Devils Without Tails
by Thomas A. Droleskey
A world where Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is not recognized by men and their nations as King is one where the devil will reign supreme, hatching and executing all sorts of naturalistic plots to convince people that they can have a veritable paradise on earth by means of material success and as a result of electoral politics.
The devil, whose head has been crushed by the heel of the New Eve, Our Lady, the very Mother of God Himself, wants to convince fallen men, whose souls he desires to take into Hell within for all eternity so that they can be tormented by burning flames and by the loss of the Beatific Vision forever, that they have the power to remake the world on their own without submitting to the Deposit of Faith that Our Lord has entrusted exclusively to the Catholic Church and without having belief in, access to and cooperation with Sanctifying Grace. The devil does not want fallen men to believe that nations are reformed by the reform of their own lives in cooperation with the graces won for them by the shedding of every single drop of Our Lord's Most Precious Blood on the wood of the Holy Cross and that flow into their hearts and souls through the loving hands of Our Lady, the Mediatrix of All Graces. No, the world must be "reformed" by secular saviours who want to increase the size and the scope of the government's control over our daily lives while at the same time promoting public policies that are in direct defiance of God's Holy Laws and thus contrary to the eternal good of souls. Alas, what is contrary to the eternal good of souls is contrary to the common temporal good of men and their nations.
Yes, of course, I make these points all the time on this site. I want to again in light of all of the "excitement" that has been generated by the bright, personal, telegenic "heavy metal" "rock music" devotee named United States Representative Paul Davis Ryan (R-Wisconsin), who is the selection of former Commonwealth of Massachusetts Willard Mitt Romney to be his vice presidential running mate, a decision that will be ratified by the poor dupes at the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida, on Wednesday, August 29, 2012, after Romney himself is formally nominated. Two articles, Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, Heard It All Before and Conserving The Welfare State, have explained that Ryan, who is forty-two years old and hence seven years older than the Constitutional minimum age to qualify for the presidency (not two years older as reported, I have been told, by the sometimes factually-challenged "moderators" of a certain website), is, despite his personal charm and intelligence and seriousness of purpose, is yet another confused "conservative" who has voted consistently to conserve the welfare state, something that he is trying to by "saving" Medicare and Social Security.
This having been noted, of course, commentators employed by house organs of the false opposite of the naturalist "left" such as The New York Times, fool only themselves if they attempt to discount Paul Davis Ryan's qualities on the outcome of the elections on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, by seeking to quantify the unquantifiable: the interaction of a charismatic office-seeker on an electorate hungry for someone to "believe in," something they think gives them a chance for "hope" for a better, more secure future.
Nate Silver, who writes the "Five Thirty-Eight" section for The New York Times, is making the same mistake that many did even when the supposedly "sophisticated tools" of quantitative methodology now in use were only in their early stages thirty-two years when the most of those in the "mainstream media" ignored the impact that the telegenic, personable and optimistic Americanist named Ronald Wilson Reagan was "connecting" with the American electorate in a way that the lefties, living in their own cocoon of reinforced illusions, could not believe was possible (see Silver's Bounce, or Not to Bounce).
Although I still believe that the demagogic, Marxist-trained statist named Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetero and his absolutely out-of-control demagogue of a stooge vice president named Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. (see Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., Demagogue Update) will win the elections in seventy-eight days from now, it is more than possible that Paul Davis Ryan can make more of a difference in the outcome than professionally trained methodologists such as Nate Silver can find in the polling data at this time or that they can predict by means of their mathematical modeling. Models devised by Nate Silver and other strained political methodologists may seriously understate, if not fail to measure at all, the ability of someone like Paul Davis Ryan to move voters out of the Obama-Biden camp. In other words, the numbers of persuadable voters, which I admit fully may be relatively few, might, however, be far greater than is measured in the polling data and may be missed entirely until after election day, at which point the same methodologists will ask what went wrong with their "models" and/or why the voters did not act as predicted.
As one who had to sit through and show a reasonable level of competency in such matters as I was studying for my doctorate at the then named State University of New York at Albany (now called the University at Albany) from January of 1974 through May of 1976 before I commenced my full-time college teaching career after two years of teaching classes as a teaching assistant, receiving the doctorate on August 5, 2012, which means that the thirty-fifth anniversary of that event passed without my even noticing it fifteen days ago now), I call to mind for you, my few readers, what a professor of international relations at SUNY Albany, Dr. Walter Goldstein, who hailed from England and a very British sense of humor, said by way of dismissing all of the complex mathematical formulae used in supposedly scholarly articles in the American Political Science Review, which is published by the American Political Science Association:
"I cancelled my subscription to the APSR [American Political Science Review) because they failed to send me the English-language edition." (Dr. Walter Goldstein, 1974, Graduate School of Public Affairs, State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York.)
In other words, efforts to try to reduce human behavior to quantitative measures will always fail as mathematics cannot measure or predict human emotions and because fallible human beings must devise various formulae and models that become for them the nearly infallible means of explaining and predicting almost all human behavior in matters of electoral politics and public policy. While there is some limited utility to such measures in some instances, the over-reliance on these measures, which the professionals in both organized crime families of naturalism use to "target" selected voters in those few states where the election is won or lost (for a review of the states that actually decide a presidential election, see Step By Step Yet Again and Yadda, Yadda, Yadda, Heard It All Before).
