Ominous Offenders Offending Ominously
by Thomas A. Droleskey
As has been noted in several recent commentaries, Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus and his minions are cynical tyrants who seek to manipulate an electoral system based on the fraudulent principles of naturalism in order to rule tyrannically. Our reigning caesar is doing this while acting sanctimoniously in the face of any criticism directed at him, especially by elected officials who belong to the organized crime family of the false opposite of the "right" in the Republican Party (see Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal on Caesar's Thin-Skinned Naturalism and President Obama, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer Share Tense Tarmac Encounter).
The reigning caesar knows better than anyone else even though his own policies are made in a haphazard manner by White House staffers that he authorizes, at least for the most part, in a perfunctory manner. Barack Hussein Obama, our caesar ignoramus, is concerned principally about whether the policy ideas that come to his desk are in accord with his leftist orthodoxy, seeing himself principally as the snake-oil salesman to sell his poison to a most gullible American public. He loves the power, especially the power to impose his Marxist agenda on social engineering while he ignores both the laws of God and man.
Political analyst Michael Barone wrote the following about Obama's penchant for approving policies designed to curb more and more legitimate human liberties:
It's unusual when a reporter sympathetic to a politician writes a
story that makes his subject look bad. But Ryan Lizza of The New Yorker
has now done this twice.
The first time was in an article last April on Obama's foreign policy
in which he quoted a "top aide" (National Security Adviser Tom Donilon?
It sounds like him) saying that the president was "leading from behind"
on Libya. Not what most Americans expect their presidents to do.
Now, in an article based on leaked White House memos marked up by Obama, Lizza has done it again.
Contrarian liberal blogger Mickey Kaus sums it up: "The president's
decision-making method -- at least as described in this piece -- seems
to consist of mainly checking boxes on memos his aides have written for
A $60 billion cut in the stimulus package? "OK." Use the
reconciliation process to pass the health care bill? A checkmark in the
box labeled "yes."
Include medical malpractice reform in the health care bill? The man
who as an Illinois legislator often voted "present" writes, "We should
According to Lizza, Obama prefers getting information and making
decisions by staying up late and reading memos rather than meeting with
people -- a temperament that's a liability because face time with the
president is one of his major sources of political capital.
Lizza's reporting undercuts the stated thesis of his article: that
Obama sought to bring bipartisan governance to Washington, but was
foiled by Republicans' partisan intransigence.
Evidence that Obama ever seriously considered Republican approaches
is minimal in the New Yorker article. The alternatives Lizza describes
Obama as considering are for even more spending and government control,
such as a much bigger stimulus package.
He mentions just in passing that Obama "had decided to pursue health
care reform" as well as the stimulus package -- a choice that inevitably
made bipartisanship harder to achieve.
At one point Lizza does quote Obama writing on a memo, "Have we
looked at any of the other GOP recommendations (e.g., Paul Ryan's) to
see if they make any sense?" Another president might have looked at
Ryan's proposals himself or might even have called him on the phone.
George W. Bush, in contrast, worked with Democrats -- and sometimes
even talked with them -- on his education plan, his tax cuts and the
Iraq War resolution. He even tried, unsuccessfully, to negotiate with
them on Social Security.
And on Obama's failure to reach a "go big" budget agreement with
House Speaker John Boehner last summer, Lizza presents only the White
House talking point: "conservative colleagues rebelled, and Boehner
withdrew." He doesn't mention Republican claims that Obama upped the
ante, demanding more tax increases.
Lizza's White House sources apparently didn't leak any memos about
some of Obama's more recent actions, but his article provides a jumping
off place for understanding them.
As in Chicago, Obama seems to live in a cocoon in which Republicans
are largely absent, offscreen actors that no one pays any attention to.
His personal interactions are limited to his liberal Democratic staff
-- and to the rich liberals he meets at his frequent fundraising
events. He has held more of these than George W. Bush, who in turn held
more than Bill Clinton.
Two decisions in particular seem tilted toward rich liberals. One was
the disapproval of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada, even after it
survived two environmental impact statements.
Obama says he wants more jobs and to reduce American dependence on
oil from unfriendly foreign sources. The pipeline would do both, and is
endorsed by labor unions. But Robert Redford doesn't like Canadian tar
sands oil. Case closed.
The other astonishing decision was the decree requiring Catholic
hospitals and charities' health insurance policies to include coverage
for abortion and birth control. Here Obama was spitting in the eyes of
millions of Americans and threatening the existence of charitable
programs that help millions of people of all faiths.
