The last gasp of a desperate denier

Here.  Leaning on only a couple stats, we're told there is no immigration crisis to speak of.   Note there is no real mention of any Americans who have been hurt.  What mention there is consists of 'no big deal.'  We know Americans have been hurt, both physically and economically.  We know that it's a lie to say Americans are never hurt by illegal immigration.  In fact, we know it's such a lie that to insist it is true, or to downplay and ignore it, is to say why so many Americans are willing to back Trump: To do so is to say we only care about one set of The Least of These, from outside our borders. Those who are inside?  Eh.  Fuhgeddaboudit.

Immigration should be fixed, because almost every sane person admits it's broken.  Illegal immigration is harmful, and until almost a year ago, you had no problem finding Democrats and liberals who admitted that fact.

Sadly, too many Christians, Catholics and secularists have suddenly decided whatever harm is done to Americans is of no real importance.  They won't say they don't care, but virtually nothing in the conversation suggests they do.  They will turn and twist numbers, select stats, ignore data and do everything to suggest nothing short of open borders is what Jesus would do.  As for breaking the law? They find no problem declaring anything short of their solutions (open borders) to be a grave evil, and we all know we're called upon to resist and even fight grave evils, including breaking unjust and evil laws.

The linked to post represents why someone like Trump has the support he has, and why countless pictures of children in America's Death Camps isn't causing nearly as many Americans to buckle as you might expect.  Increasingly they're being told their fortunes, their well-being, their suffering and their very lives are forfeit, and nobody really cares.

Saying there is no immigration crisis reminds me of when the Left shouted down George W. Bush for saying Social Security was in crisis mode back in 2004.   Despite the fact that Democrats and liberals had been ringing the bells about Social Security's inevitable demise for years, suddenly they never even heard of Social Security.  Bush being Bush, of course, capitulated and let the issue die.  Nonetheless, it showed two things.  First it showed the Left was unaware that the Internet existed, and we could go back and find Democrats' speeches raising the alarm about Social Security.  Second, we could also use the Internet to find out that, yes, Social Security will need to have something happen or eventually it won't be there.

Same here.  To say there is no crisis is to contradict everything that both side have said, Christians and Catholics have said, other countries have said, Americans have said, and those who have suffered and died from the phenomenon have seen.  And with the Internet, we have no problem finding examples of how such a claim is at best subjective (after all, define crisis), at worst false.  It is almost unfathomable to say that something involving tens of thousands of people risking and losing lives and impacting citizens within a sovereign nation's border is no big deal. And a Catholic page at that.

Prayers for the shooting victims at The Capital

There really isn't much else to say.  This was a planned crime, hate and evil, murder and death.   The poor victims and their families and friends should be prayed for right now.  I'm sure we'll learn more, but on the spiritual side, we know all we need to know.

This comes of sinful men and women in a fallen world.  This is where walking the pathway of sin will lead.  This is where anger and hatred and wrath will eventually end up.  Whatever happened, whatever the details, whatever we can point to - none of it should have ended with this. It makes you ill to the stomach to see the victims of such senseless violence.

Prayers for all those lost and hurting during this time.  May God grant peace and strength to the hearts and souls of those left behind as he covers their hearts and minds in Christ Jesus. 

Americans will be inviting unlawful immigrants to move in with them all over the country tomorrow

Actually not, there will just be protests, unlike the nationwide protests and accusations of America's Holocaust that didn't exist back when Obama was deporting immigrants and separating families.  Of course not.  It wasn't quite as advantageous to do such things back then.  It is now.  The press says so.

Immigration is one of those topics that is easy for most Americans to get behind since, ultimately, it doesn't directly impact most Americans.  If illegal immigration hurts anyone, it's not me.  I don't live along the border.  I'm not so poor as to be hurt by the cheap labor illegal immigration provides.  And I'm certainly not the one risking life and limb by crawling through Central America on my way to the US because of our current 'open borders in all but name' mentality.

Most screaming the loudest about immigration seem to have little to no direct connection to immigrants and those hurt by the influx of immigration.  At best, they see it like terrorism - something they can pontificate about that won't impact them if they're wrong.  At worst, they seize upon it because human suffering can be exploited to advance a political agenda.

Either/or, the best solutions are actually those that make sure the least of these born on both sides of the border are considered and emphasized.  Here is a nice look from someone who isn't even American.  About the best Catholic take I've seen.  Not perfect, but certainly better than most I've seen.

If that isn't enough, then at least consider this.  If you don't really care, or put much time into caring, about those on America's side of the border, then in the long term you're just hurting those who today are immigrants.  After all, down the road they and their children will be those on this side of the border.  Perhaps that will get these who suddenly care on cue to care on principle.

Why the liberals got with they had coming with Kennedy's retirement

Whether or not Trump gets a conservative justice, or keeps a promise, or says something we can understand about the situation , remains to be seen.  But it's hard to have much sympathy for the Left as it goes into straightaway psycho mode in the wake of Justice Kennedy's retirement annoucement.

While many of the screams center around the capstone of modern liberalism (abortion), there have been other issues mentioned as well.  The whole picture is that the American Left is in complete panic mode.  And yet, in the end, they only have themselves to blame.  Jonah Goldberg explains.

I can't remember who, but someone said the same thing about Trump.  When Trump stunned the world, the Left had a complete meltdown.  It was over.  We were all going to die.  Death camps and nuclear war and gulags and gas chambers - that would be America!  Some could ask how this could happen.  He's only president.  We have checks and balances, right? 

Well, no.  We've actually been eating away at those for some time, and the Left is hardly the only ones to blame.  But under Obama, and with the changes in America's electorate, the Left was sure it had the future in the bag.  So they began legislating from the bench when possible, or just from the Oval Office as good as ever.  How can we forget Obama personally declaring transgenderism to be just hunky-dory, and so any school that doesn't accommodate his opinions on the subject will face withdrawal of federal funds?  Was there any legislation with that?  Did Congress have a say? Were voters consulted?  Why no!  Obama donned his merry emperor, and ruled from on high.  And the Left loved him for it.

Problem is, the Left basically said the President can rule from on high, bypass the legislative process, ignore the electorate, rule with pen and phone, and mandate conformity to his their agenda.  So naturally they were scared s--tless when the opposition prevailed. They tried to put ultimate power in the White House, and now their mortal enemy had the key.

Same here with the courts.  Contrary to press reports, the Democrats haven't been wallflowers with the whole 'courts as instruments of political legislation.'*  Nor have they stood by silently when it comes to twisting and turning the rules of Congress to get what they want without opposition.  And now their greatest fears look to be coming true. 

That's politics of course.  It's right when we do it, evil and stupid and wrong when you do it. Problem is, if you do it, you've just given the best excuse in the world to your opponents for doing the same thing.  All of the parsing and sling and dicing and trying to show why it's horrible that your opponents are doing what you darn well know you tried to do just won't cut it.  Lesson learned?  We'll see. 

*I think we're all smart enough to know that the Supreme Court is seen as an instrument for legislating politically biased agendas.  Whether they do or not is for others those more versed in the legal process to say.  But that we want the Courts to advance agendas rather than do any of that law stuff should be obvious just by listening to the reactions this week.

To make America Socialist

Remember how liberals used to mock conservatives who said there was a desire to push America toward Socialism?  I give you this story.  The joy and euphoria in the article are palpable.

Young people in America, by greater numbers than ever, are embracing Socialism as the wave of the future.  That's because of a couple things.  First, it's what they've been taught in schools, colleges, in the media, or society in general.  Second, let's face it, the Market hasn't exactly been kind to everyone over the last few decades.  Those who are 'middle class' today are nowhere near as well off as those who were considered 'middle class' forty years ago.  And combined with the poorer segments of society, that's an awfully big hunk of Americans who can no longer take their kids to Disneyland or even buy a new car, much less afford things like major medical expenses and retirement.

Back in the day, a local father could work in the meat counter at an independent grocery store, and the mother could work as a secretary, while affording a spacious three bedroom ranch on about a 3/4 acre plot of land, and also send their two kids to college, and happily retire.  I have news for you.  Today, a father working at a grocery store with a wife who is a secretary (administrative assistant) will likely not be living in a spacious three bedroom ranch on 3/4 of an acre, much less sending their kids to college or coming close to having a decent retirement.