All right. Let's sake, purely for the sake of argument, that the man who believes that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and Satan are "spirit brothers," Willard Mitt Romney, and Paul Davis Ryan, who believes that innocent preborn children may be killed when a mother's life is said to be endangered and who voted for President George Walker Bush's effort to further nationalize control of the miseducation of children that goes by the absurd title of "no child left behind," win enough electors on November 6, 2012, that will result in their being elected president and vice president of the United States of America when the electors meet in the various state capitals on Monday, December 17, 2012 (the first Monday after the second Wednesday in December) to cast their ballots, which are then sealed and sent to the President of the Senate, who opens and counts them before a joint session of the Congress of the United States of America on Monday, January 7, 2013 (January 6, the normal date for such a session, falls on a Sunday next year). Let's say that there is going to be a President Willard Mitt Romney and Vice President Paul Davis Ryan sworn in by Chief Justice John G. Roberts, a "gift" bestowed upon us by George Walker Bush, on Sunday, January 20, 2013. What then?
Here's what then: a continuation of the domestic policies of George Herbert Walker Bush and George Walker Bush and a continuation of the "global war on terrorism" of George Walker Bush:
Mr. Romney’s transition team, which has quietly been ramping up since
June, is an extension of his campaign and reflects many hallmarks of the
Romney operation — methodical and disciplined, with acute attention to
detail. The team also offers a glimpse of what might be Mr. Romney’s
approach to governing, functioning much like his old private equity
firm, Bain Capital. The team is assessing the government and looking for
ways to make it more efficient and streamlined.
“With Mitt, his approach to problem solving is first to identify the
problem, make sure you’re solving for the problem actually there;
second, look at best practices; third, apply best practices to the
problem at hand; and fourth, execute on it,” said Beth Myers, a top
Romney adviser who worked on his transition team in 2003, when he became
governor of Massachusetts.
Mr. Romney’s transition team, known within the campaign as “The Readiness Project,” is led by Mike Leavitt,
a former governor of Utah and a former secretary of Health and Human
Services, and until recently included only three other advisers — Ms.
Myers; Bob White, a longtime friend of Mr. Romney who was chairman of
his transition in Massachusetts; and Ron Kaufman, a senior adviser and
Republican national committee member from Massachusetts.
The meeting on Tuesday, however, reflected the fact that less than three
months from Election Day, the Romney campaign is putting together a
framework should he win the White House.
“The transition group is more of a table setter, a drafter of an agenda,
an outliner of what you need to do,” said a Romney adviser, insisting
on anonymity to discuss a sensitive topic. “They will be asking, ‘What
are the things you can do right away? What are the things you can think
about? What can this president still do between Nov. 6 and Jan. 20?’ ”
Mr. Romney’s campaign is wary about discussing transition plans, worried
that it might appear overconfident. Four years ago, Senator John
McCain, the Republican presidential nominee, attacked Senator Barack
Obama for “measuring the drapes.”
Privately, however, Romney advisers say that not arranging for the
future would be irresponsible, and that their goal is to be prepared but
not presumptuous. They also say they are operating in accordance with
the Pre-Election Presidential Transition Act of 2010, which urges campaigns to plan well before Election Day.
As part of the law, the General Services Administration acts as the
liaison between the candidate and the current administration, providing
the campaign with office space and other resources immediately after its
party’s national convention. The G.S.A. has held three formal meetings
with Mr. Romney’s team, as well as informal, weekly conference calls.
Last month, Mr. Leavitt spoke with Jacob Lew, President Obama’s chief of
staff, about a transition, a conversation that a White House spokesman
called cordial.
Mr. Romney and his advisers have always prided themselves on applying a
private sector approach to governing, and Mr. Romney’s transition team
is shaping up to include a number of men and women with business and
government experience. The list of attendees on Tuesday included: Jamie
Burke, the White House liaison at the Department of Health and Human
Services under President George W. Bush; Russ Gerson, the head of Mr.
McCain’s transition team four years ago; Ben Ginsberg, the Romney
campaign’s top lawyer; Emil Henry, a senior Treasury official under Mr.
Bush; Kay Coles James, the director of the Office of Personnel
Management under Mr. Bush; Kent Lucken, a longtime Romney supporter and
foreign policy adviser; Chris Liddell, the former chief financial
officer for Microsoft and General Motors; Steve Preston, the Housing and
Urban Development secretary under Mr. Bush; and Jim Quigley, the former
global chief executive at Deloitte.
Former Senator Jim Talent of Missouri and Robert B. Zoellick, the former
president of the World Bank, are also expected to be involved, with Mr.
Zoellick heading the team’s national security wing. And in another
businesslike touch, members of the team are expected to sign
nondisclosure agreements. (Team Plans a Romney Presidency.)
In other words, if you'd liked Bush 41 and Bush 43 you will love Romney 1.0. It's going to be the same thing. Naturalist devils without their tails are better able to do the devil's bidding that those, such as Obama and Biden and the Clintons, with tails as all manner of conservative "cheerleaders" close their eyes to the evils done by the supposedly "lesser" of two evils while in office that wind up institutionalizing more and more evils because they are "grateful" that the devils with their tails have been, they convince themselves, beaten down for the moment.
This is, of course, the same phenomenon in the Motu world where all manner of well-meaning Catholics convince themselves that the "good" "pope" is surrounded by "bad" bishops, which is why we just have to cut the suffering man some slack as he offends God consistently by denying the nature of dogmatic truth, which is a denial of the very nature of God Himself, and esteems the symbols of false religions with his own priestly hands and praises false religions for their ability to fight "irreligion" and thus "build" a "civilization of love" and as he praises the penultimate evolutionist named Father Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, S.J.
The willing suspension of rationality and logic must take place in order to accept delusions in the face of the cold, hard facts of reality. Almost no one wanted to do this during the administration of Ronald Wilson Reagan or during that of George Walker Bush (admitting that there some willing to do so during the administration of George Herbert Walker Bush). All was well because the "good guys" were better than the "bad guys" even though the "good guys" were doing things that further institutionalized evils in this country and the world.
