Exposing the Farce Once and For All, part two

Although I did not expect to write a sequel to Thursday’s article, several things have occurred since the commentary was last revised on Thursday afternoon. Suffice it say that the swollen-headed rats among Congressional Republicans who are addicted to the perquisites that come with political power are rather upset that the riff-raff have dared to select a presidential nominee who meets with their condescending, self-righteous disapproval.

Led by the smarmy little devotee of “hard core metal” noise (“music”), United States Representative Paul Davis Ryan, Congressional Republicans have done the bidding of the United States Chamber of Commerce, K Street lobbyists, bankers, multinational corporations, the American-Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) while enabling the statist policies of President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro at almost every turn. These so-called “wise men”  have gutted American manufacturing, shifted thousands upon thousands of America jobs overseas, sent thousands of American military personnel into harm’s way needlessly, and crushed future generations of Americans with a national debt that may yet contribute to the collapse of the country in a manner reminiscent of the fall of Rome. That these political robber barons have the temerity to thumb their noses at the over eighteen million voters who rejected their establishment ways by voting for Donald John Trump (10,717,357) or Raphael Edward Cruz (7,325,796), both of whom ran as anti-establishment candidates, gives new meaning to the word chutzpah.

That is, two-thirds of those who have voted thus far in the Republican Party’s presidential primaries or caucuses this year have rejected “establishment” candidates such as John Ellis (JEB!) Bush and Marco Antonio Rubio. The percentage of anti-establishment votes is actually around seventy percent when one includes the 732,107 votes that were cast for Benjamin Solomon Carson. Thus it is that the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives Paul Davis Ryan, who represents but a single district in the State of Wisconsin, believes that he has the moral authority to speak down to the voters who are very justifiably angry with how Congressional Republicans have lived in fear of being blamed for government shutdowns and for being called racists if they actually had done something substantive to do what the Constitution authorizes them to do: check and balance the abuse of power by a president who has no regard for the laws of God or men.

What is particularly interesting in Ryan’s condemnation of Donald Trump is the high regard in which he holds the dictatorial Abraham Lincoln, who had as much contempt for the Constitution and for the lives of innocent human beings as our current “soft” dictator, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro. Ryan believes that Donald John Trump is the antithesis of the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, who used raw terrorism to force the sovereign states of the Confederate States of America back into “communion,” shall we say, with a Federal government that was intent on using their secession as the pretext to increase its size, scope and reach over the lives of ordinary citizens.

To refresh readers’ memories, I am pasting below in Appendix A material published on this site seventy-four months ago that attests to the fact that Abraham Lincoln was an atheist who did not believe in a personal God, which is why he could authorize the use of raw terror against civilian population centers, including the City of Atlanta, Georgia, and the swath of land devastated by William Tecumseh Sherman’s “march to the sea” from Atlanta to Savannah, Georgia, that took place between November 15, 1864, and December 21, 1864. Sherman wrote to Lincoln to present the City of Savannah as a “Christmas gift” to him, which the sixteenth president accepted with gratitude.

The War Between the States was an effort to hold the United States of America together by armed force. It was not an effort to end slavery. Lincoln created the mold by which his successors could ignore the Constitution with impunity and pursue amoral policies with the full support of Congressional enablers. Lincoln’s lawlessness established a precedent that has been followed by the likes of Theodore Roosevelt, Thomas Woodrow Wilson, John Calvin Coolidge (in coming to the aid of Plutarco Elias Calles against the Cristeros and sending American troops to occupy Nicaragua and Haiti to advance the interests of American businesses), Herbert Clark Hoover, many of whose statist policies were adopted but renamed by his successor, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, whose “New Deal” helped to create the monstrous Federal bureaucracy that has stifled the country ever since, Lyndon Baines Johnson (the Great Society and War on Poverty), Richard Milhous Nixon (funding for international population “control,” the imposition of wage and price controls), James Earl Carter, Jr., William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, George Walker Bush and, of course, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro. Abraham Lincoln, who was also invoked by Jorge Mario Bergoglio in his address to a special joint meeting of the Congress of the United States of America on Thursday, September 24, 2015, the Feast of Our Lady of Ransom, is a model of one thing: totalitarianism.

Yet it is that Paul Davis Ryan, whose knowledge of true history is nonexistent, wants Donald John Trump to bow day and pay homage at the altar of the atheist Lincoln, a man who was personally responsible for issuing orders that took the lives of countless thousands of innocent human beings and dealt a blow to the Constitution, the meaning of whose words are as helpless in the hands of tyrants and positivists as the words of Sacred Scripture are in the hands of Protestants and Modernists, from which it has never recovered. Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro is but the logical end result of a document framed by men who themselves had no regard for the rights of Christ the King or the authority of His true Church. Lincoln simply took full advantage of that which admits of no higher authority than the text of its own words, the Constitution of the United States of America.