Catholic bishops responded predictably by requiring priests to read
letters opposing the policy. Who's on the other side? The designer-clad
ladies Obama encounters at every fundraiser. They want to impose their
views on abortion on everyone else.
Obama fundraising seems to be lagging behind its $1 billion goal, and
Democrats fear Republicans are closing the fundraising gap. So Obama
seems to be concentrating on meeting the demands of rich liberals he
spends so much time with. (Box-Checking Obama in a Liberal Cocoon.)
This is a very good assessment of Barack Hussein Obama and his administration he has staffed with rigid adherents to his own religion of the statist brand of naturalism.
As perfunctory as Obama is as a policy-making, however, he is very involved in the planning for his re-election. Although several recent articles on this site have discussed the caesar's administration's decision to require ostensibly Catholic institutions to provide health insurance coverage for contraception as being crafted precisely to drive a wedge between the conciliar "bishops" in the United States of America and just enough of Catholics in--or out, as the case may be, out--of their pews to maintain the "Catholic vote" for him this year at where it stood in 2008 (fifteen percent). Obama and his political strategist are seeking to make the "bishops"
appear to be the enemy of the people's "personal liberty," which his pro-abortion Catholic Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius contends has to weighed against the "bishops'" invocation of "religious liberty" (see Contraception Rule Respects Religion). So much for the Stupak Amendment, which was a farce from the outset as no Catholic can surrender on any moral of moral truth at any time for any reason of expediency, personal or otherwise (Never Give In To Compromise).
Obama's chief strategist, the Talmudist named David Axelrod, has chosen this particular battle in the well-founded belief that by doing so he can keep Obama's campaign bank rollers, each of whom is a fanatical supporter of the chemical and surgical assassination of innocent preborn children, and at the same time not run much of a risk of losing a significantly large number those Catholics who supported Obama four years ago, figuring that most of those who did vote for Obama over the naturalist fraud named John Sidney McCain III did so because the economy. The reality is this: only four percent of Republicans who voted on the Nevada caucuses on Saturday, February 4, 2012, said that abortion was the most important issue facing the nation. Axelrod has done the math, and he believes, not without substantial justification, that he's got a cash cow with his boss's biggest financial backers and a vote-getter with Catholics, most of whom use contraception and resent the "church" telling them what to do:
Even as angry Catholic leaders vow to fight a new federal requirement that most employers include contraceptives in their health insurance coverage, the Obama administration believes
any political damage will be limited because it's on the side of women's
Democratic strategists think voters who oppose President Obama because of the birth-control rule wouldn't have voted for him anyway.
The strategists think most Catholic women — like most other American
women — believe that birth control should be affordable and available.
The Susan G. Komen Foundation
can attest to the volatility of family-planning politics. After saying
it would cut off most funding to Planned Parenthood, Komen reversed itself last week in the face of public outcry.
"I think we saw with Komen that this is a country where voters, and
particularly women voters, support affordable access to birth control,
and that is true among Catholic women as well as women who are not
Catholic," said Geoff Garin, a pollster for Democrats and Planned Parenthood.
Democratic strategists point to statistics showing widespread approval
of birth control among Catholic voters, suggesting a gulf between clergy
and parishioners. Catholic doctrine opposes birth control, but surveys
show many Catholics use contraceptives.
The new rule stems from the 2010 healthcare law, which requires
employers to provide insurance coverage for contraceptives to patients
who want them. Churches and other houses of worship are exempt, but
Catholic hospitals and universities are not. Bishops call the rule an
affront to religious freedom.
The rule doesn't force doctors who object to contraception to prescribe it.
As the Komen Foundation discovered last week, public opinion can be hard to predict. After the breast cancer charity decided to stop funding about $650,000 in breast-health
services at 16 Planned Parenthood affiliates, a public uproar ensued,
and Komen reversed itself within days.
The controversy underscored broad support for access to birth control, prevention and treatment of [various social diseases] and cancer screenings for women, which altogether totaled 86% of Planned Parenthood's services in 2010, according to the group's website. Abortion accounted for 3%.
Still, angering Catholic voters — or doing anything that appears to
restrict religious freedom — in swing states could come back to bite
Obama. At least one Democrat, Sen. Machin III, a moderate and a Catholic in a tough reelection fight in West Virginia, came out against the administration's plan.
"This is America. Under our Constitution, religious organizations have
the freedom to follow their beliefs, and government should honor that,"
Manchin said in a statement. "The Obama administration's position on
this mandate is wrong and just doesn't make any sense to me. I'm talking
to my Democratic and Republican colleagues about any ways we can fight
this misguided decision." (Fight With Catholics Unlikely to Hurt Obama, His Strategists Say.)