To wit, George Walker Bush unleashed an unjust, immoral, unnecessary invasion of the sovereign nation of Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein in the belief that doing so would "stabilize" the Middle East, making it safe for the State of Israel, which Paul Davis Ryan calls this country's "most consistent ally" in that region of the world (bombing the U.S.S. Liberty, recruiting spies such as Jonathan Pollard, selling high-level nuclear missile technology to Red China, the wanton mistreatment and murder of innocent Palestinians and citizens of Lebanon in retaliation for the crimes of Mohammedans seeking revenge upon Israelis for the crimes of its leaders?--yeah, quite an "ally," Representative Ryan). What Bush unleashed was a bloodbath upon innocent Iraqi civilians that resulted in the destruction of that country's infrastructure, which was rebuilt so shabbily by American companies that profiteered greatly on the war that it had to be rebuilt all over again.
The unjust, immoral, unconstitutional invasion of the
sovereign country of Iraq to impose upon its people the "American way"
so as to make the Middle East safe for Israel has also devastated Iraq's
population of Christians, including Chaldean Rite Catholics. Mohammedan
violence against Catholics and members of various Orthodox sects has
been relentless in the past seven years. As bad as Saddam Hussein was,
and he was a brutal thug, to be sure, he was a clever politician who
wanted to have the support of as many groups as possible in Iraq, which
is why he protected the small Christian minority in that country. One of
the consequences of Hussein's overthrow has been to make Christians
"fair game" for Mohammedan murderers, who have long desired to kill off
or to drive into exile the "infidels." (See More Christians Killed in Iraq, Chaldean bishop says U.S. accountable for death of Archbishop of Mosul, and Go Tell Iraq's Catholics--and American Babies--About The "Lesser of Two Evils".)
Neither the George Walker Bush administration or that
of his successor, Barack Hussein Obama, have cared much to stop the
violence against Christians as to do so would mean angering members of
warring Mohammedan factions who are deemed "necessary" to build a
"democratic" Iraq. The lives of Chaldean Rite Catholics and members of
the various Orthodox sects are as expendable to American policy-makers,
who have, of course, sanctioned outright torture and introduced
contraception into country almost immediately after the first wave of
the American invasion began seven years ago today, as the lives of
Palestinian Arabs and the Lebanese are to the murderous thugs in the
government of Israel and in that country's defense forces. Too bad. The
"better" world must be built. Too bad that so many innocent lives must
be killed. Too bad.
Has anyone noticed, however, that the toppling of the thug named Saddam Hussein, a more or less secular Mohammedan, resulted in the rise of the Shiites in Iraq and thus moved the corrupt Iraqi Prime Minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, closer to Iran, whose forces used the border between the two countries that became very porous to send thousands of trained guerillas to attack American military and civilian personnel who should never have been placed in harm's way there to begin with, helping it to skirt American sanctions?
WASHINGTON — When President Obama announced last month that he was barring a Baghdad bank from any dealings with the American banking system, it was a rare acknowledgment of a delicate problem facing the administration in a country that American troops just left: for months, Iraq has been helping Iran skirt economic sanctions imposed on Tehran because of its nuclear program.
The little-known bank singled out by the United States, the Elaf Islamic Bank, is only part of a network of financial institutions and oil-smuggling operations that, according to current and former American and Iraqi government officials and experts on the Iraqi banking sector, has provided Iran with a crucial flow of dollars at a time when sanctions are squeezing its economy.
The Obama administration is not eager for a public showdown with the government of Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki over Iran just eight months after the last American troops withdrew from Baghdad.
Still, the administration has held private talks with Iraqi officials to complain about specific instances of financial and logistical ties between the countries, officials say, although they do not regard all trade between them as illegal or, as in the case of smuggling, as something completely new. In one recent instance, when American officials learned that the Iraqi government was aiding the Iranians by allowing them to use Iraqi airspace to ferry supplies to Syria, Mr. Obama called Mr. Maliki to complain. The Iranian planes flew another route.
In response to questions from The New York Times, David S. Cohen, the Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, provided a written statement saying that Iran “may seek to escape the force of our financial sanctions through Iraqi financial institutions.” But he added that “we will pursue, and are actively pursuing, efforts to prevent Iran from evading U.S. or international financial sanctions, in Iraq or anywhere else.”
Some current and former American and Iraqi officials, along with banking and oil experts, say that Iraqi government officials are turning a blind eye to the large financial flows, smuggling and other trade with Iran. In some cases, they say, government officials, including some close to Mr. Maliki, are directly profiting from the activities.
“Maliki’s government is right in the middle of this,” said one former senior American intelligence official who now does business in Iraq.
In announcing that he was “cutting off” Elaf Islamic Bank, Mr. Obama said it had “facilitated transactions worth millions of dollars on behalf of Iranian banks that are subject to sanctions for their links to Iran’s illicit proliferation activities.”
But the treatment the bank has received in Baghdad since it was named by Mr. Obama suggests that the Iraqi government is not only allowing companies and individuals to circumvent the sanctions but also not enforcing penalties for noncompliance.
Iraqi banking experts said last week that the bank was still allowed to participate in the Iraq Central Bank’s daily auction at which commercial banks can sell Iraqi dinars and buy United States dollars. These auctions are a crucial pathway for Iranian access to the international financial system. Western officials say that Iran seeks to bolster its reserves of dollars to stabilize its exchange rates and pay for imports.
Iraqi and American officials with knowledge of Iraqi banking practices say Iranian customers are able to move large amounts of cash through the auction, and from there into banks in regional financial centers like Dubai, United Arab Emirates, or Amman, Jordan, and then into the international banking system.
Mudher Salih, the central bank governor, said in an interview that Elaf Islamic Bank was being allowed back into the auction because Elaf officials had denied any wrongdoing. “Elaf Bank is attending the auctions, and they are telling us that they didn’t violate the law, and saying that they didn’t deal with any Iranian institutes,” Mr. Salih said.
