Thursday, November 9, 2017
What we watch in November
November and Thanksgiving have never generated as much cultural trapping as the two flanking holidays. Nonetheless, we manage to scrape together a few films and specials for seasonal watching. There are others than those mentioned, but at least they give an idea of what we look for during the month of Thanksgiving.
But why?
The tell all book by Donna Brazile is causing quite the buzz. The press is on it, and talking about it everywhere. In some cases, it appears Ms. Brazile has backtracked. In others, there appear to be no real challenges to what she says. Despite the fact that, given her own example of colluding with the Clintons as a member of the media, it would be easy to discredit her.
Of course the book is completely damning for the Clinton campaign, since it seems to validate just about everything everyone suspected: that Clinton ran a corrupt, underhanded, political machine styled campaign, making back room deals with anyone and everyone to thwart the process in her favor, with the DNC and most of the political left in on the joke.
More than that, some of the other criticisms that were dismissed as Right Wing wacko gossip, might turn out to have some truth behind them.
In other words. Whew. Thank goodness she lost. Trump might be Trump, an obnoxious, and at times vulgar, temperamental blowhard. But Clinton represented real, deep down in the bloodstream corruption and deception. The sort of lies and duplicity that define true Machiavellian politics at its worst.
But my question is, why? Why is the press, which obviously hoisted Clinton up during the campaign, and all but openly supported her and fought against Trump, turning on her now? When something like this happens, the press is more than happy to bury the story. If it's not what they want, they'll have a day of 'experts and pundits' coming out to trash the book, then they file it in the circular file of forgotten stories.
Why is the press all over this now? There has to be a reason. Just what that reason is can only be guessed.
Of course the book is completely damning for the Clinton campaign, since it seems to validate just about everything everyone suspected: that Clinton ran a corrupt, underhanded, political machine styled campaign, making back room deals with anyone and everyone to thwart the process in her favor, with the DNC and most of the political left in on the joke.
More than that, some of the other criticisms that were dismissed as Right Wing wacko gossip, might turn out to have some truth behind them.
In other words. Whew. Thank goodness she lost. Trump might be Trump, an obnoxious, and at times vulgar, temperamental blowhard. But Clinton represented real, deep down in the bloodstream corruption and deception. The sort of lies and duplicity that define true Machiavellian politics at its worst.
But my question is, why? Why is the press, which obviously hoisted Clinton up during the campaign, and all but openly supported her and fought against Trump, turning on her now? When something like this happens, the press is more than happy to bury the story. If it's not what they want, they'll have a day of 'experts and pundits' coming out to trash the book, then they file it in the circular file of forgotten stories.
Why is the press all over this now? There has to be a reason. Just what that reason is can only be guessed.
How the press celebrated October Revolution
One hundred years ago. It wasn't really dwelt upon, in fairness. Not like American slavery, or the Trail of Tears, or the Inquisition, or the Crusades (the bad, Christian part), or the Atomic Bombs, or the internment of Japanese citizens (just Japanese, nobody else), or Jim Crow, or segregation, or the persecution of Jews in Europe, or European and American colonialism. Those need no anniversaries. Not a week will go by without several of those being brought up in some outlet or another. Not a day goes by without at least one of them mentioned somewhere.
But the October Revolution? Not a whole lot was mentioned at all. The press did cover it, sort of. It was mentioned a couple times. Not much focus. Here are a few stories, from here and abroad, mostly looking at the good and the bad, the complexities, or just a nice slide show. Here, here, here, here and here.
Again, nothing big, nothing altogether bad. Not much worth dwelling on. Move along folks. Nothing to see.
Have I mentioned that the modern Left pines for another October Revolution? Perhaps the press just didn't want to let the cat out of the bag.
But the October Revolution? Not a whole lot was mentioned at all. The press did cover it, sort of. It was mentioned a couple times. Not much focus. Here are a few stories, from here and abroad, mostly looking at the good and the bad, the complexities, or just a nice slide show. Here, here, here, here and here.