Ryan also wants Trump to worship at the altar of “conservative” demigods Ronald Wilson Reagan, who governed his life by means of astrology, which just happens to be a violation of the First Commandment, and the thirty-third degree Freemason named Jack French Kemp, who was in favor of the social-engineering represented by open borders. 

Let me try to get this straight.

Paul Davis Ryan believes that a naturalistic political philosophy, conservatism, is the sole standard of electoral politics and public-policy decision-making.

Ryan, accompanied by other Republican elitists such as columnists George Will and William Kristol and neoconservative war hawks such as John Sidney McCain III and Lindsay Graham, believes himself to be one of the authoritative interpreters and guardians of what “conservatism” represents and who is considered to be “fit” enough to speak in its behalf.

Ryan thus believes that there are fixed, non-negotiable principles that a Republican presidential candidate must adhere to in order to be “worthy” of the supposedly hallowed privilege of being this organized crime family of naturalism’s nominee for the highest elected office in the United States of America.

In other words, Paul Davis Ryan is a self-appointed “pope” (or at least a self-appointed “prefect” of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Conservative Faith) who can ignore the fact that nearly eleven million voters have chosen a candidate who fails to live up to his, Ryan’s, arbitrary definition of what constitutes being a “conservative.”

There are several philosophical flaws to what Paul Davis Ryan believes.

First, no “philosophy” or ideology based in naturalism can ever provide any kind of stable foundation for the pursuit of the common temporal good.

How many times must it be necessary for me to reminder the readers of this site that Catholicism is the one and only foundation of personal and social order?

All right, I will do so again:

Just as Christianity cannot penetrate into the soul without making it better, so it cannot enter into public life without establishing order. With the idea of a God Who governs all, Who is infinitely Wise, Good, and Just, the idea of duty seizes upon the consciences of men. It assuages sorrow, it calms hatred, it engenders heroes. If it has transformed pagan society--and that transformation was a veritable resurrection--for barbarism disappeared in proportion as Christianity extended its sway, so, after the terrible shocks which unbelief has given to the world in our days, it will be able to put that world again on the true road, and bring back to order the States and peoples of modern times. But the return of Christianity will not be efficacious and complete if it does not restore the world to a sincere love of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. In the Catholic Church Christianity is Incarnate. It identifies Itself with that perfect, spiritual, and, in its own order, sovereign society, which is the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ and which has for Its visible head the Roman Pontiff, successor of the Prince of the Apostles. It is the continuation of the mission of the Savior, the daughter and the heiress of His Redemption. It has preached the Gospel, and has defended it at the price of Its blood, and strong in the Divine assistance and of that immortality which has been promised it, It makes no terms with error but remains faithful to the commands which  it has received, to carry the doctrine of Jesus Christ to the uttermost limits of the world and to the end of time, and to protect it in its inviolable integrity. Legitimate dispenser of the teachings of the Gospel it does not reveal itself only as the consoler and Redeemer of souls, but It is still more the internal source of justice and charity, and the propagator as well as the guardian of true liberty, and of that equality which alone is possible here below. In applying the doctrine of its Divine Founder, It maintains a wise equilibrium and marks the true limits between the rights and privileges of society. The equality which it proclaims does not destroy the distinction between the different social classes. It keeps them intact, as nature itself demands, in order to oppose the anarchy of reason emancipated from Faith, and abandoned to its own devices. The liberty which it gives in no wise conflicts with the rights of truth, because those rights are superior to the demands of liberty. Not does it infringe upon the rights of justice, because those rights are superior to the claims of mere numbers or power. Nor does it assail the rights of God because they are superior to the rights of humanity. (Pope Leo XIII, A Review of His Pontificate, March 19, 1902.)

Here we have, founded by Catholics, an inter-denominational association that is to work for the reform of civilization, an undertaking which is above all religious in character; for there is no true civilization without a moral civilization, and no true moral civilization without the true religion: it is a proven truth, a historical fact. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

Second, one of Protestantism’s enduring consequences is the overthrow of the Divinely-instituted, hierarchical authority of the Catholic Church. The result has been the triumph of the reign of a radical egalitarianism and thus the divinizing of man and his beliefs, no matter how erroneous or heretical they may be.