Unfortunately, for some conservatives that became the Law of the Market.  Sorry about your luck.  The Market is as the Market is.  Even as some necessary expenses, like healthcare, became debilitating and almost assured that a growing segment of the population would likely experience bankruptcy, even if they had insurance, from a major health crisis, 'the Market is as the Market is' was the mantra.  Other expenses have followed in the healthcare costs footsteps.  Not to mention that many of the corporate leaders themselves are far from 'Capitalist/Free Market' advocates.  One can almost believe that they purposefully used their station to torpedo the market by making it look bad.

But for whatever reason, a growing segment of the population came into America where healthcare costs were through the roof, prices far outpaced wages, quality and quantity were declining in kind, and necessities like college and retirement were becoming a pipe dream.  The Left seized upon this to blame everything on Satan's economic theory (Capitalism), while,  unfortunately, you had loud advocates  of the Market continue with 'We're sorry, but it's the Law of the Market, you should have striven for the acquisition of financial gain to the exclusion of any other conceivable priority.  As it is, you don't got it, you don't get it.'

It's a little like someone telling you your father is a horrible person, and your father answering by hitting you with a club while insisting it's not true.  Therefore, we have this:

Once again the Left is proud and ecstatic about what it once said would never happen.  Just like it said it would never punish people over gay rights.  Your best bet?  If the Left says 'We'll never do such a thing in a million years', understand what they really mean is that they have every intention of doing it within ten years or less.

I don't care what CAIR says

The other big news from the SCOTUS world is that the court ignored political wrangling and ruled that the president can, in fact, protect the country using such things as a travel ban.  America's number one and most referenced Islamic rights group CAIR joined in the outcry. 

Here's my thing.  I don't give a flip what CAIR thinks.  When Bernie Sanders launched a stunning assault on Christianity by suggesting a religious litmus test that would disqualify Christians who believe Jesus is necessary for salvation, that was CAIR's chance.  That was their chance to protest Sanders and say they want a nation where all religions are equal and respected.

But as if to lit its slip show too soon, it joined with Sanders and gleefully aided the chorus of Leftist rage against the traditional Christian Faith.  And why not?  Look at religious minorities throughout the Muslim world.   Not just those in the Middle East or in areas impacted by this or that US policy.  If you look only at those, you can do what the Left does and insist it's all America's fault.

Hmmm, there's some trends there, but I'm having a hard time pinpointing ...

But look across the Muslim world.  Look at how religious (and other) minority groups are treated.  At best, they're made sure they know they're not part of the mainstream minority, with occasional harassment and intimidation trickling from on high.  At worst, it's outright oppression, persecution and sometimes violence.  Very few are the societies where this is not the case, and even in those nations, there is a strong Islamic presence trying to undo the tolerance.

A friend from Africa once said, years ago in the early 90s, that those who don't fear Islam don't live in the shadow of Islam.  The Left, whether honestly or not, has convinced itself and our society (including Europe) that the only thing we have to fear is white, Anglo-American, heterosexual, Christian men.  They have taught that the only true evils of the world came out of the Western Christian tradition and its bastard child America.  Likewise, they have also taught that the rest of the world was always a bastion of tolerance, diversity, women's rights, gay rights, religious pluralism and enlightened peace, love and John Lennon songs. 

Therefore, the Left sees Islam as useful allies of a like mind in the quest to destroy the one religious tradition it truly hates.  Whether Islam sees the Left as useful fools, or tools, or whatever, remains to be seen. For now, CAIR made it clear that its preference is an America in which Christian who profess the traditional faith in salvation through Christ should not be at the same political table as others.  And that's while being a sliver minority barely .001% of the population.  Imagine when those numbers increase. Well, you don't have to.  Just look across the oceans.  Only the fact that we've taught Americans to not care about others, including our posterity, could any sane person not be concerned enough to at least rethinking the Leftist narrative.

Supreme court rules for Crisis Pregnancy Centers

And religious liberty, a precarious thing nowadays.  Slate, in the meantime, has a cow.  California is one of the three Left coast states most eager to resurrect the Soviet Union and plant it amidst those amber waves of grain. 

California is no stranger to what a Leftist tyranny in the States would look like.  It champions punishing all who do charity work apart from the Glorious State.  It has already attempted to pass laws making it illegal to promote ideals at odds with the Political Left.  Just recently, the California Senate is considering a special council to monitor Fake News (despite the fact that there really is no agreed upon example of what is and isn't fake news). 

In this particular case, California tried to make Crisis Pregnancy Centers (that is, religiously funded pro-life pregnancy centers) do what liberals fought like a mad dog to prevent in abortion clinics.  They tried to make them tell everything.  Of course when we've asked that abortion clinics actually show what an unborn baby looks like, the Left screamed foul.  But suddenly, they wanted to make these faith based organizations encourage women to consider choices contrary to the centers' faith doctrines. 

The SCOTUS, thankfully, stepped in and headed off another naked assault on the right to not be liberal.  We'll see how long it lasts.  So far, using the promise of drugs and unlimited sexual pleasures, the Left has created enough apathy and hedonism for up and coming generations to not really care what happens down the road.  Still, you never know.  There might be enough people who start thinking "wait a minute, that could be me down the road' that they'll halt the juggernaut.  We'll have to see.  But for now, well done SCOTUS.  You can get it right once in a while.

One flew out of the cuckoo's nest

So a women I don't know about on a BBC show I've never heard of has upset the machine.  Apparently her show pays her male co-host more than her.  Cue the hysterics and crusaders of perpetual outrage.  Unfortunately, she seems content with what she makes.  Furthermore, Ms. Strachan goes on to explain that her host is the real pro from Dover, deserves the extra money, and she's fine with it.

I had to laugh at this part of the story:

The BBC press office said they wouldn't be commenting on Strachan's remarks

As if there's anything to comment about.  She's fine. I'm sure the fellow is OK with it.  What's the problem?

The problem is, this runs afoul of the prime tactics for the modern, Marxist inspired Left.  First, all things traditional are wrong.  Everything ever taught about anything is wrong.  The idea that anyone should get more based on anything like merit is anathema.

Second, she's a woman, he's a man.  All demographics must be in competition and seek conflict with all other demographics.  Everything is about two groups being in conflict.  The original conflict is the proletariat vs. the bourgeoisie.  You can, however, change those to any two groups, including the all important man vs. woman.  There is no harmony.  There is only division and animosity.

But mostly this is wrong because we must be outraged.  We must be angry.  We must see the worst in everyone else.  We must see anything that doesn't elevate us to the god of all things as hate that needs eradicated.  We must, like a donkey being hit by a whip, immediately snap into action and begin a holy crusade against all and everything and nothing.   She was supposed to rise up and break off her chains, beat down her co-host, and march victoriously through another glass ceiling.

Instead, Ms. Strachan's general contentment and admiration for her coworker is a threat to the world the modern Left has created.  Where it goes from here?  I don't know.  The Left will need to find something to replace the void of outrage that Ms. Strachan's grace and good nature has left behind. Perhaps she'll be taken to the woodshed and taught a lesson.  Otherwise, we'll have to watch for the next Big Outrage.  It likely will be a doozy.

Not that I speak from want, for I have learned to be content in whatever circumstances I am. I know how to get along with humble means, and I also know how to live in prosperity; in any and every circumstance I have learned the secret of being filled and going hungry, both of having abundance and suffering need. I can do all things through Him who strengthens me.  Philippians 4.011-13

UPDATE: This is how they do it.  Again, Ms. Strachan's response was suppose to be rage, anger, triumph, storming the Bastille and all that jazz.  Her gracious willingness to be content with her life and situation necessitated something of 'misogynistic racist bigotry is everywhere!' hysterics.  So enter the BBC, reminding us that the football soccer rage is really still a bastion of sexism and woman hate.  Another staple tactic of the Left: there is never a time when we will not be a sexist, racist, bigoted civilization.  Ever.

When the Washington Post unpacks an inconvenient immigration truth

It's time to sit up and take notice.  So for over a week, I've watched claims about Trump's policies, Trump's lies about the "Border Crisis (TM)", and the actions of previous administrations walked back, contradicted, changed and altered.