Again, nothing big, nothing altogether bad. Not much worth dwelling on. Move along folks. Nothing to see.
Have I mentioned that the modern Left pines for another October Revolution? Perhaps the press just didn't want to let the cat out of the bag.
Because the Left has never totally rejected Communism
That's why. So a report found that one third of millennials believe George W. Bush killed more people than Stalin. As I said here, the Left has always cast a longing eye leftward toward that old Communist religion. There's something about Communism that tugs at the heart strings. Generally, even if they don't long for a good old Bolshevik revolution, they nonetheless attribute the worst of Communism to US meddling. We are the cause of all problems after all.
That millennials would be unaware of the true scope of Communism is hardly surprising. I've talked to under-30s before who are fully convinced that the Cold War involved brave Soviets fighting back the evil US Industrial War Machine.
Likewise, what is the casualty count up to now? Did our Iraq invasions kill hundreds of millions? Or is it still only in the tens of millions? I can never keep track. I know we're up to around a billion American Indians killed by genocidal Europeans coming over to destroy the American environment. That doesn't count the hundreds of millions of Africans killed by slave owners who, apparently, thought nothing of wiping out their investments for the sheer delight of spending money just to wipe out their investments.
It's funny. Going through college, one of the things skeptics always dismissed about the historicity of the biblical narrative was the figures and numbers. You know, millions here, tens of thousands there. Clear and obvious exaggeration on the authors' parts. The ancient near east had nowhere near enough people to account for such stats.
And yet when I see the way inflated figures are thrown around at US history, mixed with the fact that the left downplays, if not outright ignores, the Communist track record, it makes total sense that millennials would be so unaware. We're we reached the nadir of historical studies. Don't blame the students of such a time for being so ignorant.
Oh, and saying Communism is dangerous because Donald Trump and others who are not liberal are the real Bolsheviks, only muddies the waters of understanding. So again, cut the young'uns some slack.
That millennials would be unaware of the true scope of Communism is hardly surprising. I've talked to under-30s before who are fully convinced that the Cold War involved brave Soviets fighting back the evil US Industrial War Machine.
Likewise, what is the casualty count up to now? Did our Iraq invasions kill hundreds of millions? Or is it still only in the tens of millions? I can never keep track. I know we're up to around a billion American Indians killed by genocidal Europeans coming over to destroy the American environment. That doesn't count the hundreds of millions of Africans killed by slave owners who, apparently, thought nothing of wiping out their investments for the sheer delight of spending money just to wipe out their investments.
It's funny. Going through college, one of the things skeptics always dismissed about the historicity of the biblical narrative was the figures and numbers. You know, millions here, tens of thousands there. Clear and obvious exaggeration on the authors' parts. The ancient near east had nowhere near enough people to account for such stats.
And yet when I see the way inflated figures are thrown around at US history, mixed with the fact that the left downplays, if not outright ignores, the Communist track record, it makes total sense that millennials would be so unaware. We're we reached the nadir of historical studies. Don't blame the students of such a time for being so ignorant.
Oh, and saying Communism is dangerous because Donald Trump and others who are not liberal are the real Bolsheviks, only muddies the waters of understanding. So again, cut the young'uns some slack.
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
It isn't that I'm a big fan of President Trump
I'm not. And like most people, I assumed that Hillary would win.
But the smugness, arrogance, loathing and contempt for everything I hold dear by those who so proudly knew they had the election in the bag, is worth a few years of Trump. As long as he doesn't do something stupid like nuke the world like Reagan did.
Just because it's worth the watch:
But the smugness, arrogance, loathing and contempt for everything I hold dear by those who so proudly knew they had the election in the bag, is worth a few years of Trump. As long as he doesn't do something stupid like nuke the world like Reagan did.
Just because it's worth the watch:
Gun control advocates as crooked salesmen
Lying, ignoring evidence, cherry picking stats, ignoring factors behind studies, sleight of hand, purposeful misleading - all of these things seem to define much of the movement behind gun control. So I didn't realize that the two heroes (whose names escape me since I've not heard much of a deal made about them by the MSM), apparently used that villainous AR-47 to stop the shooter.