Thus, just as Protestantism (or even Orthodoxy before it) lacks any authoritative teacher to bind all “believers,” who are said to be “equal” to each other and equally able to interpret the words of Holy Writ, so is it the case the naturalistic “philosophies” and/or ideologies lack any single authoritative teacher to bind all adherents.

Who is Paul Davis Ryan to define “conservative” orthodoxy? He is simply one out of many.

Therein lies the hypocrisy of Modernity, whose scions have had to create their own hierarchies of high priests and priestesses to whom citizens are supposed to pay homage and render their obsequious submission.

Third, while “conservatives” have belonged to the Republican Party for a long time, it is not accurate to say that the Republican Party has been or is now institutionally “conservative.”

A Thumbnail Review of Republican Factionalism: 1854 to 2016

The Republican Party began in 1854, running its first presidential candidate, General John C. Fremont, in 1856, who lost to Democratic Party nominee James Buchanan, and Abraham Lincoln, who had served precisely one term as a United States Representative from Springfield, Illinois, was its first successful presidential candidate four years later, although he only won because the Democratic Party was split three ways, making it possible to win a majority of the electoral college vote despite garnering only 39.8% of the popular vote. Perhaps it should be mentioned that Lincoln’s election was one of the factors that precipitated the War Between the States.

The Republican Party was composed of a number of factions in the latter part of the Nineteenth Century, but it catered mostly to big businesses and was noted for anti-Catholic nativism, noting that it had some prominent Catholic supporters, including the notorious Americanist Archbishop of Saint Paul, John Ireland. The anti-Catholicism of most White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Republicans, though, contributed in large measure to affiliation of Catholic immigrants to this country from Eastern and Southern Europe with the Democratic Party.

By the turn of the Twentieth Century the Republican Party was led by the progressivist Theodore Roosevelt, a thirty-third degree Freemason, who believed in nationalism as opposed to federalism. A “conservative” faction, led by Roosevelt’s hand-picked successor, William Howard Taft, gained power in 1909 before one of the Republican Party’s great, cataclysmic disputes erupted in 1912 when former President Theodore Roosevelt divided the Republican vote by running on a third party line (Progressive Party, more commonly known at the time as the “Bull Moose Party”) after being thwarted by the Taft forces at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois, in 1912, from reclaiming the Republican mantle for himself. This resulted in the election of the statist, philandering Governor of New Jersey, Thomas Woodrow Wilson, who gave us the Federal income tax, the Federal Reserve System, American interventionism in Mexico in support of one anti-Catholic revolutionary after another, and American intervention in the needless, unjust and immoral World War I, called “The Great War” at the time.

It was during the New Deal of Theodore Roosevelt’s fifth cousin and fellow Freemason, the philandering Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who was married to fifth cousin Eleanor Roosevelt the daughter of “Teddy’s” brother James Roosevelt), that the conservative and isolationist wings were most prominent within the party, something that prompted a reaction from Eastern liberal Republicans, who wanted to establish a sort of Whiggish “me too” policy to accommodate the reality of Franklin Roosevelt’s welfare state, while “conservative” Republicans such as 1936 presidential nominee Alfred Landon, Governor of Kansas, opposed the New Deal in its entirety.

World War II helped the cause of the liberal, internationalist wing of Eastern Republicans. It was this wing whose maneuvers made possible the presidential nominations of “me too” presidential candidates as Wendell Wilkie (a registered Democrat until 1939) in 1940, New York Governor Thomas E. Dewey in 1944 and 1948, and Dwight David Eisenhower (who had been a registered Democrat until shortly before the Republican National Convention).

Eisenhower’s administration “conserved” Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal and consolidated many of its disparate bureaucracies into the monstrosity known originally in 1953 as the United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, which has been known as the United States Department of Health and Human Services since 1979).

This was all preface to the epic “conservative”-“liberal” Republican warfare that took place in 1964 between the supporters of Planned Barrenhood’s own Barry Goldwater and Planned Barrenhood’s own Nelson Aldrich Rockefeller. Talk about false opposites! Many “establishment” Republicans walked out the Cow Palace in Daly City fifty-two years ago and openly supported the uncouth, philandering statist named Lyndon Baines Johnson. The 1964 Republican National Convention, which I witnessed live on television, was a raucous event, highlighted by Nelson Rockefeller threatening to slug United States Representative Melvin Laird (R-Wisconsin) when the latter wanted Rockefeller to end his speech to the delegates as he was being booed mercilessly. National Broadcasting Company convention floor reporter John Chancellor was escorted out of the Cow Palace by security guards, a fate that would befall the nefarious Dan Rather at the riotous Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois, four years later.