The initial stories ran as if we never even heard of Immigrants, and now Racist Trump was initiating the new Holocaust out of the blue aimed at murdering children in cages while families were sent to concentration camps.  Cue hysterics and protests by the donkey masses.

Problem is, almost everything that has come out since the initial days' reporting has torn down that narrative.  Of course the protests, like a train, aren't easily stopped.  They continue on as if nothing has been released to change the story.  It's still SatanHitlerTrump and America's Great Holocaust out of the blue.  Facts and truth mean little in this day and age.

In another setback for people who don't seem to care about immigrants, the United States, Americans or the Truth, however, the Washington Post has released a story suggesting why Trump is trying to finally fix this decades' long problem.  That's the Washington Post.  It turns out that, under Obama's policies, immigrant children were being handed over to slave traders.

Well, they're called human traffickers because we call modern slavery human trafficking.  It's slavery.  Calling it slavery reminds us that human slavery was only out of the picture for a few decades in the last half of the 20th century.  The last country to outlaw slavery did so in the 1950s I believe.  Before that, slavery had been practiced in some form or another - often in different forms in the same region - since the dawn of time.

Of course the sex industry is one of the main driving forces of the modern slave trade. Since the media is loathe to focus on the dark underbelly of issues it supports (like the modern sex and drugs culture), the modern slave trade and the sex industry's part in it get about as much coverage as the occasional hot air balloon race.

Beyond the Slave Traders who we'll call Human Traffickers, the children were also neglected as those entrusted to care for them engaged in systemic abuse.  On the whole, it was a disaster.  As the immigration issue has been for some decades.

Like gun violence and overall violence in America, if you only care about that which is usable for political gain, accusing appeals to the wider issue of being a defense for Trump  or hating immigrants, then you're actually the main problem.  Nor are you pro-life in any sense of the term.   Because following the latest hysterics that only erupted under Trump instead of Obama because it's politically expedient, suggests you care far more about scoring political points than helping the least of these, either in America or outside of its borders.

And that, children, is not what Jesus would have us do.

Catholic apologist joins in mocking Trump staffers for not being able to get laid

Yep, you read that right:

I'll say no more, except to point out that if a Christian minister joins forces with someone mocking another for not engaging in sexual immorality, it might be time to consider the Church's reputation and witness to the world.

Catholics, save yourselves from those who corrupt it for whatever reasons.  Those reasons will never be worth it.

The insanity of the modern Left

The modern Left in one easy image

Like Oliver Crangle, it sees racism behind every tree; sexism under every rock; Islamophobia on every street corner; homophobia tunneling under every house.  No stereotypical fundamentalist caricature from the 1970s looked more ridiculous and idiotic than the modern Left.

The only difference is that we had the entertainment industry, arts and literature, education, journalism and intellects to shoot holes in such stupidity and call it out for the puritanical witch hunt mentality that it was.  Today?  Those same institutions are in complete lockstep with such thought police. As a result, no extreme take on McCarthyism could ever outdo the abject madness and fanatical lynch mob mentality that drives the modern Left.

So apparently the phrase 'cotton picking' as in, 'you're out of your cotton picking mind' is racist.  I had no idea.  Though it doesn't surprise me.  I've heard it said that the word radical is racist, rebel is racist, thug is racist, and saying a woman should smile is sexist.  I've heard suggesting sex is procreative or that men are actually male and females exist are somehow homophobic or cisphobia.  I do believe we're at the point that there are now 9,312,837,283 words and phrases that could possibly offend any one of over 7 billion human beings in at least 23,843 ways, and are therefore punishable for being used.  The sign of an enlightened and tolerant world by anyone's stretch.

How does one deal with a society willing to embrace such stupidity?  Note, the link isn't some blog, some wacked out loon on the fringes of the Internet.  This is a valid Leftist publication.  That would be like National Review running a series on the Moon Landing conspiracy.

But that's what's happened.  What was ever only the far extreme of the radical, fundamentalist right back in the day is now mainstream on the Left.  What was once the level of lunacy confined only to the fringe of conservatism is endorsed and advocated by the Left's primary outlets in the media, entertainment and even educational fields.

If you ever wondered how the best and brightest in societies of yore were able to fall behind the most wretched, evil and stupid ideologies known to man, you need only look at the latest news pages.  Who knows?  In doing so, you might begin to see why we spend so much time focused on the sins of our ancestors.  It keeps our eyes off of looking at the sins and idiocy of our present era.

Oh, and one more thing.  This tactic of the Left, to divide us by encouraging us to see the worst and hear the worst in others, is likely why we have the suicide, depression and violence (including, but not limited to, mass shootings) we're seeing.  After all, if you're trained to hear in everything said 'I hate you and want you dead, your entire worth is in this one issue, it alone defines you, and that means you are nonhuman and you and everyone like you should die', you have to admit, that's bound to have an impact.

First, the idea that my worth is this issue, and failure to worship me about this issue means I'm nothing and should die, has to be linked, at least in part, to the suicide and depression rates we've seen skyrocket.  Second, it stands to reason that 'this person said this, which is secret code for 'I love Hitler and you should be exterminated'', is bound to have side effects in a society. 

But I digress.  Our whole 'those who don't worship you want you dead because you deserve it' mantra is for another post.  This just came to me because, in all honesty, I know all of this is not idiocy. I mean it is idiocy.  But it's being promoted on purpose in order to foster hatred, violence and death for a greater purpose.  And doing so quite nicely I'll admit.

Dave Armstrong looks at the Immigration problem through a Catholic Christian lens

Not the lens of the political Left.  The Left's lens says that 1) we don't give a damn about our country's identity, 2) we sure don't care if poor Americans are suffering, and 3) laws are only valid when convenient, often based on ethnicity, national origin and religion.

Dave actually helps us remember that breaking laws is not an option.  In the most dire of circumstances, where immediate survival is in question, perhaps stealing bread or a vial of medicine unlawfully hoarded would be considered.  But wantonly and proudly defying the law, and then living a life based on lying and further breaking laws is not - repeat not - the teachings of the Church, or most historical Christian traditions.

We won't even get into the notion that we should only care about immigrants when convenient.  That's not just a violation of Christian ethics, it's a violation of the most basic ethics of common decency and goodness:

FOX News anchors are one up on the MSM

So according to Ralph Peters, a former FOX analyst, the FOX anchors know they are propaganda for Trump, and know they tell lies for Trump.  Good for them.  That puts them one up on the rest of the MSM anchors who apparently aren't quite so self-aware.

Of course this sort of 'reporting' is just gossip.  What are the FOX anchors to do? Deny it?  It's likely true.  They, like the rest of the MSM, have to be smart enough to know that their network filters news stories and spins the news and ignores the news based on a given set of agendas which likely include, but are hardly exclusive to, political and ideological platforms.

But the old 'I have it on authority because I talked to them  behind closed doors and they said so' never flew with me.  I remember some journalist said the same of Rush Limbaugh a few years ago.  According to him, he and Limbaugh were at dinner together. While there, Limbaugh unloaded over how it was all a fake, he didn't believe any of it, and he laughed at the morons and dolts who made him rich because of it.

Of course that's foolproof.  Limbaugh could deny it, but anyone who wants to believe it will, and they'll just say Limbaugh is covering his arse and continuing the act.  It's air tight gossip that leaves no way to overcome it.  In short, it's not really reporting.  It's just 'Come here, I just heard the juiciest...!'  Which, of course, is in many ways what the thing formerly known as American journalism has been reduced to.

Trump focuses on non-people

Non-people are those people who are useless or counterproductive for the Leftist narrative.  They are the women who think women should focus on their maternal roles in raising children.  They are black conservatives, Hispanics against illegal immigration, former gays who left their lifestyle behind them, liberals against abortion, Muslims who call out Islam, and those people whose suffering and death does't advance the Leftist narrative.  They are cops killed by blacks, whites killed by minorities, victims of Islamic terrorists, and Americans killed by illegal immigrants.

So Trump bothered to focus on the other half of the immigration problem.   That's the half that, when brought up, everyone insists is important but never seem to get around to discussing.  Even Christian leaders and the Catholic Bishops give little attention to those Americans hurt and killed by the immigration problem.  This plays off the postmodern notion that as long as [Other] Americans do the suffering and dying, it's a sacrifice I'm willing to make (since  we no longer have a notion of 'Our country' or any such rubbish).