At least admit when reality doesn't fit the narrative and agenda. This might not change a thing in the debate. But admit it. Focus on it. Point out all of the ways in which this doesn't fit, but you're courageous and honest enough to address it.
Stop acting like a used car salesman trying to assure me that the oil puddle under the car should be there. That's why I hesitate about Climate Warming, that's why I hesitate about most things.
At least admit when reality doesn't fit the narrative and agenda. This might not change a thing in the debate. But admit it. Focus on it. Point out all of the ways in which this doesn't fit, but you're courageous and honest enough to address it.
Stop acting like a used car salesman trying to assure me that the oil puddle under the car should be there. That's why I hesitate about Climate Warming, that's why I hesitate about most things.
I almost fell off the wagon
I've seen, through other blogs and Facebook pages, several rants from Mark Shea exploiting the Texas shootings to advance his politics. May God have mercy on him. He continues to make his blog a partisan leftist site that spreads lies, calumny, false accusations and judgmentalism to justify its hatred of American Christian conservatives, and all things valued by those who cling to traditional values. Because of the sheer madness and slander, falsehood and obvious disdain for religion sans liberal politics, I almost began going back to his blog to keep up with the latest in order to warn others.
Then I realized Mark's site is not just bad for the mind, it's become bad for the soul. So rather than become tainted, I thought I would post this, a little refresher on why I love movies:
After all, a century of watching Hollywood productions has to be more spiritually healthy than what comes from Mark at this point.
BTW, I consider it a point of pride that, while being well read, my boys recognize most of the films in the sequence. Heck, they've seen the majority of them.
Then I realized Mark's site is not just bad for the mind, it's become bad for the soul. So rather than become tainted, I thought I would post this, a little refresher on why I love movies:
After all, a century of watching Hollywood productions has to be more spiritually healthy than what comes from Mark at this point.
BTW, I consider it a point of pride that, while being well read, my boys recognize most of the films in the sequence. Heck, they've seen the majority of them.
Honesty about election results
Long and short, yes, when a Democrat wins against a Republican endorsed by a sitting president, it does mean something. Not the world, but it means something. What does it means?
It means the president's endorsement was not good enough to push the candidate over the line. It means that people are not so enamored with the president that anything and everything he gives a stamp of approval to is enough to win.
So yes, do Democrats winning mean that Trump might not be all that he wants to be, or that voters are saying they want something else? Sure. Just like those Republicans who won earlier on meant something, too.
But on the whole, truth is, sitting presidents often see losses in Congress or other party races. Americans are a fickle lot. We don't like monopolies in Washington. As they said time and again during the Obama years, Americans often swing a bit against the sitting administration. It's what we do. Especially in recent decades.
That doesn't mean don't worry. If you end up posting constant losses for your party, or lose in one catastrophic election night (think the 1994 midterms), that means something. In those cases, Americans are sending a clear message.
A bigger test for Trump will come next year. But it's fair to say that the wins by Democrats yesterday show that clearly, Trump's America isn't enough to secure victory after victory. It should send warning shots to the Republicans, lest they think there will be no consequences for their own actions next year, especially because it is true, and Americans often vote more critically against the sitting president's party.
It will not, however, mean everything the press will attempt to make it mean in the upcoming days. We will learn Trump is in trouble, things are dire, it's all over, he might as well give up, 2018 is without hope for Republicans. Only if, by the end of his presidency, he has gradually lost one election after another and seen his party suffer defeat on a regular basis can we say his influence was a net negative as president. And then, heck, like Obama, we could argue that he was still the best of the best, and all was beautiful and right with the world in any event.
It means the president's endorsement was not good enough to push the candidate over the line. It means that people are not so enamored with the president that anything and everything he gives a stamp of approval to is enough to win.
So yes, do Democrats winning mean that Trump might not be all that he wants to be, or that voters are saying they want something else? Sure. Just like those Republicans who won earlier on meant something, too.