While Iraq has tried to impose more stringent reporting requirements that might pick up illegal transfers, officials with knowledge of the Iraqi banking industry say that banks, hawala houses, an unofficial global network of money-traders, and their Iranian customers are finding ways around them, often by forging documents that make it look as if the money transfers are to finance legitimate trade between Iraq and other countries.
Thanks to Iraq’s growing oil revenue, the Iraqi central bank has about $60 billion in foreign exchange reserves, held in accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, with which to meet the insatiable demand for dollars. But the new flight of dollars out of Iraq is prompting criticism of the central bank and of the Iraqi government.
The accusations of high-level Iraqi government involvement in sanctions-busting have roiled Iraqi politics and invariably reflect on Mr. Maliki, since many Iraqi officials now say that he has taken effective control of the Iraqi central bank, which is nominally independent.
“We want to question the central bank and the banks that are involved,” Ali al-Sachri, a member of Parliament, said in an interview. Mr. Salih acknowledged the huge dollar transfers and said that they threatened the economic stability of Iraq by depleting the country’s foreign reserves. He said that “in order to prevent the economy from collapsing, we should put an end to this illegal flow of dollars outside Iraq.”
He said the large-scale money laundering was probably being helped by “some corruption that requires the government to investigate,” but he defended the actions of the central bank, saying that it does “not have the capability to watch everything.”
Several American and Iraqi banking and government officials also say that Iranian organizations have gained effective control over at least four Iraqi commercial banks through Iraqi intermediaries. That gives Iran direct access to the international financial system, supposedly denied to Tehran by the economic sanctions. Even as the United States has moved to tighten the vise against Iran this summer, the Maliki government has openly sought to enhance its already deep economic and political ties with Iran. Trade between Iraq and Iran, which fought a costly war from 1980 to 1988, has been growing rapidly ever since the American-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein, and it is now estimated to be as high as $11 billion a year. Among other openly acknowledged forms of trade, Iraq has contracts to buy large amounts of electrical power from Iran.
Just last week, an Iraqi delegation that includes the deputy prime minister and top officials from the ministries of finance and trade and the central bank met in Tehran with their Iranian counterparts for talks about further increasing economic ties.
An Iraqi government spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, said in a telephone interview that Iraq “is not intending to break any rules,” but added that “we also have good relations with Iran that we do not want to break.” (U.S. Says Iraqis Are Helping Iran Skirt Sanctions.)
This is what 4,488 American military personnel died for while fighting in Iraq?
This is what 33,184 American military personnel suffered wounds, some of them permanently disabling in nature, for while fighting in Iraq?
This is why thousands upon thousands of Iraqi civilians have been killed or wounded to establish in their country, the replacement one corrupt regime with another?
This is why most of the Chaldean Rite Catholic population of Iraqi has seen fit to escape a country that where their ancestors converted to the Faith in the First Century as they heard the Gospel preached by none other than three different Apostles, Saint Thomas, Saint Bartholomew and Saint Jude Thaddeus?
As I asked in The Remnant nine and one-half years ago a month prior to the American invasion and occupation of Iraq, "for what?" For what? For this? For this?
The supposedly "lesser evil" represented by George Walker Bush visited great evils upon the country of Iraq. Those evils included not only the vast destruction and despoiling of a sovereign nation. They included the torture of prisoners, some of which were tempted to sin against the holy virtue of purity by being forced to watch lewd displays, and the separation of American service personnel from their families for long stretches of time, something that resulted in many divorces and a lot of suicides.
Further evidence of the vast evils done by the supposedly "lesser evil" of the year 2000, George Walker Bush, has emerged recently. Some of the injuries sustained by American combat personnel in Iraq have made them incapable of having children. The solution: the evil of in vitro fertilization:
The Senate is considering a bill that would expand medical benefits
for severely injured service members so that they and their spouses or
surrogates can have children through in vitro fertilization.
The Department of Veterans Affairs now covers a range of medical
treatment for veterans, including some infertility care, but the
legislation specifically authorizes the agency to cover IVF and to pay
for procedures now provided for some critically injured active-duty
soldiers.
Six years ago, a roadside bomb exploded outside Andrew Robinson's
Humvee in Iraq, breaking the Marine staff sergeant's neck and leaving
him without use of his legs. It also cast doubt on his ability to father
a child, a gnawing emotional wound for a then-23-year-old who had
planned to start a family with his wife of less than two years.
The catastrophic spinal cord injury meant the couple's best hope for
children was in vitro fertilization, an expensive and time-consuming
medical procedure whose cost isn't covered by the Department of Veterans
Affairs. Robinson and his wife were forced to pay out of pocket, with
help from a doctor's discount and drugs donated by other patients.
The bill's meant to help wounded veterans start families as they
return home from war and to address a harrowing consequence of combat
that can radically change a couple's marriage but receives less
attention than post-traumatic stress disorder and brain injuries. (Senate Bill Would Expand Coverage for the Evil of In Vitro Fertilization.)
Will candidates Willard Mitt Romney and Paul Davis Ryan oppose this bill?
Would President Willard Mitt Romney and Paul Davis Ryan seek to repeal this bill if it is passed by Congress this year?
Of course not! As I wrote to the Bushies eleven and one-half years ago now, Get a Grip on Reality.
Where was the outrage from Catholics when George Walker Bush said the following the "necessity" of in vitro fertilization to help infertile couples have children, which he used as a justification to fund with American taxpayer dollars the fetal tissue experimentation on a "limited" line of embryonic human beings who were frozen after being "left over" following efforts at "fertility" clinics to "assist" couples have children?