A truce of sorts between the “conservatives” and “me too” Republicans emerged in the administration of President Richard Milhous Nixon. This truce stayed firm until Congressional Democrats, aided and abetted by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, began investigation into the amoral Nixon’s abuse of presidential powers, abuses that had precedent in many previous administrations, although multiple wrongs, of course, can never make any single instance of wrongdoing correct. This truce ended when Nixon’s successor, President Gerald Rudolph Ford, Jr./Leslie Lynch King, Jr., forged ahead with the giveaway of the Panama Canal, giving the then former Governor of California, Ronald Wilson Reagan, whose televised speech in behalf of Barry Goldwater in October of 1964 launched his political career, an opportunity to oppose Ford, the nation’s only non-elected president, for the 1976 Republican nomination, a battle that left bitter feelings in the Reagan camp.

Yet it is that the “Battle of ‘76” resulted in Reagan’s securing the Republican Party presidential nomination in 1980, whereupon another truce within the organized crime family of naturalism of the false opposite of the naturalist “right” arose. This truce involved “social conservatives,” who sought to reverse the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton and prevent ratification of the so-called Equal Rights Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, “economic conservatives,” who were concerned about supply-side economics and large tax cuts to stimulate an economy suffering from high inflation and unemployment, and “neoconservatives,” a movement that consisted mostly, although not exclusively, of Talmudists who had been Trotskyites turned anti-Communists. These are the folks whose contemporary exponents brought us the “Global War on Terror” in order to make the world safe for the Zionist State of Israel.

The Reagan-era truce was maintained by the fact that each of the competing factions within the Republican Party had one thing in common: a firm opposition to Communism. Anti-Communism was the glue that held the Reagan coalition together. Careerist Republicans, for example, tolerated Reagan’s pro-life rhetoric, but it was shortly after he returned to California on January 20, 1989, that his successor’s handpicked head of the Republican National Committee, Lee Atwater, began to push for the “big tent” philosophy on abortion that has been detailed on this site many times in the past (see The Winner of the 2016 Republican Nomination Will Be . . . . A Naturalist, Gee What A Surprise.)

The apparent end of Communism in Eastern European countries at the end of 1989 and the apparent end of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on December 25, 1991, began the process of the emergence of Buchananism, which opposed needless American military interventionism and took a traditionally Republican protectionist stance in opposition to trade deals that surrendered American national sovereignty to bodies of bodies of international governance that were accountable to no one.

Patrick Joseph Buchanan posed a mortal threat to the hegemony of the Republican establishment. He was especially hated by neoconservatives such as William Kristol, the son of original neoconservatives, Irving Kristol, because of his opposition to the blanket support for the policies of the State of Israel demanded of American presidential administrations by Talmudists and their manipulated “Christian Zionist” allies. The neoconservatives so hated Pat Buchanan that they encouraged others, such as Dr. Alan Keyes, William Kristol’s roommate at Harvard University, and United States Representative Robert K. Dornan (R-California), to run for Republican presidential nomination in order to siphon votes away from him in 1996.

Another Republican fault-line that began to form in the 1990s during the administration of President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton divided “me too” statists such as United States Senator Robert Joseph Dole, Jr., a thirty-third degree Freemason, and United States Representative Newton Leroy Gingrich (R-Georgia). It was as Speaker of the United States House of Representatives that Gingrich called Dole, then the Majority Leader of the United States Senate, the “tax collector for the welfare state.” Dole was a simple “split the difference” legislative compromiser. Gingrich had his “Contract with America,” and was prepared to shut down the Federal government at the end of 1995 to force Clinton to get serious about reduce the rate of increase in the growth of Federal entitlement programs.

Clinton demagogued the issue, claiming Gingrich and his fellow House Republicans were proposing an absolute cut in entitlement programs. They were not. They were proposing a reduction in the rate of the annual increase of Federal monies allotted to such programs. Undaunted, though, Clinton claimed that Republicans wanted to kill the elderly, starve children, poison the environment and entrap the poor in lives of inescapable poverty. Dole could not stand such a confrontation, a spirit of timidity and cowardice that was exhibited by former House Speaker John Boehner (R-West Chester, Ohio) and is being exhibited at present by the current House Speaker, Paul Davis Ryan (see Still Enabling Statism).

By the way, the inarticulate, hapless and ever-mercurial Dole defeated Buchanan for the 1996 Republican Party presidential nomination and then proceeded to lose in a landslide to Clinton. His campaign was as much as a joke as that of John Sidney McCain III’s in 2008 and that of Willard Mitt Romney’s in 2012. Dole, McCain and Romney each cared about being “moderate” as it was thought that being “moderate” was the path to electability. Wrong.