But on the whole, truth is, sitting presidents often see losses in Congress or other party races. Americans are a fickle lot. We don't like monopolies in Washington. As they said time and again during the Obama years, Americans often swing a bit against the sitting administration. It's what we do. Especially in recent decades.
That doesn't mean don't worry. If you end up posting constant losses for your party, or lose in one catastrophic election night (think the 1994 midterms), that means something. In those cases, Americans are sending a clear message.
A bigger test for Trump will come next year. But it's fair to say that the wins by Democrats yesterday show that clearly, Trump's America isn't enough to secure victory after victory. It should send warning shots to the Republicans, lest they think there will be no consequences for their own actions next year, especially because it is true, and Americans often vote more critically against the sitting president's party.
It will not, however, mean everything the press will attempt to make it mean in the upcoming days. We will learn Trump is in trouble, things are dire, it's all over, he might as well give up, 2018 is without hope for Republicans. Only if, by the end of his presidency, he has gradually lost one election after another and seen his party suffer defeat on a regular basis can we say his influence was a net negative as president. And then, heck, like Obama, we could argue that he was still the best of the best, and all was beautiful and right with the world in any event.
Did Democrats cause Texas shooting?
Actually, it would be easy to say 'Democrats caused Texas Shooting', followed by spewing contempt and loathing on Democrats as the party that wants people dead or shootings or whatever.
Fact is, pushing through legislation is a difficult thing. Consider the following academic treatment of the process:
Yep, we all know it. It remains to be seen if this would have stopped the shooting. And even so, was this something even on the radar of the Democrats, could Cruz have taken a different path, or what other factors are there worth considering? All questions worth asking.
No, I can't help but think one of our biggest problems is that we have made politics our God, and we all are willing to engage in jihad for our new Almighty. We watched the following special about Jimmy Stewart last week:
It's long, but worth the watch. If for no other reason than Stewart is one of the truly heroic American celebrities in the last century, and a genuinely good man. While we were watching it, my boys noticed that many of those singing his praises (including host Carson), were actually Democrats. Maybe not liberal Democrats in the modern sense, but clearly liberal and clearly Democrat. Stewart, on the other hand, was famously conservative and an open supporter of Reagan and the GOP.
And yet - they noticed - everyone seemed to love the guy. This was in stark contrast to the death of Charlton Heston, which was met with half baked memorials from so many on the Left, if they mentioned him at all. A few civil rights leaders did give him high fives for being one of the biggest A-List celebrities to support the Civil Rights Movement back in the day, but stopped short of fully celebrating his legacy due to his politics.
My boys asked what happened. Easy. Politics is now God. It is everywhere and in everything. And more than that, it is a burning, zealous, fanatical religion. It teaches us to hate those who vote differently. To hate those who don't agree; to see their disagreement as an unspoken desire to kill and murder and maim and oppress us; to understand their differences as a hate based assault against us.
But the special in question, made in the late 1980s (while Reagan was still president), showed a different world. It's worth noting that, with the exception of Richard Dreyfuss and Sally Field, most interviewed were from an earlier era. And even those two were Boomers, still reflecting the attitudes that predated the postmodern notion of Politics as Jihad.
So for this, remembering the complexities of the real world and an age where adults still understood that fact, I'll not say Democrats caused the Texas shooting, or any such thing. I'll leave it as an example of the complexities of politics and social issues, and reference it later when someone tries to say 'GOP starves babies' because the GOP might actually think there is a better way to help feed babies than what the Democrats are proposing. After all, it's not like Jesus said that only one party was capable of doing His will.
Fact is, pushing through legislation is a difficult thing. Consider the following academic treatment of the process:
Yep, we all know it. It remains to be seen if this would have stopped the shooting. And even so, was this something even on the radar of the Democrats, could Cruz have taken a different path, or what other factors are there worth considering? All questions worth asking.