My administration must decide whether to allow federal funds, your tax
dollars, to be used for scientific research on stem cells derived from
human embryos. A large number of these embryos already exist. They
are the product of a process called in vitro fertilization, which helps
so many couples conceive children. When doctors match sperm and egg to
create life outside the womb, they usually produce more embryos than
are planted in the mother. Once a couple successfully has children, or if they are unsuccessful, the additional embryos remain frozen in laboratories. (Remarks by the President on Stem Cell Research.)
This is what I wrote at the time in the printed pages of Christ or Chaos:
Indeed, this whole controversy is the direct result
of the rejection of the teaching authority of the Church on matters of
faith and morals, as well as on matters of fundamental justice. For it
is the rejection of the Deposit of Faith our Lord entrusted to Holy
Mother Church that gave rise to the ethos of secularism and religious
indifferentism, which became the breeding grounds for secularism and
relativism and positivism.
A world steeped in all manner of secular
political ideologies comes not only to reject the Deposit of Faith but
to make war against all that is contained therein, especially as it
relates to matters of the sanctity of marital relations and the
stability of the family.
Contraception gave rise to abortion.
Contraception also gave rise to the mentality which resulted in
artificial conception. If a child's conception can be prevented as suits
"partners," then it stands to reason that a child can be conceived "on
demand" by using the latest technology science has to offer.
The Church has condemned artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization
on a number of occasions as offenses to the Sovereignty of God over the
sanctity of marital relations. Yet it is the very rejection of the
Church's affirmation of what is contained in the binding precepts of the
Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law which leads people, including
George W. Bush, into thinking that artificial insemination and in vitro
fertilization are morally licit to help couples deal with the problem of
childlessness, ignoring the simple little truth that no one is entitled
to a child.
Children are gifts from God to be accepted
according to His plan for a particular couple. If a married couple
cannot have a child on their own, they can adopt -- or they can use
their time to be of greater service to the cause of the Church in the
evangelization of the true Faith. No one, however, is entitled to a
child.
Indeed, the whole tragedy of harvesting
the stem cells of living human beings has arisen as a result of
discoveries made by scientists experimenting on human beings conceived
in fertility clinics to help couples conceive artificially.
That George W. Bush endorses this immoral
enterprise (which is big business, by the way) and actually commends it
as a way to "help" couples is deplorable.
It is as though he is saying the following:
"We are not going to kill any more Jews for their body parts. We will
only use the body parts of the Jews we have killed already. After all,
we have people who will benefit from this research, do we not?"
Living human embryos do not have the
"potential" for life, as Bush asserted on August 9, 2001. They are
living human beings! To seek to profit from their destruction is
ghoulish, and will only wind up encouraging the private sector to fund
all stem-cell research, creating more "stem cell lines" from the
destruction of living human beings. ("Preposterous," Christ or Chaos, September, 2001)
Remember, Willard Mitt Romney said seven months ago that "contraception is working very well." You really don't think that he is going to oppose an effort that is said to "help" veterans as the Sovereignty of God Himself over matters of life and death is violated, do you? Do you?
So what, you say? So what?
Hey, let me remind you in case you are wrapped up in the naturalistic agitation of the moment: that which offends God and is injurious souls also harms the common temporal good, which yes, yet again I repeat, must be pursued in light of man's Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son and Go the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven.
Conscious of the fact that there might be a new reader or two accessing this site for the first time this very day, permit me to reprise yet again the simple Catholic truth expressed by Silvio Cardinal Antoniano over four hundred ten ago now:
The more closely the temporal power of a nation aligns itself with the
spiritual, and the more it fosters and promotes the latter, by so much
the more it contributes to the conservation of the commonwealth. For it
is the aim of the ecclesiastical authority by the use of spiritual
means, to form good Christians in accordance with its own particular end
and object; and in doing this it helps at the same time to form good
citizens, and prepares them to meet their obligations as members of a
civil society. This follows of necessity because in the City of God, the
Holy Roman Catholic Church, a good citizen and an upright man are
absolutely one and the same thing. How grave therefore is the error of
those who separate things so closely united, and who think that they can
produce good citizens by ways and methods other than those which make
for the formation of good Christians. For, let human prudence
say what it likes and reason as it pleases, it is impossible to produce
true temporal peace and tranquillity by things repugnant or opposed to
the peace and happiness of eternity. (Silvio Cardinal Antoniano, quoted by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929.)
How, pray tell, is in vitro fertilization not repugnant and thus opposed to the peace and happiness of eternity?
How, pray, tell, did President George Walker Bush not offend God by making sure that contraceptives were distributed in the name of "humanitarian assistance" shortly after the invasion of American military troops on March 20, 2003?
How, pray tell, did President George Walker Bush not offend God by letting stand the decision of the United States Food and Drug Administration under the Clinton administration in 2000 to permit the marketing of the human pesticide, RU-486?
How, pray tell, did President George Walker Bush not offend God by letting the United States Food and Drug Administration during his own administration in 2006 to permit the over-the-counter sale of the so-called "Plan B emergency contraceptive," which is an abortifacient, to women over the age of eighteen?
What does it tell you that Willard Mitt Romney trusts Robert Zoellick, the former president of the World Bank, to serve on his transition team even though one of the chief goals of the World Bank has been "population control," which it enforces rigorously as a condition of the financial assistance it gives to "third world" countries, including the once proudly Catholic country of The Philippines that was undermined by the unjust and immoral American invasion and occupation there in 1898? See, for example, World Bank Population Policy; Remote Control, World Bank's population control push in Philippines and a report inspired by, prepared under the direction of and signed by one Robert Zoellick, in conjunction with the pro-abortion, pro-one child per family, pro-forced sterilization Red Chinese government, on China 2030: Building a Modern, Harmonious, and Creative High Income Society--World Bank that includes discussion of "family planning services" without any mention of the reality that forced abortions still exist in some parts of Red China and that the one-child per family policy is monstrous.
