself eternal salvation. "If anyone abide not in Me, he shall be cast forth as a branch, and shall wither, and they shall gather him up and cast him into the fire, and he burneth" john xv., 6). "He that believeth not shall be condemned" (Mark xvi., 16). We have but too much evidence of the value and result of a morality divorced from divine faith. How is it that, in spite of all the zeal for the welfare of the masses, nations are in such straits and even distress, and that the evil is daily on the increase? We are told that society is quite able to help itself; that it can flourish without the assistance of Christianity, and attain its end by its own unaided efforts. Public administrators prefer a purely secular system of government. All traces of the religion of our forefathers are daily disappearing from political life and administration. What blindness! Once the idea of the authority of God as the Judge of right and wrong is forgotten, law must necessarily lose its primary authority and justice must perish: and these are the two most powerful and most necessary bonds of society. Similarly, once the hope and expectation of eternal happiness is taken away, temporal goods will be greedily sought after. Every man will strive to secure the largest share for himself. Hence arise envy, jealousy, hatred. The consequences are conspiracy, anarchy, nihilism. There is neither peace abroad nor security at home. Public life is stained with crime.
So great is this struggle of the passions and so serious the dangers involved, that we must either anticipate ultimate ruin or seek for an efficient remedy. It is of course both right and necessary to punish malefactors, to educate the masses, and by legislation to prevent crime in every possible way: but all this is by no means sufficient. The salvation of the nations must be looked for higher. A power greater than human must be called in to teach men's hearts, awaken in them the sense of duty, and make them better. This is the power which once before saved the world from destruction when groaning under much more terrible evils. Once remove all impediments and allow the Christian spirit to revive and grow strong in a nation, and that nation will be healed. The strife between the classes and the masses will die away; mutual rights will be respected. If Christ be listened to, both rich and poor will do their duty. The former will realise that they must observe justice and charity, the latter self-restraint and moderation, if both are to be saved. Domestic life will be firmly established (by the salutary fear of God as the Lawgiver. In the same way the precepts of the natural law, which dictates respect for lawful authority and obedience to the laws, will exercise their influence over the people. Seditions and conspiracies will cease. Wherever Christianity rules over all without let or hindrance there the order established by Divine Providence is preserved, and both security and prosperity are the happy result. The common welfare, then, urgently demands a return to Him from whom we should never have gone astray; to Him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and this on the part not only of individuals but of society as a whole. We must restore Christ to this His own rightful possession. All elements of the national life must be made to drink in the Life which proceedeth from Him- legislation, political institutions, education, marriage and family life, capital and labour. Everyone must see that the very growth of civilisation which is so ardently desired depends greatly upon this, since it is fed and grows not so much by material wealth and prosperity, as by the spiritual qualities of morality and virtue. (Pope Leo XIII, Tametsi Futura Prospicientibus, November 1, 1900.)
Public life has been stained with crime in the United States of America from its very inception upon one false principle of naturalism after another, the logical issue of the revolution begun by Martin Luther on October 31, 1517, against the Divine Plan that God Himself instituted to effect man's return to Him by the means of His Catholic Church that He Himself founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope.
On Quiguagesima Sunday
This writing of this commentary has continued through today, Sunday, Quinquagesima Sunday, February 23, 2020, and the Commemoration of Saint Peter Damian.
This is a good day to conclude this long commentary as the miracle of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s restoring sight to the blind man as He was walking through Jericho en route to Jerusalem to undergo the events of His Passion and Death during Holy Week.
So many people, including even a lot of believing Catholics, permit themselves to be blinded by the agitations of the moment and become fearful of the future. The holy, penitential season of Lent provides up with an opportunity to withdraw from the agitation engendered by various sections of the Judeo-Masonic synagogue of competing sets of naturalistic approaches to life and public policy and to have the spiritual eyes of our immortal souls restore to a 20/20 vision that permits us to see and to remember that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ really meant it when He said:
 I am the vine: you the branches: he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same beareth much fruit: for without me you can do nothing. (John 15: 5.)