Unfortunately for United States Senator Joseph Manchin III, who is a a Catholic, the "America" he thinks exists is but a delusion. Religious liberty is but a tool devised by the devil to give him free rein to spread error. Behold the result of such errors, including those made in articles such as the one just quoted that make it appear that Planned Parenthood, founded by a woman who was a racist and a eugenicist, has little to do with the surgical baby-killing when the truth of the matter is that that "three percent" figure still makes this evil empire responsible for being the largest single provider of surgical baby-killing in the United States of America. That's quite a three percent.
Men who are ominous offenders of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law of thus of the good of souls upon which depends all true social order must, as figures of Antichrist, offend the true God of Divine Revelation and those who believe in Him in more and more ominous ways. Reminiscent of other tyrants in the past who have sought to censor sermons given by Catholic priests, the Secretary of the Army John McHugh ordered that a letter written by Timothy Broglio, the conciliar "archbishop" for the military services, could not be read in the Army's chapels on Sunday, January 29, 2012:
The Obama administration has been accused of telling Catholic
military chaplains what they can and cannot say from their pulpits after
the Army ordered Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to
parishioners from their archbishop.
The Secretary of the Army feared the letter could be viewed as a call for civil disobedience.
The letter called on Catholics to resist the policy the Obama
Administration’s policy that would force institutions affiliated with
religious groups to provide coverage for birth control, sterilization
and “abortifacients.” The Catholic Church believes the mandate
represents an unconstitutional violation of freedom of religion.
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum told Fox News Sunday
the Army violated its chaplains’ constitutional rights by barring them
from reading the letter – calling for resistance to the contraceptive
“The Army and the Obama administration said they couldn’t even issue
the letter to complain about the Obama administration’s plan on this
policy,” Santorum said, calling it a violation of freedom of religion
and freedom of speech.
“This is the problem when government tells you they can give you
things,” said Santorum, a Catholic. “They can take it away but even
worse they can tell you how they are going to exercise this new right
consistent with their values instead of the values guaranteed in the
On Jan. 26, Archbishop Timothy Broglio emailed a letter to Catholic
military chaplains with instructions that it be read from the pulpit.
A portion of the letter was obtained by Business Insider. It reads:
“In so ruling, the Obama Administration has cast aside the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, denying to Catholics our Nation’s first and most fundamental freedom, that of religious liberty. And as a result, unless the rule is overturned, we Catholics will be compelled to either violate our consciences, or to drop health coverage for our employees (and suffer the penalties for doing so). The Obama Administration’s sole concession was to give our institutions one year to comply.”
The following day, senior chaplains received an email from the Army’s
Office of the Chief of Chaplains advising them that the archbishop’s
letter was not coordinated with their office – and instructed chaplains
not to read it from the pulpit.
The Chief’s office ordered that the letter was to be mentioned in the
Mass announcements and distributed in printed form in the back of the
“Archbishop Broglio and the Archdiocese stand firm in the belief,
based on legal precedent, that such a directive from the Army
constituted a violation of his Constitutionally-protected right of free
speech and the free exercise of religion, as well as those same rights
of all military chaplains and their congregants,” read a statement
provided to Fox News from the Archdiocese of the Military Services.
According to the AMS, Archbishop Broglio had a telephone conversation with Secretary of the Army John McHugh.
“It was agreed that it was a mistake to stop the reading of the
Archbishop’s letter,” the statement read. “Additionally, the line: “We
cannot-we will not-comply with this unjust law” was removed by
Archbishop Broglio at the suggestion of Secretary McHugh over the
concern that it could potentially be misunderstood as a call to civil
The issue raises a question among critics: did administration
official tell the Catholic Church what it could and could not say in the
The Army confirmed that they asked Catholic chaplains not to read the letter, according to a statement released to National Review Online.
“The Army greatly appreciates the Archbishops consideration of the
military’s perspective and is satisfied with the resolution upon which
they agreed,” the statement concluded.
A source with knowledge of the incident told Fox News that no other
branches of the military objected to the letter and to their knowledge
was delivered “as-is” by chaplains in the other branches of the military. (Army Silences Catholic Chaplains.)