Oh, by the way, do you know who appointed Robert Zoellick to be president of the World Bank? Yes, that's right, it was President George Walker Bush, who nominated Zoellick on May 30, 2007, whereupon he was confirmed by the plutocrats who served on the executive board of the World Beach on June 25, 2007, six days before he began his five year term, which ended on June 30, 2012.
Again, just for your information, you understand, Robert Zoellick, who also served in the administration of President George Herbert Walker Bush, was the one of the signatories on a letter, dated January 26, 2008, just four days after Matt Drudge broke the Monica Lewinsky story, that called upon then President William Jefferson Blythe Clinton to take action to "remove" Saddam Hussein. The
Letter to President Clinton on Iraq also was signed by such future Bush the Lesser Iraqi War Hawks as Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, John Bolton, Donald D. Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Armitage.
Yes, yes, yes, my friends. Just keep telling yourselves that "things" will be "different" with Willard Mitt Romney in the White House than they were with Bush the Elder and Bush the Lesser. Some "conservatives" are even protesting that Zoellick's presence on the Romney transition team, which is preparing for the possibility of Romney-Ryan victory in seventy-eight days, does not mean anything, citing those associated with the Romney campaign who state that Zoellick would have no influence on policy in a Romney-Ryan administration. All right, then why have this man serve as the head of the national security section of the transition team? Who is he going to recommend serving in a Romney administration? Supporters of United States Representative Ron Paul (R-Texas)? Yes, the desire to believe in the political equivalent of the tooth fairy is astounding.
Evil is evil.
Wrong is wrong.
Devils without their tails wind up becoming more dangerous than devils with their tails as people willing to close their eyes to the truth continue in their steadfast refusal to understand that the world must continue to spiral out of control as long as it rejects the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by His Catholic Church.
What I wrote in 2008 about Barack Hussein Obama defeating Hillary Rodham Clinton is just as applicable to the situation that would obtain if Willard Mitt Romney defeated Obama in seventy-eight days. Just substitute the names and remember the text because I will use it again on November 7, 2012, if Romney winds up defeating Obama as I simply change the names around:
Yes, one devil is about to leave the Democrat Party presidential race, although she is going kicking and screaming after still holding out hope that there was some way for her to get rewarded for all of those years she stood by her husband's side as she, the candidate of "women," trashed the very women who he had manipulated for his own purposes time and time again with utter impunity and without, of course, seeking out the Absolution that could be his at the hands of a true priest in the Sacred Tribunal of Penance. United States Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-New York, is through, at least for the year 2008, and quite possibly forever as a presidential candidate if her former rival, United States Senator Barack Obama, D-Illinois, wins the Presidency of the United States of America against Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, in one hundred fifty-one days from now. The scheming politico who came to national prominence solely on her adulterer husband's coattails--and has been at the epicenter of one scandal and abuse of power after another (Watergate, Travelgate, Chinagate, the billing records from the Rose Law Firm that just "happened" to wind up in the reading room of the second floor of the White House)--has lost her bid for the only thing that has ever mattered to her: the political power that she could have exercised as the first female President of the United States of America.
The defeat of Hillary Rodham Clinton, however, is no cause for rejoicing. A new devil, one far more dangerous that she ever was or ever will be, has emerged in the form of Barack Hussein Obama. Obama's supposedly "lofty" naturalistic rhetoric masks his Communist background. (See:
Barack Obama's Communist connections and
Moscow endorses Obama as US President; Russian Foreign Ministry official, former Soviet apparatchik articulates Kremlin line. Yes, Our Lady really, really meant that Russia would spread its errors if the proper consecration of Russia to her Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart was not done, which is why there is no greater triumph, albeit temporary, for the devil than to delay this consecration by means of false "popes" and false "bishops" who believe in the "civilization of love," not in the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.) Obama is just as militantly in favor of unrestricted baby-killing as is Hillary Rodham Clinton. He has demonstrated himself to be willing to pay his obeisance before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). He is vague about his naturalistic"ideas" because his true agenda involves a massive increase in the power exercised by the Federal government of the United States of America, and most likely a government-imposed crackdown on those deemed guilty of fomenting "hate speech," namely, those of us who oppose baby-killing and the agenda of those committed to unrepentant sins of perversity against the Sixth and Ninth Commandments. Oh, believe me, many of our fellow citizens will rejoice when such a crackdown occurs.
The political climate at present favors the election of the newest naturalist devil of the false opposite of the "left." President George Walker Bush has bankrupted the treasury of the United States of America on an unjust, immoral war that was based on misrepresented intelligence "facts" and designed to do the bidding of Israel in creating a series of "democratic" states in the Mohammedan world. Bush has violated legitimate liberties of citizens to increase the power of the Federal government of the United States of America even on matters of domestic policies that make Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Lyndon Baines Johnson and even William Jefferson Blythe Clinton each seem like advocates of limited government. Bush has a presidential approval rating of just twenty-five percent according to a survey conducted by CBS News and The New York Times between May 30, 2008, and June 3, 2008, just one percentage point above that of then President Richard Milhous Nixon's when his resignation from the Presidency of the United States of America (announced on Thursday, August 8, 1974, preempting Ironside in the process, as he had done six years before on the same date when delivering his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention in Miami Beach, Florida) became effective at noon, Eastern Daylight Saving Time, on Friday, August 9, 1974. The election is Obama's to lose.