Texas Governor George Walker Bush, a neoconservative Protestant Zionist, prevailed over “me too” McCain for the 2000 Republican Party presidential nomination, holding on to defeat then Vice President Albert Arnold Gore, Jr., in the general election, on Tuesday, November 7, 2000, solely because Green Party presidential nominee Ralph Nader won 97,488 votes in the State of Florida, thereby giving him the Sunshine State’s twenty-five electoral votes and thus the presidency even though he lost the populate vote to the enviromanaic Gore by 547,398 votes.

Bush the Lesser used the tragic (and more than a little curious) events of Tuesday, September 11, 2001, as his own personal mandate to fulfill the neoconservative plan to redraw the map of the Middle East, starting with the unconstitutional, illegal, immoral and unjust invasion and occupation of Iraq on March 20, 2003, an adventure that needlessly put thousands upon thousands of Americans into harm’s way, devastated the infrastructure of Iraq, destabilized the Middle East, killed untold thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens, forced Chaldean Rite Catholics to flee from a place that their ancestors had called home since before Apostolic times. Iraq’s borders were made porous, making it possible for the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which now exercises great influence in Baghdad, to send in all manner of terrorists to attack American troops and Iraqi Christians.

Bush’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, coupled with profligate domestic spending, made possible the election of United States Senator Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro (D-Illinois) against United States Senator John Sidney McCain III (R-Arizona), who is of the “me too” statist, warfare wing of the Republican Party, on Tuesday, November 4, 2008. Obama/Soetoro won re-election handily on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, because his Republican opponent, the waffler named Willard Mitt Romney, ran a campaign that made McCain’s look competent. Why should voters support milquetoast statists such as Dole, McCain and Romney when they can have the real deal with William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and, now, Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton?

The Elites Know Best

Yes, despite the efforts of the Tax Enough Already (TEA) Party movement to change Congress with their stunning electoral victories in 2010 and 2014, the Republican establishment ignored the demands that voters were making upon them to provide real resistance to Obama/Soetoro and to refuse to fund his unconstitutional and immoral programs and provide some kind of actual check upon his abuse of the powers of the presidency, including his efforts to stonewall investigations and to use the Internal Revenue Service to intimidate his political opponents. This is what helped to create the environment that has propelled Donald John Trump to have the success that he has achieved during this current election cycle.

Paul Davis Ryan is thus very disingenuous when speaking about “Republican values.” The Republican Party has been riven by internal disputes and debates since its very inception in 1854, and he is not a Divinely-appointed arbiter of what it represents.

The real problem here, of course, is that Ryan and others of his ilk see that their party’s putative presidential nominee has won a good deal of support by using issues and arguments that had been advanced twenty years ago by Patrick Joseph Buchanan. This is what has angered Paul Davis Ryan, who believes himself to be an “enlightened” conservative, as the House Speaker’s “vision” of the United States of America has more in common with Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro than it does with the nearly eleven million voters who have supported Trump.

All of this having been noted, of course, I change nothing of my own criticisms of Trump’s coarseness and his lack of any rudimentary understanding of First and Last Things, to say nothing of the simple fact that he does not know Consitutional history or even its major provisions. This is to take nothing away from Trump’s electoral accomplishments or his ability to get under the skin of professional politicians who have been drinking from the public trough throughout the entirety of their professional lives to point this out clearly. Donald John Trump has done a masterful job of exposing the farce of America’s political establishment, and for that he deserves much credit. That alone, however, does not serve as a solid intellectual foundation for just governance, especially when he boasted yesterday, Sunday, May 8, 2016, Sunday within the Octave of the Ascension and the Commemoration of the Apparition of Saint Michael the Archangel, that he is free to change his mind on such things as taxation and the minimum wage. Donald John Trump does not believe in anything very solidly, and even the little that he does believe is subject to negotiation, compromise and bargaining.

Fighting Supernatural, Not Natural, Forces

My point, however is simple: the American political system has been a farce from its very beginning. We live in a country where men have always been divided by a welter of errors.  Error divides. Catholicism unites. Have you read that somewhere before?

It must be remembered that Republican presidential candidates only garnered a majority of the popular vote once since 1988, and that was then President George Walker Bush received 50.7% of the vote to then United States Senator John “Borderless World” Kerry’s 48.3% on November 2, 2004. The electorate has moved to the “left” since President Ronald Wilson Reagan’s forty-nine state landslide on November 5, 1984.