How will the Left and the New Prolife Christians react to families suffering because of illegal immigration?  Some have already accused Trump of trying to make people afraid of immigrants.  This is opposed to the Left that makes the world scared of Americans. I used to say ISIS didn't need propaganda.  It could just turn on the US news or listen to a Democrat.  No Nazi or Communist propaganda poster was ever more brutal than they are.

Most news shows this morning mentioned it briefly, but then moved on. No stories about the families, no spotlights on this or that victim.  Media Tactic #4: Mention an inconvenient truth briefly, then move on.

The New Prolifers?  My guess is they will just ignore it, or they will do something like attack Trump for exploiting people or changing the discussion or something.  This will use that modern Leftist tactic that assumes the Left is obviously 100% right, so any deviation from its narratives is obviously wrong, evil, stupid or some such.  When inconvenient human suffering is raised?  Attack, ignore, deflect, but for heaven's sake don't focus unless it helps the Left.

US Bishops once more charge forth with white flags waving

So it turns out the once vaunted 'Fortnight of Freedom' will be reduced to 'Serving Other in God's Love.'  'Fortnight of Freedom' apparently has too much of a 'culture war' vibe about it. 

I've found that, as far as the Catholic Church is concerned, when not embracing the dictates of the Left, just talk about God and Love and Love and God and stuff.  Use 'Love' a lot.  Of course when walking with the Left, feel free to use the Left's harshest rhetoric and condemnations.   But if the point somehow runs afoul of modernity?  Just say 'Love' over and over.  It worked for the Beatles when they weren't singing about those seventeen year old girls.

BTW, by 'culture wars', we now usually mean siding with issues opposed to the Left.  I notice that those who say 'I'm done with the culture wars!' often have no problem parroting the Left's side of the culture wars.  They just don't call those 'culture wars.'  Like the word 'Religion' usually means wrong in the mouth of a liberal, so 'Culture Wars' now means wrong for the postmodern, non-conservative pundit.

Anyway, the Fortnight of Freedom was for the American Catholic Church perhaps the last gasp of resistance before capitulation became the norm.  A reaction to the Obama administration's naked assault on religious liberty, it was already a little past its time.  At our parish, the priest apologized for having to read the proclamation, explained the bishops were making him do it, breezily read it, and then almost ceremoniously tucked it away never to mention it again.  Some Catholics, along with Evangelicals and other conservatives, came to the protests.  But on the whole, the Church was starting to buckle and surrender.

Today the space between the Catholic Church and the post-Christian Left is growing exceedingly thin.  Increasingly it's difficult to find too many points of departure.  Oh there's still the whole Trinity thing and the nature of Christ and all and the Immaculate Conception as good as always, but the Left doesn't care about those silly things anyway.  Where the Faith hits the road of life, however, there is becoming little where one can distinguish between the Left and the Church. 

I do believe we are living at the cusp of the Great Apostasy of the Christian Era.

New Pro-Life Christians and NARAL: A Love Story

New Pro-Life means never having to confront abortion

Written by Herndon de la Rosa, and edited by Mark Shea.  You see, the New Prolife Christians (NPLCs) are, in fact, that religious wing of the emergent Left.  That is, they act as if they accept the Left's doctrine that the sanctity of life stops dead where its advantage for the Political Left ends, only with religious sounding spins.  By seamless garment, they increasingly mean what the Left means when it chastises someone like Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey: You're either 100% with us every day on every issue, or you're 110% deplorable, irremediable or otherwise.

The Political Left, of course, doesn't care about the sanctity of human life any more than any other man made political movement necessarily does. It likely cares less.  After all, where was NARAL's protests back when Obama was deporting immigrants?  Where was NARAL or the press when immigrants were being detained and separated from their families in 2014?  Where were the cries of Holocaust, Auschwitz, Hitler and Nazi then?

You'd never know it,  from the Left or the NPLCs

Unless I'm missing something, that would be almost nowhere. Those cries would be the same place as the Left's coverage of half as many people dying of AIDS in America every year as murdered by guns.  That would be the Left that drops like a hot potato an unarmed American brutalized or killed by police when it turns out the police officer in question was black.  That would be the Left that thinks nothing of the misery and suffering brought to Americans by immigrants due to the skin color and heritage of those Americans.

Yes, the Left has schooled Christians in the teachings of St. Saruman* well, whether that's the reason for their capitulation or not.  You shall care about life when we say so if you're going to join with the new power that is rising.  This is the Political Left that elevates to the source and summit of all secular sacraments abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide and all manner of sexual gratification in the era of 36 million dead from AIDS.  This is the Left increasingly proud of its demands that all civil rights be subjugated to obedience to the Left. This is the Left that renounces the Christian Faith, even announcing that Christians who believe salvation is through Jesus have no business sitting near the front of the political bus. This is the Left that turns a blind eye to the suffering under Islam of religious, and other, minorities unless it can be used for political leverage in America.

And this is the Left that the so-called New Prolife Christians almost universally support.  How do the NPLCs reconcile with the various heretical beliefs and sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance that are embraced, advocated and promoted by the Left?

First, they make those sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, like abortion, into nothing more than a matter of polite and respectful disagreement.  They then, in a manner similar to Pope Francis, elevate the various political platforms, narratives and policies of the Left to non-negotiables.  Global Warming, Open Borders, Post-National Global Government, Socialized Medicine, even acceptance of non-heterosexuality as a gift from God in all but name - these become the absolutes, the dogmas against which there is no argument.

What about issues associated with the modern Left, like sexual immorality, blaspheme, heresy, abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, state mandated termination of sickly children, embryonic stem cell research (yeah, remember that one)?   Those become the little points of departure with which we can lovingly and respectfully disagree.  If pressed, they are blamed on the Left's bogymen: Traditional white skinned American Christian men.  Abortion becomes the fault of vile Capitalist, rapists misogynists.  Euthanasia the unfortunate result of a Capitalist driven economy gone mad.  Suicide the sad consequence of mental and emotional problems born of an oppressive and wicked society.

And if those excuses don't do it, the NPLCs simply attack.  They attack the traditional believer and pro-lfie advocate through lies and insults, calumny and character assassination.  They embrace the modern progressive notion that we judge the hearts and minds, not the actual actions, of all who fail to conform.  Sure, the traditional Christian pro-lifer might look like they care, like they do the right thing, like they really value all life - but we've seen their wicked  hearts and know better!  Note that recurring theme in Mark's posts (though he is hardly alone).

Nope, the NPLCs are merely religious foot soldiers for the political Left.  Why, I don't know.  Maybe they just no longer believe anything that isn't filtered through a post-Christian world view.  Maybe they believe in the inevitability of progress, that we're just getting better all the time and the old ways are therefore necessarily wrong.  Or perhaps they have seen the writing on the wall, and are in no way prepared to become outcasts who are marginalized by a post-Christian society.  Their leaders realize that, to be blunt, if you want to be the next Billy Graham when living in the USSR, you have to wear a hammer and sickle.  And so they do.  Mark's entire piece is simply a long screed trying to square the round hole of having elevated political policy to sacred dogma and reduce sacred dogma and intrinsic evils to minor points of polite disagreement.

This is how it happens, BTW.  My sons, being homeschooled, learned that slavery wasn't something our evil and bigoted forefathers invented to slake their racist lust.  Rather, racism was the outgrowth that resulted from bringing slaves from Africa and eventually treating them differently than others in various forms of servitude.  As the slaves from Africa came in droves, those slave owners had to have an excuse, as humans always do.  That's where racism came from: a sinful rationalization for doing the wrong thing. FWIW, they also know that Europeans weren't the first to adopt racist justifications for African slavery, but that's for another post.

So those Christians today who want to serve Jesus and also want to be invited to all the best parties at the anti-Christian Kremlin must find excuses as well.  And those excuses are starting to sound a lot like those slave owners of old explaining why African slaves should be slaves for life; an excuse, a justification, a rationalization, but certainly not historical Christian teaching.  That so much of the NPLC's obedience to the Left depends on judging  the inner heart and soul of those who seem to do the right thing but don't conform to the political Left merely adds to the problem and should make it obvious that the NPLCs are on the wrong track.