The new naturalist devil of the "left" will get a lot of help from his Republican opponent Senator John McCain, a naturalist of no particular ideological bent who believes in absolutely nothing and is able to read a prepared speech only slightly better than the hapless septuagenarian who gave then President Bill Clinton a easy ride to a second term in 1996, the hapless, mercurial, inarticulate thirty-third degree Mason named Robert Joseph Dole, Jr., the former Majority Leader of the United States Senate. McCain stands a chance of winning this year for two reasons: (1) some voters will be reluctant to vote for Obama on the basis of his mixed-race background; and (2) Obama is vulnerable on the naturalistic grounds of what is considered to be "national defense" as he is not committed to the global "War on Terror" which McCain, although he has tried to distance himself from the current President Bush, supports and believes is the path by which the United States of America can remain "secure" against "radical Islam." (Neither Obama or McCain would dare admit that Mohammedanism in and of itself is violent and that its not-so-holy book, the Koran, preaches violence against "infidels" such as us.)
Lost on both the new leftist devil and the old Republican agent of the devil's naturalism will be the simple truth that no nation can ever make itself secure from attacks, whether they come from international terrorists or from Russia or China, from abroad as it makes warfare upon the innocent preborn on a daily basis. Never lose sight of the fact, ladies and gentlemen, that over four thousand innocent human beings are butchered in their mothers' wombs by means of surgical abortions every day. Thousands more die as a result of chemical abortifacients. Both Obama and McCain support surgical baby-killing, differing only on the extent to which they believe babies should be killed (Obama with no restrictions, McCain believing that babies can be sliced and diced under cover of law in the "hard" cases).
Both Obama and McCain support chemical abortifacients under cover of law. Neither Obama or McCain will seek to reverse the United States Food and Drug Administration's September, 2000, decision to permit the marketing of the human pesticide, RU-486, that has remained perfectly "legal" during the eighty-nine months, seventeen days of the "pro-life" administration of George Walker Bush. Neither will reverse the Food and Drug Administration's August 24, 2006, decision to permit the "behind the counter" sales of the "Plan B" "emergency contraceptive," approved during that wonderful "pro-life" George W. Bush's term. Nations that permit various evils under cover of law will reap the sorry consequences of their own defiance of the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. No amount of "strategy" and no use of military force will keep a nation safe that defies God's laws and puts the innocent at risk while offending Him and undermining the eternal good of souls--and thus of the common temporal good--in the process.
Once again, for those who are "worried" about who gets elected and believe that we must settled for the "lesser of two evils," I propose yet again for those interested in a sober dose of Catholic reality that our steady acceptance of the so-called "lesser of two evils" in the past fifty years has only increased our toleration for what constitutes the so-called "lesser evil." In actual truth, you see, there is no distinction between the "greater" and "lesser" evils as all manner of evils are protected under cover of civil law and promoted in every aspect of popular culture, which is the essential point that I made nearly five months ago in When Lesser is Greater.
Pope Leo XIII, writing in Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888, put the matter this way:
But, to judge aright, we must acknowledge that, the more a State is driven to tolerate evil, the further is it from perfection; and that the tolerance of evil which is dictated by political prudence should be strictly confined to the limits which its justifying cause, the public welfare, requires. Wherefore, if such tolerance would be injurious to the public welfare, and entail greater evils on the State, it would not be lawful; for in such case the motive of good is wanting. And although in the extraordinary condition of these times the Church usually acquiesces in certain modern liberties, not because she prefers them in themselves, but because she judges it expedient to permit them, she would in happier times exercise her own liberty; and, by persuasion, exhortation, and entreaty would endeavor, as she is bound, to fulfill the duty assigned to her by God of providing for the eternal salvation of mankind. One thing, however, remains always true -- that the liberty which is claimed for all to do all things is not, as We have often said, of itself desirable, inasmuch as it is contrary to reason that error and truth should have equal rights. Libertas Praestantissimum, June 20, 1888.)
How much evil is the United States of America not simply "tolerating" but promoting actively at the present time?
Oh, you are perfectly free, of course, to get all wound up about the election in the next seventy-eight days, spending your time on the blathering idiocy of the naturalists of the "left" and the "right" on talk radio programs and the various all-news television channels, none of which have any place in the Droleskey household whatsoever. You may think me daft for considering this all to be a gigantic waste of our good Catholic time. No matter who wins the presidential election in the United States of America seventy-eight days from now, that is, on Tuesday, November 6, 2012, the results for the next four years will be pretty much the same. And then there will loom the specter of the next "greater evil," Hillary Rodham Clinton, who, one report has indicated, wanted no part of feelers that were made to her about replacing Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., this year as she wants to keep her distance from a possible defeat while at the same time putting herself in a position to "win over" disaffected Democrats who might vote for Romney this year if she runs for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination in 2016 (see (see 'The Amateur' author Ed Klein: Hillary dismissed VP possibility two weeks ago).
The scions of the counterfeit church of conciliarism believe that evil can be retarded by means of making a "reconciliation" with the flawed premises of Modernity, refusing even to teach in the practical order of things the immutable doctrine of the Social Reign of Christ the King or to exhort Catholics to pray and to work for the conversion of their nations to the true Faith. They have made their accommodation with the precepts of Judeo-Masonry that serve as the bedrock foundation of the inherently degenerate principles whose perfection is being made manifest before our very eyes. They have dared to make to an alliance with the interdenominationalism desired by Belial himself and condemned by Pope Saint Pius X in Notre Charge Apostolique and by Pope Leo XIII in Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892:
Everyone should avoid familiarity or friendship with anyone suspected of belonging to masonry or to affiliated groups. Know them by their fruits and avoid them. Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)
Who is it who has stated in writing his belief that the "Second:" Vatican Council represents the "Church's official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789"?
Let us be content to say here that the text serves as a countersyllabus and, as such, represents on the part of the Church, an attempt at an official reconciliation with the new era inaugurated in 1789. (Joseph Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, p. 382.)
What happened in 1789? Wasn't there some kind of anti-Theistic revolution in France, the elder daughter of the Church? What did Pope Leo XIII write about such reconciling with the principles of the revolution?