No, I can't help but think one of our biggest problems is that we have made politics our God, and we all are willing to engage in jihad for our new Almighty. We watched the following special about Jimmy Stewart last week:
It's long, but worth the watch. If for no other reason than Stewart is one of the truly heroic American celebrities in the last century, and a genuinely good man. While we were watching it, my boys noticed that many of those singing his praises (including host Carson), were actually Democrats. Maybe not liberal Democrats in the modern sense, but clearly liberal and clearly Democrat. Stewart, on the other hand, was famously conservative and an open supporter of Reagan and the GOP.
And yet - they noticed - everyone seemed to love the guy. This was in stark contrast to the death of Charlton Heston, which was met with half baked memorials from so many on the Left, if they mentioned him at all. A few civil rights leaders did give him high fives for being one of the biggest A-List celebrities to support the Civil Rights Movement back in the day, but stopped short of fully celebrating his legacy due to his politics.
My boys asked what happened. Easy. Politics is now God. It is everywhere and in everything. And more than that, it is a burning, zealous, fanatical religion. It teaches us to hate those who vote differently. To hate those who don't agree; to see their disagreement as an unspoken desire to kill and murder and maim and oppress us; to understand their differences as a hate based assault against us.
But the special in question, made in the late 1980s (while Reagan was still president), showed a different world. It's worth noting that, with the exception of Richard Dreyfuss and Sally Field, most interviewed were from an earlier era. And even those two were Boomers, still reflecting the attitudes that predated the postmodern notion of Politics as Jihad.
So for this, remembering the complexities of the real world and an age where adults still understood that fact, I'll not say Democrats caused the Texas shooting, or any such thing. I'll leave it as an example of the complexities of politics and social issues, and reference it later when someone tries to say 'GOP starves babies' because the GOP might actually think there is a better way to help feed babies than what the Democrats are proposing. After all, it's not like Jesus said that only one party was capable of doing His will.
Monday, November 6, 2017
Mark Shea and the Left's horses and chariots
Why I now avoid Mark's writings like the plague is touched upon here. Mark can't join with the secular left which simply disdains all appeals to dumb prayers and a non-existent God. So he appears to take a different approach. Prayers and God are fine as far as they go, but those who appeal to them without deferring to the efficacy of political liberalism only do so because their wretched hearts and souls really worship guns and pine for increased human slaughter. So it's the inner motives that are the problem, rather than appealing to some fairy tale God in deference to the State.
For me and my house, I'd prefer to stand with those appealing to prayer, God, personal responsibility, and a return to better morals and a nation of Faith, rather than hold hands with those willing to whip it out and piss all over the Almighty, and those who were murdered while worshiping Him.
For me and my house, I'd prefer to stand with those appealing to prayer, God, personal responsibility, and a return to better morals and a nation of Faith, rather than hold hands with those willing to whip it out and piss all over the Almighty, and those who were murdered while worshiping Him.
Sunday, November 5, 2017
God be with those killed and wounded in the Texas church shooting
I know nothing about this, except the basics that a church was attacked, a gunman killed multiple victims, the gunman apparently was killed, and others have been wounded. God embrace those whose lives were taken from them this Lord's day, and give peace and strength to those left behind, those wounded, and their loved ones. Be with the police, first responders, doctors, nurses, and all who were impacted by this horrible act of evil.
Friday, November 3, 2017
A spanner in the works
We know that Donald Trump personally worked with Russia in order to hack the election and change the votes so he could win. How else do we explain the greatest candidate in political history losing to someone like Trump?
And after almost a year of some of the most rigorous coverage and investigations, we've been able to prove that Hillary's campaign reached out to foreigners and paid them to dig up any dirt, true or false, on Donald Trump. We also know that a lower level aid in the Trump campaign did try to do the same, but higher level aids appeared to poopoo the idea. Pretty damning stuff.
Now, we've had the woman who once slipped Hillary Clinton questions before a primary debate admit that Hillary and the DNC were in cahoots to ensure Clinton's nomination over Bernie Sanders. Not that Ms. Brazile's word is gospel. After all, she was caught doing something pretty underhanded. This could be a case of trying to deflect back on Clinton in the hopes of making herself look good.