It's worth noting that this sweet comment arrived on the blog, celebrating Mark's post:

Thank you.  This is a powerful and important testimony, and I say that as a former officer in the Texas chapter of NARAP and a monthly donor to Planned Parenthood.  There are people who think abortion is great – there are seven billion humans and many of them are terrible – but most of us think that abortion is like chemotherapy; a bad thing that is marginally better than a worse thing, and the worse thing in this instance is bearing a child that the women cannot care for or nurture. The Old PLM organized around a hatred for the changing role of women in society and tried to make themselves look good using pictures of newborns.  I don’t share their ultimate goal, but at least the New PLM women understand that abortion is a terribly complex problem that is poorly addressed by the criminal justice system.  I look forward to working with women like Destiny to make the world a more welcoming and nurturing place. 

And again, than you for your wisdom on this issue. 

In the olden days, most pro-life Christian blogs were not the place that former officers of organizations dedicated to providing abortions, and donors to the choice of abortion, came to sing praises and adoration of the blogger in question.  New Pro-Life indeed.

So how do you get abortion industry officers to sing your praises as a New Pro-Life Advocate?  To recap:

• Declare Sacred Dogma a matter of personal opinion that we can lovingly agree to disagree about.  Love Jesus, hate Jesus, piss on Jesus, it matters not.  What matters is: 
• Declare political narratives, premises, policies and platforms the Real Sacred Dogma that alone bringeth salvation and righteousness, and all who dare resist guilty of nothing less than mortal sin
• Emphasize verbal conformity to the political over and against actually doing the will of God (see the John Lennon principle for guidance)
• When confronted by the sins of the new progressive sacraments, you may do several things:

1. You may blame society or whatever bogeyman is in vogue 
2. You may deflect, focusing on some obscure stat and ignoring the stats that are inconvenient
3. You may simply cover up, ignore or downplay the sin altogether
4. You may attack those who point out the sin, falsely accusing them of secretly wanting to murder babies or Hitler as good as always; judging motives, heart and soul works well here 

• Finally, you let the political power dictate what is and isn't important, and when it is and isn't important.  If it says deporting immigrants is the next Holocaust (c. 2018), then so be it.  You must join in the outcry.  If, however, it chooses to downplay the deporting of immigrants (c. 2014), then you had best keep your mouth shut, too.  Remember, 100% obedience 110% of the time

And that, kiddies, is how you do it.  I'm beginning to think Rod Dreher is right. The time is coming when Christians will - and should - be an oppressed minority.  All of those jumping ship in order to align with the principalities and powers of this present darkness, for whatever reasons, will have to account for their allegiance in due time.

*' "And listen, Gandalf, my old friend and helper! " he said, coming near and speaking now in a softer voice. "I said we, for we it may be, if you will join with me. A new Power is rising. Against it the old allies and policies will not avail us at all. There is no hope left in Elves or dying Númenor. This then is one choice before you. before us. We may join with that Power. It would be wise, Gandalf. There is hope that way. Its victory is at hand; and there will be rich reward for those that aided it. As the Power grows, its proved friends will also grow; and the Wise, such as you and I, may with patience come at last to direct its courses, to control it. We can bide our time, we can keep our thoughts in our hearts, deploring maybe evils done by the way, but approving the high and ultimate purpose: Knowledge, Rule, Order; all the things that we have so far striven in vain to accomplish, hindered rather than helped by our weak or idle friends. There need not be, there would not be, any real change in our designs, only in our means."

The Lord of the Ring, The Fellowship of the Ring

Always remember, for every Christian martyr who was marched into German concentration camps, there were ten German Christians behind them with guns and swastikas on their armbands.   

Remember Time Magazine's devastating Obama Immigration Policy cover?

Nope?  Neither do I.  Maybe I just missed it.

Memo: It's increasingly likely that much of the political Left doesn't give a damn about immigrants, babies or otherwise.  They can rot for all it cares.  It sees them as convenient for the time being.  When no longer convenient, off to the old shoe pile.  The same goes for murder rates, crime rates, poor, suffering, AIDS, racism or anything.  It matters when it's beneficial for it to matter.  Otherwise, not so much.

A note for Christians worth remembering: the Christian view is that we must do the right thing for the right reason.  Doing the right thing for the wrong reason is ultimately no better than doing the wrong thing for the right reason.  We won't get into doing the wrong thing for the wrong reason.  Though we may need to explain that some day.

UPDATE: Ooops. It looks like the little girl crying was not really crying for the reasons the picture suggest.  That reminds me of the editorial cartoon following the Oklahoma City Bombing, where the sad photo of the fireman cradling a dead infant.  The editorial cartoon reproduced the photo perfectly, but added a thought bubble for the fireman that said "Damn Limbaugh."  The fireman, IIRC, was outraged at the thought that he would care about politics while holding a dead infant.  But such is the emergent Left.  Ethics and common decency stop dead when it involves advancing the political Left.

UPDATE II: Double Ooops Ooops. I'm starting to lose track of all the times Trump was said to have lied about the border situation when he didn't, photos that turn out to be fake, and statements that turn out to be false.  So it turns out the caged children photo, the one that helped jump start the "Trump Incarnates Auschwitz" backlash against the policies that he invented for the first time in history, is also a fraud.  It turns out the children were not caged by the Gestapo American ICE agents under orders of Hitler/Trump.  Instead, the pictures are from the kerfuffle around The Deportation That Cannot Be Mentioned (that is, the deporting and separating of Immigrants under Obama).  Yes, some liberals did complain.  But there is an eternal difference between "We really don't like what you're doing to immigrants Obama - we love you dude!", and "From now on Hitler is an angel compared to the True Spawn of Satanic Hell Trump and the American Holocaust!"  Again, consider that much of the outrage is likely fake, convenient, and only for advancing political power for the Left.  Any other explanation, and I'm afraid it just doesn't make sense compared to the emerging truth.

UPDATE III: OK, so it's getting crazy.  It's been brought to my attention that Mark Shea also posted on this as proof of Trump/Hitler.  It was pointed out to Mark that the picture was fake, that is technically a lie.  We all remember the Great Lila Rose disaster of 2011, when Mark, Dawn Eden, and a host of Catholic bloggers decided to make lying the premier issue of the day.  If we found that Planned Parenthood was selling body parts of unborn babies for profit, that was hardly more important than Christians encouraging lying.  That was the Law.  So one would expect Mark to be consistent, right?  Sorry, the only thing consistent about Mark Shea is that almost everything he once called good he now calls evil, and everything he called evil he now calls good (or at least defends or ignores).  So Mark made it clear that the truthfulness of the image is irrelevant next to the horrors of the border.  Unlike 2011 when he made it clear babies dismembered and sold for profit were bad, but nothing next to the horrors of lying.  Flee apologists who make it their profession to call good what they once called evil, and evil what they once called good.

Demonstrating political tribal partisanship and zealotry

So if your political opponents say 'Look, if you don't like what our president is doing, come up with a solution.  We need to make sure everyone is OK, and while that includes immigrants it also includes those back home.  But it is, and has been, a mess for some time.  Just as liberals said in the 80s and 90s, the countries they're from must also be accountable. In the meantime, we must fix this ages old problem before more people get hurt", and your response is to compare them to the lawyer being told the Parable of the Good Samaritan, then you're likely the partisan zealot. 

After all, the non-partisan response would be "While I disagree, and am appalled by what Trump (and Obama) have done about immigration, let's sit down and figure this out.  After all, it's the innocent, especially the children, who matter."  Instead it sounds like it's more important the political opponents be attacked than anything good happen for the immigrants, children or otherwise.

FWIW, my ears are now deaf to anyone who is calling this crisis the next Holocaust and comparing Trump to Hitler, ICE agents to Gestapo, and the border to Auschwitz, unless they have opened the doors of their homes and are letting any and all immigrants in their homes without question.  If they live too far away, I expect them in their cars and vans, driving to the borders, in order to invite immigrants back to their homes and allow them to stay without question. 