Every familiarity should be avoided, not only with those impious libertines who openly promote the character of the sect, but also with those who hide under the mask of universal tolerance, respect for all religions, and the craving to reconcile the maxims of the Gospel with those of the revolution. These men seek to reconcile Christ and Belial, the Church of God and the state without God. (Pope Leo XIII, Custodi Di Quella Fede, December 8, 1892.)
Naturalism is not of God. The use of natural means will never defeat the devils of this day or any day.
Devils of one sort or another will always abound in the corridors of the false opposites of the naturalist "right" and the naturalist "left." We will not drive them out at the ballot box, as I used to believe, at least in part, or by the use of naturalistic or interdenominational or nondenominational means. No, we will help to do our part to drive them out by clinging to true bishops and to true priests in the Catholic catacombs where no concessions are made to conciliarism or to the "legitimacy"of its false shepherds. We will help to do our part to drive them out by spending time in prayer before Our Lord's Real Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament and praying as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit. We will help to do our part to drive them out by offering up each of our daily prayers and penances and sufferings and humiliations in reparation for our own sins and those of the whole world, giving all we have and do and suffer to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The way out of this mess runs through Our Lady's Fatima Message, which is why the conciliar revolutionaries have worked so very hard to deconstruct, distort and demythologize it, and don't let anyone, no, not even some kind of supposed traditionalist commentator, convince you to the contrary.
The world's fate at present is that which France suffered one hundred years after King Louis XIV, who chosen by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ despite his own many personal sins, refused to heed Our Lord's request, made through Sister Margaret Mary Alacoque, to have the bishops of France consecrate this eldest daughter of Holy Mother Church to His Most Sacred Heart:
At this point
Lucia explained that she understood the apparition was a representation
of the Holy Trinity, as she heard Mary speak to her: "The moment has
come in which God asks the Holy Father, in union with all the Bishops in
the world, to make the consecration of Russia to my Immaculate Heart,
promising to save it by this means. There are so many souls whom the
Justice of God condemns for sins committed against me, that I have come
to ask reparation: sacrifice yourself for this intention and pray."
Lucia told all
this to her confessor who ordered her to write it down, and she also
said that later on Jesus had spoken as follows to her: "They did not
wish to heed My request. Like the king of France, they will repent and
do it, but it will be late. Russia will have already spread her errors
throughout the world, provoking wars and persecutions of the Church; the
Holy Father will have much to suffer." (Mary's words at Fatima.)
Behold how the errors of Russia keep being spread by the false opposites of the naturalist "left" and the naturalist "right."
We must be attached to God alone, something that Blessed Humbeline, the sister of Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, explained to her husband
Guy, who was about to give her permission to enter the religious life,
how we must love God completely in this passing vale of tears:
"Guy, dear," she pressed, "it seems incredible. I
know; but that is because we think so superficially. Now tell me: Were
you not more ready and without fear to face your uncle after you had
done some heroic deed in battle, after you had risked your life and
sacrificed safety than you were after some escapade or boyish prank?
Bring the principle to the touchstone of everyday life and you'll see
its force. When did you face your uncle most gladly?"
"After I had sacrificed, as you say." came the thoughtful reply. "That is certainly true in the case of any knight."
"Then don't you see the parallel?"
"I do, Humbeline; more clearly than ever before.
And I see that I have sacrificed very little for God. I can believe that
religious souls such as Elizabeth de Forez and your brothers, if not
completely without fear, are certainly more ready to face God than any
of us in the world. It is most reasonable."
"And you have touched the real reason, Guy. It is giving to God!
I am growing more convinced that life has only one purpose: that God
gave us everything simply that we might freely give everything back to
Him again. Daddy's death at Clairvaux last year taught me that most
forcefully. I saw then that happiness here and hereafter is to be found
in God alone."
"Do you mean that the world should be one large monastery?"
"Never!--But I do mean that everyone in the world
should live as the inmates of the monastery; that is, fully
God-conscious, God-centered, God-absorbed! My sister-in-law [Elizabeth
de Forez, whom Saint Bernard convinced to enter religious life] has more
happiness here than any hundred society women, and she is more sure of
happiness hereafter than ay thousand of them. And why? Because she has
made the total sacrifice and the unconditional surrender. She has given
her all!" (Father M. Raymond, O.C.S.O., The Family That Overtook Christ: The Amazing Story of the Family of Bernard of Clairvaux, Boston, Massachusetts: Saint Paul Books and Media, 1986, pp. 278-279.)
Is this world in which we live God-centered and God-absorbed? Hardly. It is self-centered and self-absorbed.
As noted above, we need the help of Our Lady, to whom Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, whose feast we celebrate today, Monday, August 20, 2012, at all times in order to surrender ourselves to God as He has revealed Himself to us exclusively through His Catholic Church
In dangers, in doubts, in difficulties, think of
Mary, call upon Mary. Let not her name depart from your lips, never
suffer it to leave your heart. And that you may more surely obtain the
assistance of her prayer, neglect not to walk in her footsteps. With her
for guide, you shall never go astray; while invoking her, you shall
never lose heart; so long as she is in your mind, you are safe from
deception; while she holds your hand, you cannot fall; under her
protection you have nothing to fear; if she walks before you, you shall
not grow weary; if she shows you favor, you shall reach the goal.
Rely upon Our Lady and the tools she has given us, starting with the Rosary and including her Brown Scapular of Mount Carmel, the Miraculous Medal and the Green Scapular, and not upon the naturalists who promise us everything but can do nothing of any lasting good without her blessed assistance as she wants to lead all men and all nations to an acceptance of and humble submission to the Social Reign of Christ the King as It must be exercised by the Catholic Church.
Vivat Christus Rex!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