But most of us knew, from the screwed up super delegates, to the press's obvious support through its constant 'can Bernie survive another victory?' coverage, that the jig was up for Sanders and the Machine had ordained that Hillary go down in the history books as America's first woman president.
So I can see why I didn't notice a single evening news broadcast mentioning this story last night, outside of FOX. It's not surprising after all. It's barely news. The DNC and Clintons were in something underhanded together? That's dog bites man if I ever saw it. And it might just bring up ugly memories that remind us how much we suspected about the Clintons, the DNC, the media and the whole machine in the first place.
And after almost a year of some of the most rigorous coverage and investigations, we've been able to prove that Hillary's campaign reached out to foreigners and paid them to dig up any dirt, true or false, on Donald Trump. We also know that a lower level aid in the Trump campaign did try to do the same, but higher level aids appeared to poopoo the idea. Pretty damning stuff.
Now, we've had the woman who once slipped Hillary Clinton questions before a primary debate admit that Hillary and the DNC were in cahoots to ensure Clinton's nomination over Bernie Sanders. Not that Ms. Brazile's word is gospel. After all, she was caught doing something pretty underhanded. This could be a case of trying to deflect back on Clinton in the hopes of making herself look good.
But most of us knew, from the screwed up super delegates, to the press's obvious support through its constant 'can Bernie survive another victory?' coverage, that the jig was up for Sanders and the Machine had ordained that Hillary go down in the history books as America's first woman president.
So I can see why I didn't notice a single evening news broadcast mentioning this story last night, outside of FOX. It's not surprising after all. It's barely news. The DNC and Clintons were in something underhanded together? That's dog bites man if I ever saw it. And it might just bring up ugly memories that remind us how much we suspected about the Clintons, the DNC, the media and the whole machine in the first place.
As a witty and profound analyst of current events
J.K. Rowling makes a decent children's book author. Actually, she makes a great marketer and self promoter.
My boys, including a staunch never-Trumper, say she has been gradually slipping into some half baked madness. Certainly the gap between her and the luminaries that she was constantly compared to, such as Lewis and Tolkien, seems to grow with each passing comment.
My second oldest once said that Rowling made a fictional world that was too big for her abilities to fill. As I've noticed some of her recent observations, I have to say it might be because the real world seems a bit too large for her to grasp.
In this case, her 'take down' would have meant more had Trump claimed calm confidence. As it is, that's just a case of deflection. Why deal with the meat of the issue (are the DNC and Clintons guilty?) when we can deflect to something pointless?
There's an old adage that if you have to resort to pointing out typos or style flaws on social media, it's likely because you have nothing substantial to add to to the debate. In Rowling's case, given other observations of hers that I've read, that's what I'm going with.
My boys, including a staunch never-Trumper, say she has been gradually slipping into some half baked madness. Certainly the gap between her and the luminaries that she was constantly compared to, such as Lewis and Tolkien, seems to grow with each passing comment.
My second oldest once said that Rowling made a fictional world that was too big for her abilities to fill. As I've noticed some of her recent observations, I have to say it might be because the real world seems a bit too large for her to grasp.
In this case, her 'take down' would have meant more had Trump claimed calm confidence. As it is, that's just a case of deflection. Why deal with the meat of the issue (are the DNC and Clintons guilty?) when we can deflect to something pointless?
There's an old adage that if you have to resort to pointing out typos or style flaws on social media, it's likely because you have nothing substantial to add to to the debate. In Rowling's case, given other observations of hers that I've read, that's what I'm going with.
Have I mentioned how much the Left now hates America
I don't visit Catholic and Enjoying It anymore. There is little Catholic there, and almost nothing to enjoy. In an ironic twist, Mark once pointed out how Rush Limbaugh used to be light hearted and fun, but became an interminable crank in his later years. I'd say that describes Mark's blog to a T.
I'm not avoiding it just because of Mark's own approach, which typically involves name calling, insults, accusations and even calumny. But his comments section has become a tempest of insanity, hate, and all things left and anti-Western.