Here’s more cheery news for you.

Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro enjoys an approval rating of 53% in the latest Gallup Poll survey. This should serve as a sobering reminder that only a small sliver of the American electorate have participated thus far in the Republican primary and caucus process.

Republicans such as Paul Davis Ryan believe that someone such as Donald John Trump will lose in a landslide to Hillary Diane Rodham Clinton because he cannot reach out to Democrats, independents and “moderate” Republicans are very satisfied with the state of the country at this time. Even though such Republicans say that they care about “conservative” principles, it their principal goal to conserve themselves in power, and the way to do that, they believe, is to “conserve” the welfare state and adjust to the “reality” of borderless nations.

This is all a farce.

There is no salvation in electoral politics, and a country whose leaders have sought to undermine, if not attack openly, Catholicism in such countries as Mexico, Cuba, and The Philippines by the introduction of Freemasonry and Protestant “missionaries” is not going to be “saved” by any mere mortal at this time, whether of the “left” or of the “right.” We are eyewitnesses to perfect of the inherent degeneracy of the American founding principles just as surely as we ae eyewitnesses to the same process of degeneration that is unfolding with the counterfeit church of conciliarism at this time.

There is one thing, however, that unites the Republican’s establishment critics of Donald John Trump with the object of their derision and scorn: Americanism. See Appendix Cbelow for a summary and critique of Americanism’s basic premises.

Americanism has deep roots on the soil of the former English colonies, and it was given expression in the Seventeenth Century by John Winthrop, a Puritan preacher, who blasphemed Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by twisting his words to refer to what became the United States of America over a century and one-half later as the “shining city set on a hill,” a phrase used repeatedly by President Ronald Wilson Reagan and was invoked six days ago now by United States Senator Raphael Edward Cruz as he suspended his campaign.

Reagan invoked the phrase in his farewell address to the nation on January 11, 1989:

And that's about all I have to say tonight. Except for one thing. The past few days when I've been at that window upstairs, I've thought a bit of the "shining city upon a hill." The phrase comes from John Winthrop, who wrote it to describe the America he imagined. What he imagined was important because he was an early Pilgrim, an early freedom man. He journeyed here on what today we'd call a little wooden boat; and like the other Pilgrims, he was looking for a home that would be free.

I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.

And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was eight years ago. But more than that; after 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she's still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.

We've done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for eight years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren't just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger. We made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all. (Ronald Reagan, Farewell Address, January 11, 1989, Farewell Address.)

Alas, Ronald Wilson Reagan had it wrong. Whatever accomplishments he thought were achieved during his eight years in office were undone in the years thereafter, especially during the presidencies of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro, although George Herbert Walker Bush, who really had no use for many of Reagan’s policies, chipped away at a few things during his disastrous one term in office. Nothing is ever “settled” in the United States of America unless it is “settled” on the terms of the false opposite of the “left,” and this is so because everything must fall apart absent the Social Reign of Christ the King. There is a direct line from Martin Luther to Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro.

The shining city set on a hill." This blasphemous corruption of the words of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ("You are the light of the world. A city seated on a mountain cannot be hid") taken from the Sermon on the Mount as recounted in the Gospel According to Saint Matthew (5: 14), to the land settled by the Catholic-hating Puritans, including the John Winthrop who was so praised by the late President Ronald Wilson Reagan? God meant to establish the followers and their false, wicked, diabolical theology and approach to materialism as the "beacon" for the rest of the world? John Winthrop as a "freedom man." No man is a freedom man unless he yokes himself to the Cross of the Divine Redeemer as that Cross is lifted high by the Catholic Church, the one and only "shining city that is set on a hill," the one and only beacon to the world.

Pope Saint Pius X explained that the true shining city set on a hill is the Catholic City. None other:

No, Venerable Brethren, We must repeat with the utmost energy in these times of social and intellectual anarchy when everyone takes it upon himself to teach as a teacher and lawmaker - the City cannot be built otherwise than as God has built it; society cannot be setup unless the Church lays the foundations and supervises the work; no, civilization is not something yet to be found, nor is the New City to be built on hazy notions; it has been in existence and still is: it is Christian civilization, it is the Catholic City. It has only to be set up and restored continually against the unremitting attacks of insane dreamers, rebels and miscreants. omnia instaurare in Christo. (Pope Saint Pius X, Notre Charge Apostolique, August 15, 1910.)