After all, we know the allies, including the United States, could have done more than raise an army and sacrifice hundreds of thousands of lives in order to defeat Nazi Germany.  We know they purposefully chose not to do things, not because those things wouldn't work, but because they secretly were glad the Nazis were killing Jews in death camps.  We know the Americans knew all about the death camps from day one.  How?  Because we said how evil the Nazis were but millions still died.  Obviously it had to be on purpose.  Racist America after all.

So given the rather high standards we hold the past to, and given the fact that this is now Hitler/Holocaust, I don't expect there to be a single excuse for why a critic of Trump doesn't have at least one immigrant family in their home.  For those who are housing immigrants?  Bravo.  Well done, Good Samaritan.  But for those who merely support others who do, or are merely involved with others who do the heavy lifting for immigrants, I say anathema.  Because of the standards we hold our own nation's past to, we must assume they really don't care about those immigrants at all, if they'd rather score political points than work together.  If they are raising the Holocaust Banner but aren't housing the immigrant, then it is they who are the Priest and the Levite. 

Normally I don't say 'Unless you have done everything, you have no right to an opinion.' We all have our situations in life.  But the rhetoric is so over the top, the willingness to condemn and judge so common, the refusal to allow for discussion, nuance or pity so standard, that it's high time to put their righteousness where their mouths are.

The Alt-Left's brownshirts target ICE workers

In another reminder that it's likely the Left doesn't give a damn about suffering families or children unless they can exploit them for power, the much beloved and adored Antifa has posted the faces and names of over a thousand ICE agents.  Whatever happens, happens:

“I’ve downloaded and made available the profiles of (almost) everyone on LinkedIn who works for ICE, 1,595 people in total. While I don’t have a precise idea of what should be done with this data set, I leave it here with the hope that researchers, journalists, and activists will find it useful,” Lavigne wrote in his original Medium post, according to a cache visible through Google search at the time of writing.

'Don't have a precise idea of what should be done with this data set.'  Uh huh. What could possibly go wrong?

Antifa is to any sane and moral person as bad as any alt-right hate group.  It has declared itself Grand Inquisitor for the Left, and given itself authority to hunt down, find, accuse and attack any deemed 'fascist', using whatever destructive and violent means necessary.  The press, entertainment industry, educational institutions and a fair number of Christian leaders, of course, approve this message.  They can taste the United Soviet States of America, and are beginning to corral into the fold all who would not be sent to the gulags.

Ever wonder how followers of Jesus could don armbands with swastikas and goosestep around bonfires of burning books as minorities were rounded up and sent to concentration camps?  I give you the 21st century followers of Jesus who appear quite ready to do the same.   I guess there's just something in some believers that says no matter how vile, evil, wrong or blasphemous the compromise, when those barbed wire fences go up, I'm sure as hell not going to be on the inside looking out.  Sounds harsh, I know.  But it's a thought I've had recently.

RIP Charles Krauthammer

Charles Krauthammer has died.  Donald McCleary has the details and a darn fine piece.  I didn't read much of Mr. Krauthammer, and seldom watch FOX News (despite what people say).  So I didn't know much of his content or his positions.  When I did see him, he struck me as an old timer type, someone who tried to use the power of his words to persuade, while remaining a gentleman and a polite one at that. 

That's not to say he never became passionate.  That's OK.  But a person who is mannered and kindly and polite becomes passionate and can get a little under the collar.  Peter Fonda (who has apologized in all fairness) demonstrates what you get when you forgo old time manners and common decency and become passionate. 

I pray God give him family and loved ones strength and peace.  God bless him for all of his talents and gifts.  And God give us more who can remind us we need not hate people who disagree with us, but can actually discuss in good will with a good heart.  RIP.

Good for Peter Fonda

Yesterday Mr. Fonda sent a gut churning tirade aimed at Donald Trump's wife and child.  In it, he hoped for her and Barron to be put into a cell for brutalized torture and rape as punishment for Donald Trump.  He also suggested that people should descend en masse upon ICE agents' homes, surround them and show them a thing or two.  I'm sure nothing could go wrong with thousands convinced we're on the verge of the next Holocaust surrounding the homes of those being called the new Gestapo.

Anyway, he came out and apologized.  It looks like a sincere one, too.  Not the 'he made me do it' or 'I had no choice because Trump' types.   He seems to regret the horrible things he said.  Good for him. More than that, I'll add that his apology also seems to include President Trump.  If he meant he was also apologizing to the president, then dare I say Mr. Fonda displayed a sorely lacking bit of class, as well as good old manners.

It's worth noting I didn't see an apology for the call to rally at ICE Agents' houses.  Then again, he wasn't saying he wanted bad things to happen to them.  It's just that if you don't think it's possible that they could be hurt because somehow you believe the media narrative that bad things only originate right of center, you could be guilty of anything that might happen by reason of ignorance.

Nonetheless, he did apologize for what was the most egregious part of his statement, and for that he deserves credit.

Now that we care about immigrants

It looks like President Trump has shifted gears. I have no idea what the details mean.  I know that there has been tremendous pressure on this in the last week or so, as it's been compared to Trump's Katrina, the Holocaust, Japanese Internment Camps, Slavery and Genocide.  Everyone has jumped on the bandwagon, and conservatives, non-liberals as well as those on the Left have declared it a grave evil that cries out to heaven for vengeance and makes America into the new Nazi Germany.

Now, something happened yesterday morning that got me to thinking, as I am wont to do.  The local news interviewed the daughter of an undocumented immigrant (the mom's name being Edith Espinal) who has been fighting deportation.  I say undocumented because the daughter wore a tee shirt that proudly boasted of the status (Memo: must remind my boys that they are white, traditional, Christian men; if they break the law they cannot wear a tee shirt flaunting the fact).  Anyway, the daughter was interviewed because she had been separated from her father and separately detained when they came into the country (I guess to join her Mom - I don't know the details).  Apparently her father even came into the country legally.

Anyway, she painted a pretty bleak picture of what the kids were going through down near the border.  She said her heart broke, sort of like Rachel Maddow's.  She felt their pain and was going to work overtime to make sure immigration reform happened because of this and many other reasons.  After all, she had been there.  Oh, and it's worth noting that it was 2014 when her detainment went down.

And that's what caught me.  She had this happen to her, by her own words recorded on our local news station - in 2014.  The focus, of course, was on her sympathies and experiences being detained.  I don't know if anyone noticed the date.

I'm no great math person, but it seems like that's not when Trump was president.  The press has spent a week calling Trump a liar, but I'll be damned if I can figure out what he has lied about (with this at least).  The first impression was that he lied when he blamed Democrats, saying it was their bill, when it wasn't.  But apparently there was a law that the Dems passed.  Then it seemed to be he was lying when he said this had been done before.  But apparently,  unless the girl interviewed is a liar, it has been done before.  Then it seemed they were saying he lied about having to actually do such a thing.  After all, it's only a law, who says he has to enforce it?

I admit it's Trump, so I'm willing to accept that he has said something that is demonstrably false.  The problem is, this is reported by the press that long ago taught me to believe it can be just as willing to stretch, twist and manipulate the truth, sometimes to the point of saying false things, as Trump ever was.  So I'm listening to one agency I don't trust insist I must doubt a president I seldom believe.  Such is America, c. 2018.

But back to the girl.  So obviously this has been happening for some time.  According to a CBS report, the number of children separated from their parents is skyrocketing, though it admitted this has happened before now.  And yet, I never heard a thing.  Didn't know it had happened.  I heard a few people fuss about Obama deporting immigrants back in the day, but no real comparisons to Auschwitz or calls to ban CNN for not calling him out.

You know, it almost seems like this outrage, this comparison to the pits of Hell, Himmler, the Holocaust, the Killing Fields, the Gulags, and any other horror as commentators, pundits, news anchors and delivery truck drivers all break down in tears over the unprecedented suffering of this is, well, fake. Just thespians playing their parts.

I mean, the young girl interviewed has been interviewed multiple times.  She was quite the local news celebrity last year and earlier this year when it sounded like her mom might be deported.  Her whole family, and the church that granted sanctuary, were quite the celebrities. And yet I heard nothing about her plight four years ago. Just like I heard almost nothing about the plight of many immigrants four years ago.  Or two years ago.  Or a year and a half ago.