Pope Saint Gregory the Great’s sermon on the Gospel passage read at today’s Mass and contained in the readings for Matins in the Divine Office teaches us that we must permit Our Lord to keep our eyes opened to the supernatural realities rather than to choose to be blinded by various tricks of the adversary to see and to think on the merely natural level:
Our Redeemer, foreseeing that the minds of His disciples would be troubled by His suffering, told them long before both of the pains of that suffering, and of the glory of His rising again, to the end that, when they should see Him die as He had prophesied, they might not doubt that He was likewise to rise again. But, since His disciples were yet carnal, and could not receive the words telling of this mystery, He wrought a miracle before them. A blind man received his sight before their eyes, that if they could not receive heavenly things by words, they might be persuaded of heavenly things by deeds.
But, dearly beloved brethren, we must so take the miracles of our Lord and Saviour, as believing both that they were actually wrought, and that they have some mystic interpretation for our instruction. For in His works, power speaketh one thing and mystery again another. Behold here, for instance. We know not historically who this blind man was, but we do know of what he was mystically the figure. Mankind is blind, driven out from Eden in the persons of his first parents, knowing not the light of heaven, and suffering the darkness of condemnation. But, nevertheless, through the coming of his Redeemer, he is enlightened, so that now he seeth by hope already the gladness of inward light, and walketh by good works in the path of life.
One must note that as Jesus drew to Jericho a blind man received his sight. Now, this name Jericho, being interpreted, signifieth the city of the moon and in Holy Scripture the moon is used as a figure of our imperfect flesh, of whose gradual corruption her monthly waning is a type. As, therefore, our Maker draweth nigh to Jericho, a blind man receiveth his sight. While the Godhead taketh into itself our weak manhood, man receiveth again the light which he had lost. By God's suffering in the Manhood, man is raised up toward God. This blind man is also well described as sitting by the wayside begging, for the Truth saith: “I am the Way.” John XIV, 6. (Pope Saint Gregory the Great, Matins, Divine Office, Quinquagesima Sunday.)
Our Lord provided His Apostles with a forewarning about the events of His Passion and Death. Their eyes, however, were blinded as they did not have yet a full understanding of what He meant when He told them that He was going to fulfill the prophecies that were written about Him. All but one of them ran away while He redeemed us on the wood of the Holy Cross, and even the first pope himself, Saint Peter, thrice denied knowing Him before he repented. The Apostles, save for Saint John the Evangelist, were fearful.
Our Lady gave strength and comfort to Saint John the Evangelist at the foot of the Cross, and she stands ever ready to give that same strength and comfort to us during our own personal crosses and during this time that is redolent of the Roman Empire’s overt persecution of the first Catholics as a counterfeit church preaches all that is opposed to what her Divine Son has taught, revealed and entrusted to the infallible protection of His Catholic Church.
There is nothing to fear.
There are only crosses to be borne with love and prayers to be said to Our Lady for forbearance during these truly tumultuous times.
Our Lady’s Holy Rosary vanquished the Albigenses.
Our Lady’s Holy Rosary vanquished the Turks at the Battle of Lepanto and at the Gates of Vienna.
Our Lady’s Holy Rosary kept Calvinist fleets from invading Peru in the Sixteenth Century and The Philippines in the Seventeenth Century.
Our Lady’s Holy Rosary forced the Red Army to withdraw voluntarily from half of Austria in 1955, one of only two times between 1945 and 1989 that it withdrew from any territory it had occupied by force.
Why do we doubt that Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary will vanquish the enemies of our own personal salvation and of her Divine Son’s Social Kingship over men and nations?
Why do we doubt that Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary will vanquish the lords of conciliarism and make them but mere footnotes in the history of heresiarchs?
Pray Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary, and remember these words of Pope Saint Pius X:
11. If then the most Blessed Virgin is the Mother at once of God and men, who can doubt that she will work with all diligence to procure that Christ, Head of the Body of the Church (Coloss. i., 18), may transfuse His gifts into us, His members, and above all that of knowing Him and living through Him (I John iv., 9)?