The city we must build up every day within our own souls is the Catholic City. We must conform everything in our own lives to the immutable truth of the Holy Faith as we seek to cooperate with the graces won for us by Christ the King by virtue of the shedding of every single drop of His Most Precious Blood during His Passion and Death on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into our hearts and souls through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother, she who is the Mediatrix of All Graces. The Catholic City can only be built up in the world after we have sought to build it up within the fortress of our immortal souls, which have been redeemed at so great a cost.

To this end, of course, we must be totally consecrated to Our Lord through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary as we pray as many Rosaries each day as our state-in-life permits.

The farces of Modernity in the world and of Modernism in the counterfeit church of conciliarism are converging to impose upon us an era of persecution and hardship. These forces are driven by principalities and powers, and they will not be defeated in an election. They can be defeated only by the use of supernatural means. Nations whose citizens fail to understand this truth are destined to be governed by tyrants, no matter how “soft” and “tolerant they may seem.

A system of civil governance that fosters conditions that are inimical to man's last end is bound to degenerate over the course of time into a such a state of lawlessness that a "state religion" will be imposed by the brute force of the the civil state, namely, that of statism itself, the worship of the state and of its leaders as omniscient and omnipotent. The antidote to this is not found in any naturalistic philosophy, such as libertarianism or conservatism, but in Catholicism alone. There is no way--as in no way--to retard the evils caused by the separation of Church and State wrought by Protestantism and Judeo-Masonry and their actual, concrete expressions in the American and French Revolutions except by planting the seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the Social Reign of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen.

This is the work to which each of us is called. We are called to look beyond the lies of office-seekers steeped in naturalism and are clueless about First and Last Things in order to build up Christendom in our homes, starting with their being Enthroned to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary, pulsating with the rhythm provided by the liturgical life of the Church, especially (where this is possible) daily Mass in the Catholic catacombs where no concessions are made to conciliarism or its false shepherds who are opposed to the restoration of the Social Reign of Christ the King, and animated by fervent family prayer, especially by means of the daily family Rosary and frequent visits to Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament.

We are not called to be worldlings. We are not called to be grubby Calvinist materialists. We are not called to be successful careerists willing to compromise the Faith at any given moment in order to "get ahead." We are called to be faithful to Christ the King and to ever reliant upon Mary our Immaculate Queen, ever desirous of scaling the heights of sanctity, which is the sole foundation of order in the soul and hence of order within society itself.

Pope Pius XI, writing in Quas Primas, December 11, 1925, exhorted us to be soldiers in army of Christ the King:

Thus the empire of our Redeemer embraces all men. To use the words of Our immortal predecessor, Pope Leo XIII: "His empire includes not only Catholic nations, not only baptized persons who, though of right belonging to the Church, have been led astray by error, or have been cut off from her by schism, but also all those who are outside the Christian faith; so that truly the whole of mankind is subject to the power of Jesus Christ." Nor is there any difference in this matter between the individual and the family or the State; for all men, whether collectively or individually, are under the dominion of Christ. In him is the salvation of the individual, in him is the salvation of society. "Neither is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given to men whereby we must be saved." He is the author of happiness and true prosperity for every man and for every nation. "For a nation is happy when its citizens are happy. What else is a nation but a number of men living in concord?" If, therefore, the rulers of nations wish to preserve their authority, to promote and increase the prosperity of their countries, they will not neglect the public duty of reverence and obedience to the rule of Christ. What We said at the beginning of Our Pontificate concerning the decline of public authority, and the lack of respect for the same, is equally true at the present day. "With God and Jesus Christ," we said, "excluded from political life, with authority derived not from God but from man, the very basis of that authority has been taken away, because the chief reason of the distinction between ruler and subject has been eliminated. The result is that human society is tottering to its fall, because it has no longer a secure and solid foundation."

When once men recognize, both in private and in public life, that Christ is King, society will at last receive the great blessings of real liberty, well-ordered discipline, peace and harmony. Our Lord's regal office invests the human authority of princes and rulers with a religious significance; it ennobles the citizen's duty of obedience. It is for this reason that St. Paul, while bidding wives revere Christ in their husbands, and slaves respect Christ in their masters, warns them to give obedience to them not as men, but as the vicegerents of Christ; for it is not meet that men redeemed by Christ should serve their fellow-men. "You are bought with a price; be not made the bond-slaves of men." If princes and magistrates duly elected are filled with the persuasion that they rule, not by their own right, but by the mandate and in the place of the Divine King, they will exercise their authority piously and wisely, and they will make laws and administer them, having in view the common good and also the human dignity of their subjects. The result will be a stable peace and tranquillity, for there will be no longer any cause of discontent. Men will see in their king or in their rulers men like themselves, perhaps unworthy or open to criticism, but they will not on that account refuse obedience if they see reflected in them the authority of Christ God and Man. Peace and harmony, too, will result; for with the spread and the universal extent of the kingdom of Christ men will become more and more conscious of the link that binds them together, and thus many conflicts will be either prevented entirely or at least their bitterness will be diminished.