But all of a sudden, it's nothing other than the Great War of Satan.  It's the death camps all over again.  We can barely mention it without our eyes discharging gallons of lachrymal fluids.  Why now? Why all of a sudden?  I mean, immigrants have had a bad way of it for some time.  They die during the journey.  Their children are harmed, raped and abused.  They starve and perish.  They've been separated and detained and deported before now.  Sometimes the press covered it over the last eight years.  Almost never do I remember a news anchor breaking down in tears.  I don't remember Democrats storming the White House and asking Obama about his family.

I'm sorry, but as I consider the thousands dead from AIDS every year that are never mentioned; when I consider the fact that the biggest killer of black Americans is black Americans, but you'd never know it since it's never mentioned; when I think of all the murder victims that aren't killed by guns, or those cases where gun owners prevent murderous rampages and yet are seldom covered; and when I consider the fact that immigration has been a problem for decades, immigrants have suffered for decades, and we've been deporting and detaining them for years without nary a news anchor having an emotional breakdown, I can't help but think it's all just a big act.

I get creeped out thinking that the Left doesn't give a rip about anyone, poor, minority or otherwise, unless their suffering is able to benefit the Left.  I know that sounds harsh, and I hope I'm wrong.  But sometimes you have to settle for the simplest explanation.  Trying to explain all of this in other terms just doesn't seem to cover all the points.  It certainly would explain why, in the midst of the tears over the suffering of women and children, nobody seems to care about a well known celebrity calling for women and children to be beaten and tortured.  Then it all makes sense.

If everyone cared about Americans who have been hurt by unlawful immigration

How liberals see anything done by non-liberals in America today

As much as we care about the sad spectacle of children being removed from their parents, we probably wouldn't have come to the point where children are being removed from their parents.  The problem would have been fixed long ago.  I thought of that as I was reminded of this old article from January in the National Review.  It's taking a look at the crime stats regarding immigration along the southern border of the US.

Now I'm not going to get into a slug fest over stats.  You know the old saying about statistics and liars.  But the fact is, some Americans died at the hands of immigrants who were here illegally.  That's a fact.  We won't talk about the strain that caring for illegal immigrants put on the monies used for America's least of these, as Democrats said back in the 90s.  Nor will we talk about the bizarre unspoken idea that laws only apply based upon your national origin and skin color.  We won't get into the idea that immigrants might actually take jobs from Americans who are most desperate for the jobs the immigrants have taken, or those DACA recipients who have wowed the critics by living their entire lives outside the law while making it through Ivy League universities and landing corporate level jobs in Silicon Valley, all while home grown Americans can barely digress from a traffic law without having their careers sideswiped.

Nope.  We're just taking Americans killed by immigrants.  And you know what happened when this was brought up over the last decade or so?  Not a damn thing. Sometimes you were mocked or laughed at.  Sometimes a bizarre stat about White Americans killing more people than Muslim Americans would be thrown at you (which is a bit like saying Californians shockingly kill more people than Rhode Islanders).  It was almost always explained away, laughed away, dismissed, mocked or just ignored.  After all, they're only Americans.  Over the last couple decades, they increasingly came last.

Which is one of the greatest evils of our age, this postmodern ethic whereby as long as [other] Americans die, it's the sacrifice I'm willing to make.  Add to that the modern racism, where you can always tell a racist who probably got what's coming to him by the color of his skin (and nationality), and you had a very robust disregard for those who died, perhaps by the hundreds, at the hands of illegal immigrants.

Note that the article is just talking about one part of the crime problem.  I know people will say you'll never stop all illegal immigration, so such tragedies are inevitable.  Just remember that the next time Gun Control activists insist that their solutions should be tried, even if they would do almost nothing, since saving even one life is worth everything.  Same here.  But the fact is that the conversation never even came to that.  You just couldn't get anyone to care.  Those who did care were mostly people along the border, who often were portrayed by the press as bigots and racists by default, if they were covered at all.

Of course now we all care.  Now we're in the throes of the new Holocaust.  Literally.  This is being compared to the Gestapo, to the Nazi SS, to Concentration camps and even to Auschwitz.  Trump is Hitler.  All who defend it are Hitler.  They are all wrong.  The Bible is clearly against it.  It's an affront to God.

And in almost every case, the ones screaming Hitler! the loudest today are the ones who stood aside and let the crickets do the talking when the suffering and even death of innocent Americans and their  children was appealed to for all those years.  Somehow I think the point of the Gospel isn't that people only matter when their suffering helps advance a political agenda.  Somehow I think the point is that people matter, and when they are suffering, we should do something to make sure they are helped without hurting other innocent people.  If we do that, maybe others won't suffer down the road, even if their suffering does make for advantageous political exploitation.

BTW, to understand Trump, one need only think on this issue.  Since the end of the Cold War, the Left was pushing us to a post-nation world; a one world global government.  Everything was going global. If Americans were hurt?  Eh.  If you cared about America (or England, Italy, Poland, or any other nation)? Eh.  Get over it.  Increasingly, anyone came before an American.  A stranger before my cousin, my cousin before my brother, and everyone before [other] Americans.  The press was fine with it, the Democrats thrived on it, popular culture embraced it, and many religious leaders were hip to the groove (after all, Jesus didn't come to establish America).   But Trump has thrown that on its head and said 'Nope, in fact my main concern is Americans.'  Perhaps he does it to a fault.  Maybe he goes overboard.  But he is caring for tens of millions of Americans who, up until 2016, were simply not that big of a deal for a growing number of leaders who used to care, at least when it was convenient.

White liberals as a race apart

I'm uncomfortable with the thought of these White Germans

If you think about it, white liberals today talk about Whites in general the same way Whites in general once talked about Blacks, Jews, Middle Easterners, Indians, Native Americans, Polynesians, and a host of dark and brown skinned swarthy types from around the 18th century through the 20th.

Why?  How do white liberals talk about Whites as if, by their very skin color, you can tell they are racist, stupid, bigots, sexists, evil, bad, selfish, xenophobic, and a host of negative qualifiers?  How do they do it and yet you get the impression they never mean themselves?  I don't know.  I know one thing though.  They do it as if to say it's not them they mean when they talk of 'Whites' derogatorily.  Or at least they mean somehow they've been cleansed of the sin of Whiteness that so mercilessly infects all others of the same skin color, whether those whites believe in Jesus or not.  It's as if something other than Just Jesus is needed to cleanse the sin of 'Whiteness.'

In the Catholic world of apologetics, nobody does it better than Mark Shea, who has perfected the use of the term "White" in a way that would make Goebbels green with envy, if only it could be switched back to 'Jew'.

A sampling from the last five days at CAEI.  Note how the description of 'White' isn't really needed (since non-whites also hold some of these views), but is continually added as a negative modifier.  

But in fairness he's hardly alone.  From 1994, when the US Media blamed the Democrat's midterm defeat on the now infamous Angry White Male, we knew we had turned a corner.  With no evidence other than skin color (and gender), the reasons for their voting were declared and guilt was proclaimed.  Since the 1960s, the Democratic Party ditched its anti-Black positions and replaced them with anti-WASP positions.  By the 90s, clearly using 'White' where once Jew or Black would have worked was the new socially acceptable bigotry.

Take this from a year or so ago.   Kipling was more inclusive in his appraisal of the white man's burden.  If you were to scratch out 'White' and replace it with 'Arab' or 'Black', it would be nothing less than what I've read in a thousand pieces from the 19th century Europe or American literature.  On one hand it tries to be understanding, even compassionate.  On the other it's like an article observing a class of backward tribesmen in the Amazon only recently discovered.

Again, what throws everyone off is that this new 'anti-Whiteness' is primarily done by Whites.  White liberals, white leftists and increasingly white post-Conservatives.  When Russel Moore said that Southern Christians were, in many cases, just racists worshiping Jim Crow rather than Jesus, I get the strong impression he meant "Other" Christians.  Not him.  And that's the point with this new racism.  I really believe that for white liberals and the growing number of post-conservative whites, they see 'White' as some other race, a separate demographic.  Sort of a genetic mutation on the bottom end of the ethnic chain, if that.