If one chooses to live by "religious freedom," then one will die by its ultimate consequence: practical atheism (Barack Obama Is The Fruit Of Practical Atheism), which is why the poor men masquerading as Catholic bishops in the United States of America can protest ad infinitum against the Obama administration's efforts at thought-control without any possibility of turning back the tide unleashed by the anti-Incarnational errors of Modernity. Oh, they might be successful to get some "adjustment" made by caesar to appease them temporarily. By making advertence to the heresy of religious liberty, however, and seeking to wrap themselves in this tool of the devil, the American "bishops" are blind to the simple truth that no company has any right found in the Divine Positive Law or the Natural Law to manufacture, market and sell contraception of any type and no individual, therefore, has any right to buy it or to use it.
While it is certainly true that it is not possible to prohibit the manufacture, sale and use of contraceptives under cover of the civil law at this time given the social unrest that occur as a result (such a prohibition could come about only as a result of the conversion of a nation's people to the Catholic Faith and thus, their faithful observance of God's laws, accept that contraception is evil in se as a violation of the Sovereignty of God over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage), the conciliar "bishops" in this country have accepted the false principle that the Federal government can institute "universal health care" and at the same time mandate coverage for contraception for those who want it. Most of the conciliar "bishops" supported the whole concept of ObamaCare. They just wanted coverage for surgical baby-killing kept out of this. They are the victims of having endorsed ObamaCare with that one exception and of believing that Obama meant to take into any kind of real consideration the concerns that they expressed to him about the requirement forcing their hospitals and other institutions to provide insurance coverage for abortion.
Furthermore, "Archbishop" Timothy Broglio's concession on the "offensive" line in his letter “We
cannot-we will not-comply with this unjust law” on the grounds of not wanting to foster "civil disobedience" denies the essence of what it is to be a disciple of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and His one and only true Church, the Catholic Church, that He founded upon the Rock of Peter, the Pope. It is exactly in this type of situation that one who believes himself to be a Catholic bishop must exhort his people to resist and oppose unjust laws that are offensive to God and harmful to souls. Pope Leo XIII taught the antithesis of what Timothy Broglio did to appease Army Secretary John McHugh:
10. But, if the laws of the State are
manifestly at variance with the divine law, containing enactments hurtful to
the Church, or conveying injunctions adverse to the duties imposed by
religion, or if they violate in the person of the supreme Pontiff the
authority of Jesus Christ, then, truly, to resist becomes a positive duty,
to obey, a crime; a crime, moreover, combined with misdemeanor against the
State itself, inasmuch as every offense leveled against religion is also a
sin against the State. Here anew it becomes evident how unjust is the
reproach of sedition; for the obedience due to rulers and legislators is not
refused, but there is a deviation from their will in those precepts only
which they have no power to enjoin. Commands that are issued adversely to
the honor due to God, and hence are beyond the scope of justice, must be
looked upon as anything rather than laws. You are fully aware, venerable
brothers, that this is the very contention of the Apostle St. Paul, who, in
writing to Titus, after reminding Christians that they are "to be
subject to princes and powers, and to obey at a word," at once adds:
"And to be ready to every good work."(7) Thereby he openly
declares that, if laws of men contain injunctions contrary to the eternal
law of God, it is right not to obey them. In like manner, the Prince of the
Apostles gave this courageous and sublime answer to those who would have
deprived him of the liberty of preaching the Gospel: "If it be just in
the sight of God to hear you rather than God, judge ye, for we cannot but
speak the things which we have seen and heard."
There is more of this coming, however, as the "family planning" fascists (and I ran afoul of these folks repeatedly in my college teaching career, which is why that career has been over for five years) gain even more power in Caesar Obamus Barackus Obamus's second term, and there will be a second term (see Obama/Romney Looking a Lot Like Obama/McCain, which provides empirical evidence of what I have been telling you repeatedly--Bob Dole's Many Faces.)
We must consider a privilege given us by the good God to be alive in these challenging times as we pray our Rosaries and make many sacrifices as the consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary. We have work to do, namely, to plant the seeds for the conversion of men and their nations to the true Faith, the Catholic Faith, which alone is the sole foundation of personal and social order.
It will be only when men and their nations are converted to the Catholic Faith that their constitutions will truly bind them together and serve legitimate national interests as civil leaders seek to pursue the common temporal good in light of the man's Last End, the possession of the glory of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, god the Son and God the Holy Ghost for all eternity in Heaven, remembering that, as Pope Saint Pius X noted in Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906, "the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it." It will be only then that civil constitutions will serve the interests of men in this life because they seek to serve God through His Catholic Church as our mater and magister exercises the Social Reign of Christ the King.
Vivat Christus Rex! Viva Cristo Rey!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
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 Evangelist, pray for us.
Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.
Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.
Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.
Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.
Saint Romuald, pray for us.
See also: A Litany of Saints