If the kingdom of Christ, then, receives, as it should, all nations under its way, there seems no reason why we should despair of seeing that peace which the King of Peace came to bring on earth -- he who came to reconcile all things, who came not to be ministered unto but to minister, who, though Lord of all, gave himself to us as a model of humility, and with his principal law united the precept of charity; who said also: "My yoke is sweet and my burden light." Oh, what happiness would be Ours if all men, individuals, families, and nations, would but let themselves be governed by Christ! "Then at length," to use the words addressed by our predecessor, Pope Leo XIII, twenty-five years ago to the bishops of the Universal Church, "then at length will many evils be cured; then will the law regain its former authority; peace with all its blessings be restored. Men will sheathe their swords and lay down their arms when all freely acknowledge and obey the authority of Christ, and every tongue confesses that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father". . . .

If We ordain that the whole Catholic world shall revere Christ as King, We shall minister to the need of the present day, and at the same time provide an excellent remedy for the plague which now infects society. We refer to the plague of anti-clericalism, its errors and impious activities. This evil spirit, as you are well aware, Venerable Brethren, has not come into being in one day; it has long lurked beneath the surface. The empire of Christ over all nations was rejected. The right which the Church has from Christ himself, to teach mankind, to make laws, to govern peoples in all that pertains to their eternal salvation, that right was denied. Then gradually the religion of Christ came to be likened to false religions and to be placed ignominiously on the same level with them. It was then put under the power of the state and tolerated more or less at the whim of princes and rulers. Some men went even further, and wished to set up in the place of God's religion a natural religion consisting in some instinctive affection of the heart. There were even some nations who thought they could dispense with God, and that their religion should consist in impiety and the neglect of God. The rebellion of individuals and states against the authority of Christ has produced deplorable consequences. We lamented these in the Encyclical Ubi arcano; we lament them today: the seeds of discord sown far and wide; those bitter enmities and rivalries between nations, which still hinder so much the cause of peace; that insatiable greed which is so often hidden under a pretense of public spirit and patriotism, and gives rise to so many private quarrels; a blind and immoderate selfishness, making men seek nothing but their own comfort and advantage, and measure everything by these; no peace in the home, because men have forgotten or neglect their duty; the unity and stability of the family undermined; society in a word, shaken to its foundations and on the way to ruin. We firmly hope, however, that the feast of the Kingship of Christ, which in future will be yearly observed, may hasten the return of society to our loving Savior. It would be the duty of Catholics to do all they can to bring about this happy result. Many of these, however, have neither the station in society nor the authority which should belong to those who bear the torch of truth. This state of things may perhaps be attributed to a certain slowness and timidity in good people, who are reluctant to engage in conflict or oppose but a weak resistance; thus the enemies of the Church become bolder in their attacks. But if the faithful were generally to understand that it behooves them ever to fight courageously under the banner of Christ their King, then, fired with apostolic zeal, they would strive to win over to their Lord those hearts that are bitter and estranged from him, and would valiantly defend his rights.

Moreover, the annual and universal celebration of the feast of the Kingship of Christ will draw attention to the evils which anticlericalism has brought upon society in drawing men away from Christ, and will also do much to remedy them. While nations insult the beloved name of our Redeemer by suppressing all mention of it in their conferences and parliaments, we must all the more loudly proclaim his kingly dignity and power, all the more universally affirm his rights. (Pope Pius XI, Quas Primas, December 11, 1925.)

We should consider our privilege to run the risk of whatever calumnies may come our way for being steadfast in behalf of the cause of Christ the King and Mary our Immaculate Queen, offering to the Most Sacred Heart of Our King all of our sufferings and humiliations for reminding everyone, including the apostates in the counterfeit church of conciliarism who believe are the latter-day apostles of the heresy of Americanism, that He must rule over men and nations, making this offering to Him through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother.

The final victory belongs to the Immaculate Heart of Mary

It is time to plant some seeds for this victory now as the hour is very late indeed.

Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!  

Our Lady of the Rosary, 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 Beloved, 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 Balathasar, pray for us.

Saint Gregory Nazianzen, pray for us.

Appendix A

Abraham Lincoln's Atheism