12. Moreover it was not only the prerogative of the Most Holy Mother to have furnished the material of His flesh to the Only Son of God, Who was to be born with human members (S. Bede Ven. L. Iv. in Luc. xl.), of which material should be prepared the Victim for the salvation of men; but hers was also the office of tending and nourishing that Victim, and at the appointed time presenting Him for the sacrifice. Hence that uninterrupted community of life and labors of the Son and the Mother, so that of both might have been uttered the words of the Psalmist “My life is consumed in sorrow and my years in groans” (Ps xxx., 11). When the supreme hour of the Son came, beside the Cross of Jesus there stood Mary His Mother, not merely occupied in contemplating the cruel spectacle, but rejoicing that her Only Son was offered for the salvation of mankind, and so entirely participating in His Passion, that if it had been possible she would have gladly borne all the torments that her Son bore (S. Bonav. 1. Sent d. 48, ad Litt. dub. 4). And from this community of will and suffering between Christ and Mary she merited to become most worthily the Reparatrix of the lost world (Eadmeri Mon. De Excellentia Virg. Mariae, c. 9) and Dispensatrix of all the gifts that Our Savior purchased for us by His Death and by His Blood.
13. It cannot, of course, be denied that the dispensation of these treasures is the particular and peculiar right of Jesus Christ, for they are the exclusive fruit of His Death, who by His nature is the mediator between God and man. Nevertheless, by this companionship in sorrow and suffering already mentioned between the Mother and the Son, it has been allowed to the august Virgin to be the most powerful mediatrix and advocate of the whole world with her Divine Son (Pius IX. Ineffabilis). The source, then, is Jesus Christ “of whose fullness we have all received” (John i., 16), “from whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together by what every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in charity” (Ephesians iv., 16). But Mary, as St. Bernard justly remarks, is the channel (Serm. de temp on the Nativ. B. V. De Aquaeductu n. 4); or, if you will, the connecting portion the function of which is to join the body to the head and to transmit to the body the influences and volitions of the head — We mean the neck. Yes, says St. Bernardine of Sienna, “she is the neck of Our Head, by which He communicates to His mystical body all spiritual gifts” (Quadrag. de Evangel. aetern. Serm. x., a. 3, c. iii.).
14. We are then, it will be seen, very far from attributing to the Mother of God a productive power of grace — a power which belongs to God alone. Yet, since Mary carries it over all in holiness and union with Jesus Christ, and has been associated by Jesus Christ in the work of redemption, she merits for us “de congruo,” in the language of theologians, what Jesus Christ merits for us “de condigno,” and she is the supreme Minister of the distribution of graces. Jesus “sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high” (Hebrews i. b.). Mary sitteth at the right hand of her Son — a refuge so secure and a help so trusty against all dangers that we have nothing to fear or to despair of under her guidance, her patronage, her protection. (Pius IX. in Bull Ineffabilis).
15. These principles laid down, and to return to our design, who will not see that we have with good reason claimed for Mary that — as the constant companion of Jesus from the house at Nazareth to the height of Calvary, as beyond all others initiated to the secrets of his Heart, and as the distributor, by right of her Motherhood, of the treasures of His merits,-she is, for all these reasons, a most sure and efficacious assistance to us for arriving at the knowledge and love of Jesus Christ. Those, alas! furnish us by their conduct with a peremptory proof of it, who seduced by the wiles of the demon or deceived by false doctrines think they can do without the help of the Virgin. Hapless are they who neglect Mary under pretext of the honor to be paid to Jesus Christ! As if the Child could be found elsewhere than with the Mother!
16. Under these circumstances, Venerable Brethren, it is this end which all the solemnities that are everywhere being prepared in honor of the holy and Immaculate Conception of Mary should have in view. No homage is more agreeable to her, none is sweeter to her than that we should know and really love Jesus Christ. Let then crowds fill the churches — let solemn feasts be celebrated and public rejoicings be made: these are things eminently suited for enlivening our faith. But unless heart and will be added, they will all be empty forms, mere appearances of piety. At such a spectacle, the Virgin, borrowing the words of Jesus Christ, would address us with the just reproach: “This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me” (Matth. xv., 8).
17. For to be right and good, worship of the Mother of God ought to spring from the heart; acts of the body have here neither utility nor value if the acts of the soul have no part in them. Now these latter can only have one object, which is that we should fully carry out what the divine Son of Mary commands. For if true love alone has the power to unite the wills of men, it is of the first necessity that we should have one will with Mary to serve Jesus our Lord. What this most prudent Virgin said to the servants at the marriage feast of Cana she addresses also to us: “Whatsoever he shall say to you, do ye” (John ii., 5).