Perhaps they see it like the characters of Danny DeVito and Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie Twins.  The liberal white people are Schwarzenegger's character.  They are the ones who embody all that is best in their gene pool.  They are the smart, spiritual, caring, loving, open, tolerant, penitent, and intellectual ones.  But 'Whites', on the other hand, are DeVito - the genetic refuse pile.  They have everything that is bad.  Sure, they're technically the same group, the same ethnicity, the same heritage.  But the liberals are the good ones embodying all that is best in humanity, unlike those 'Whites', by which they really mean 'them over there.'

I could be wrong, but I think I'm onto something.  There's just no way white Americans can speak of Whites in a way that is more reminiscent of Nazis trashing Jews in the 30s and think they mean themselves.  Perhaps they do.  Maybe it's their form of confession.  Maybe it's projecting on everyone else what they, themselves, really are.  But I don't think so.  At best it's some perverse mockery of confession gone horribly wrong.  Sort of cleansing oneself by insisting everyone else in the demographic is more of a sinner than you are.  At worst, it's literally throwing their own demographic under the bus in the hopes that if the barbed wire fences ever go up, they'll have laid a claim on property outside the fences looking in.

Whatever the reason,  I think they have divided their own demographic into two groups, and firmly believe that they are the ones who have stars on their bellies.  It's those other starless ones who are the 'Whites' they are talking about.  And by White, they increasingly mean what was once meant by Black, Jew, Mexican, Arab and so on, but certainly not them.

Same attitude, different demographic

A quick question about CBS and Tesla

Are they married?  Having an affair?  Worship each other as gods? I ask this because, as a general rule, CBS This Morning is the show we watch while getting ready in the morning.  For a couple months now, I don't think we've gone more than a couple days at a time without CBS having something about Tesla or Tesla's CEO Elon Musk.  Not just stories, but full blown specials focused on him and his company.  I mean, even in stories where I didn't think it would go there, they manage to somehow talk about Tesla or Mr. Musk, and almost always in the most positive manner.  Even when the story is negative, like Tesla laying off thousands of workers, they still find ways to praise and adore Tesla and Musk.  Am I missing something?

My problems with the #MeToo Movement

Acceptable wisdom in the #MeToo Era

So there's been a lot of hoopla about the #MeToo movement, with almost everyone - Christians included - equating it to the birth of the Christian Faith.  There is almost no critiques that I've seen.  I don't know if it's because men are scared, women don't dare disagree because of the wrongs the #MeToo Movement appears to be righting.  I don't know. But here are a few thoughts of mine on the subject, especially in light of my post about Beth Moore.

1. What about women?  It's as if they are immaculately conceived, devoid of sin, and have contributed not an iota to the whole sexed up, exploit, assault and harass culture.  I've actually heard people ask why a woman would ever lie about being sexually mishandled, as if it's abhorrent to think a woman has ever lied.  Let me be honest, I've worked with women who openly talked about men the way men do when they're called sexist and threatening.  I've seen women behave every bit as bad as men regarding men.  I know there are cases where women have used their positions of power to force men into compromises.  Let's not overlook women who blissfully kept tales of assault and rape secret, not because they were cowering in the corner, but because they wanted to keep climbing the ladder of wealth and power without hurting the relationships with others on that same ladder.  And finally, let's not ignore women who have exploited the sex culture in order to flaunt themselves, entice men, and use all the worst of the sex culture for their advantage.  At some point we must address these, or the entire #MeToo becomes a farce, rather than a principled movement.

2. It's not defined.  I understand what rape is.  Sexual assault seems pretty straight forward.  But beyond that, it's everyone for themselves. I've read multiple pieces by women explaining what does and doesn't constitute harassment or vile, misogynistic behavior.  Know what?  They're nowhere close to agreeing.  Before we rush and start declaring men inherently misogynistic and therefore guilty (in the way we've more or less said that you can always tell a guilty racist by the color of his skin), we need some standards.  At least in the past, witch hunters had the decency to define just what constitutes a witch.

3. It accepts, almost with ease, the old feminist notion that all of history was some horrible patriarchal world of chauvinistic male pigs oppressing and terrorizing women.  It assumes that all of how men and women lived and interacted was an artificially imposed nightmare for women created by this broad, male dominated conspiracy.  It suggests that any differences at all between the roles of women and men are anathema, and purely the result of the evils that men do.  Even among women who are ostensibly conservative, traditional and Christian, it suddenly turns out the first 2000 years of the Faith were pretty detestable because of men, Scriptural models included.

That's what feminists have said for decades and, up to within the last year, it was what anyone but radical Leftists and feminists rejected. Why is it now, almost overnight, the only acceptable way to read history?

4.  Inconsistency.  Are women the weaker sex or not?  Are they the fairer sex or not?  Is it safe to say women and men are inherently different, and clearly men are the stronger, more physically capable by nature, or not?  After all, the reason why we focus exclusively on women as victims is predicated on the idea that, when all things are equal, women stand helpless before men. Obviously women are at the disadvantage; obviously it's men who are the only ones to be concerned about since they alone can do harm.  And yet, turn on a dime and say women are the weaker sex, and you'll still be called a sexist.  How dare you generalize about women being weaker than men!  Well, which is it?  Dave Rule #2:  Never trust revolutions that rely on rejecting and accepting the same proposition in the same sentence.

Nope.  I think the whole #MeToo movement is, at its best, righting the horrible wrongs that were done to women in the 90s.  The 90s were a feast or famine time for women.  Women began speaking out against sexual harassment and assault in the 70s and 80s.  During that time, they were able to roll back notions of mercy and forgiveness for men guilty of sexual harassment, even as our society was all about pity and rehab for almost every other crime.  It peaked with the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas scandal, even though it was impossible for some (including women) to ignore the feeling that the whole thing seemed somewhat political.

Of course once Bill Clinton was elected, all bets were off.  Suddenly we never heard of women being sexually assaulted or raped.  Women who accused Clinton were called liars, whores and trailer park trash.  They were attacked by prominent liberal voices.  They were mocked in popular culture.  Hillary Clinton stood by and watched as, one after another, the women accusing her husband were verbally gang raped.  For years after, the whole 'sexual harassment/assault' went back underground.

You get bonus points if you've noticed that a large number of cases where prominent men have been accused of assault/harassment hail from around the late 90s/early 00s (see the Clinton Years above).  At its best, the #MeToo movement is righting that horribly unjust wrong.  At it's best, it should be a call for massive repentance for all who have taken abusive treatment of women and turned a blind eye, whether for politically expedient reasons or whatever.

Nonetheless, like most things in our technology charged, split second, media saturated era, it has almost immediately poured over into extremism, fanaticism and zealotry.  Men are assumed guilty by accusation.  During the Roy Moore era, we actually had serious discussions in which we were informed that notions of justice, presumption of innocence, due process and even the need for evidence only exist in our courtrooms - for now.  Outside of those rooms, your arse belongs to whichever demographic happens to matter. I literally watched as we were told that it was time to get over this whole 'we need evidence before destroying a person's life' fetish.  Hello, I think we have Salem on the phone.

That is my problem.   In barely a year, traditional, conservative, non-feminist Christians have all but accepted a model of understanding relations between the sexes that, only a year or so ago, they would have dismissed as radical feminism 101.  In addition, we have no ground rules at all.  Beyond rape and assault, there is no clear set of standards as to what does and doesn't constitute sexist or inappropriate behavior, yet we're on a McCarthy-like crusade, with women just wandering around saying 'he did it, He Did It, HE DID IT!', and taken at face value for their efforts.  And to reiterate, I'm seeing absolutely no accountability for women.  It's as if they never existed except to be victims.  It's as if no woman ever did anything wrong, ever exploited the very culture they now condemn, ever lied, or ever played along for their own selfish goals.  It's as if the Blessed Mother has to stand in line since apparently all women are devoid of sin.

Those problems alone would be enough to raise warning flags.  That so many - women and men - are just collapsing and accepting this, or grabbing the flag and running with it, even if they would have scoffed at such things barely a year ago, suggests something went horribly wrong.  Personally, I don't think most men will take it much longer.  And I fear when it finally stops; when men say enough, it will be like a bungee chord backlash, with many just concerns women have being steamrolled by the repercussions.  And that could be worse than the worst of the problems that legitimately need fixed.