Now here is the word of Jesus Christ: “If you would enter into life, keep the commandments” (Matt. xix., 17). Let them each one fully convince himself of this, that if his piety towards the Blessed Virgin does not hinder him from sinning, or does not move his will to amend an evil life, it is a piety deceptive and Iying, wanting as it is in proper effect and its natural fruit.
18. If anyone desires a confirmation of this it may easily be found in the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of Mary. For leaving aside tradition which, as well as Scripture, is a source of truth, how has this persuasion of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin appeared so conformed to the Catholic mind and feeling that it has been held as being one, and as it were inborn in the soul of the faithful? “We shrink from saying,” is the answer of Dionysius of Chartreux, “of this woman who was to crush the head of the serpent that had been crushed by him and that Mother of God that she had ever been a daughter of the Evil One” (Sent. d. 3, q. 1). No, to the Christian intelligence the idea is unthinkable that the flesh of Christ, holy, stainless, innocent, was formed in the womb of Mary of a flesh which had ever, if only for the briefest moment, contracted any stain. And why so, but because an infinite opposition separates God from sin? There certainly we have the origin of the conviction common to all Christians that Jesus Christ before, clothed in human nature, He cleansed us from our sins in His blood, accorded Mary the grace and special privilege of being preserved and exempted, from the first moment of her conception, from all stain of original sin.
19. If then God has such a horror of sin as to have willed to keep free the future Mother of His Son not only from stains which are voluntarily contracted but, by a special favor and in prevision of the merits of Jesus Christ, from that other stain of which the sad sign is transmitted to all us sons of Adam by a sort of hapless heritage: who can doubt that it is a duty for everyone who seeks by his homage to gain the heart of Mary to correct his vicious and depraved habits and to subdue the passions which incite him to evil? (Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904.)
Catholic empires, kingdoms and principalities used to honor Our Lady publicly with pilgrimages, processions and festival on her feast days, including those feast days particular to a local area or region and those not included in the universal calendar of the Roman Rite of the Catholic Church. Moreover, Catholics who participated in these pilgrimages did so out of love for Our Lord and His Most Blessed Mother as they sought to make reparation for their sins. Unlike Jorge Mario Bergoglio and most of his conciliar comrades, these Catholics had horror for and detestation of their sins, and they did not want anyone to “accompany” them in those sins. They sought to quit their sins and implore the intercessory help of Our Lady, without whose loving help we are lost. Doomed. Damned.
Pope Saint Pius X explained that Our Lady’s example of perfect humility and ready obedience to the will of God is for us all to imitate:
20. Whoever moreover wishes, and no one ought not so to wish, that his devotion should be worthy of her and perfect, should go further and strive might and main to imitate her example. It is a divine law that those only attain everlasting happiness who have by such faithful following reproduced in themselves the form of the patience and sanctity of Jesus Christ: “for whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be made conformable to the image of His Son; that He might be the first-born amongst many brethren” (Romans viii., 29). But such generally is our infirmity that we are easily discouraged by the greatness of such an example: by the providence of God, however, another example is proposed to us, which is both as near to Christ as human nature allows, and more nearly accords with the weakness of our nature. And this is no other than the Mother of God. “Such was Mary,” very pertinently points out St. Ambrose, “that her life is an example for all.” And, therefore, he rightly concludes: “Have then before your eyes, as an image, the virginity and life of Mary from whom as from a mirror shines forth the brightness of chastity and the form of virtue” (De Virginib. L. ii., c. ii.) (Pope Saint Pius X, Ad Diem Illum Laetissimum, February 2, 1904.)
We live in a world that rewards and celebrates unchastity, impurity, indecency and perversity. It is up to us as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary to make reparation for the paganism, satanism, socialism, communism, capitalism, materialism, naturalism, hedonism, pantheism, relativism, utilitarianism, egalitarianism, authoritarianism, statism and globalism that promises men “happiness” here in order to lead them to eternal unhappiness and punishment fire for all eternity in hell while being deprived of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity. Our acts of reparation for our sins and those of the whole world will help to plant a few seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the true Faith.
Pray Our Lady’s Most Holy and pray it to make the best Lent of your lives as none of us knows whether it will be our last.
Our Lady of Mount Carmel, pray for us.
Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now
Our Lady of Fatima, pray for us!
Saint Joseph, pray for us.
Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.
Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.
Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Peter Damian, pray for us.