If you hate America, the Church, Jesus, Christians, Western Civilization; if you advocate for contraception, abortion, gay sex, Communism - it matters not. As long as your purpose is to stop by and trash Conservatives, Americans, Conservative American Christians, Republicans or - above all things - Donald Trump, you are given a dispensation.
At least you're not called on it. There was a time when someone posting a pro-abort or pro-gay sex or anti-American post would have been swooped down upon by Mark himself. Not to mention the majority of his readers.
Today? Almost never any push back, and that's when others don't line up and cheer and celebrate such posts. Why go to a "Catholic" blog for that? I can go to atheist, communist, pro-abortion and LGBT sites for that. And sometimes, even those type of blogs are at least fun and light hearted, if not wrapped in hatred and loathing for everything sane and right in the world.
Examples:
That was from the short lived 'John Kelly loves slavery' scandal that the press tried to float. Ever since his smack down of the Urban Cowgirl, the press has tried to do what the press will do to anyone who blasphemes the god of leftism: discredit him. So when he dared to say what historians universally said up until the dark times, that the Civil War might have been the result of many factors, even if slavery was the driving force, of course charges of Nazi and racist and irredeemable deplorable flew like crows. That is, until all but the most zealous and fanatical realized all he was saying was what historians have universally said up until these dark times. Then it went away. Except on places like Mark's blog.
Or we have this little gem:
In case you can't read it, here's what it says:
Yep. In other words, the good commenter hates America and sees it, not Nazi Germany, which was merely inspired by it, as the core evil of the 20th century. And America must be the final end of these things. Exactly how, she doesn't say.
When I was in college in 1988, I took a course on the history of the 20th Century. The professor, during the section on the rise of Nazism, made a quip that 'America, in some ways, was worse than Nazi Germany, because the Nazis were at least true to themselves, not hypocrites.' Pretty shocking, though not as many students were as shocked as you'd think. By then, we were hearing it more and more.
I knew a couple professors by then who took that assessment of things like Christianity, the United States, and Western civilization. One, who was as white as Jim Carrey, dressed only in African garb, to distance herself from any connections to that white, European and American heritage she found so repugnant. There were students who thought that way, too. I knew one young lady who was raised in S. America (her parents were there for reasons I never knew), who shared the 'Hurrah for Che, down with America!' attitude. I knew another girl who had a picture of Lenin in her apartment and indulged in some serious Sovietphilia.
I operate under the notion that I'm not the only one to find the only professors who thought that way, or the only college students who thought that way (though I note it was female students I knew, almost to a person, who were more open to the Communist/death to America chant - I only knew one male student to proudly voice that viewpoint). Since I doubt they were the only ones at my Alma Mater, and that my Alma Mater was not the only university producing such thought, it's not hard to see that, a couple generations later, we've seen exponential growth in people who can't figure out what was so bad about the USSR or Nazi Germany, when obviously the nation that needs eradicated from history is the United States, and every wretched thing it brought with it.
That Mark's blog has become ground zero in the Catholic blogosphere for such thought, in addition to the casual allowance for anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, anti-family, pro-choice, pro-LGBT, pro-socialist voices in the comments, is enough for me. I have no desire to go and see people setting up the future for one of the most catastrophically disastrous displays of stupidity ever visited on the human race.
I'm not avoiding it just because of Mark's own approach, which typically involves name calling, insults, accusations and even calumny. But his comments section has become a tempest of insanity, hate, and all things left and anti-Western.
If you hate America, the Church, Jesus, Christians, Western Civilization; if you advocate for contraception, abortion, gay sex, Communism - it matters not. As long as your purpose is to stop by and trash Conservatives, Americans, Conservative American Christians, Republicans or - above all things - Donald Trump, you are given a dispensation.
At least you're not called on it. There was a time when someone posting a pro-abort or pro-gay sex or anti-American post would have been swooped down upon by Mark himself. Not to mention the majority of his readers.
Today? Almost never any push back, and that's when others don't line up and cheer and celebrate such posts. Why go to a "Catholic" blog for that? I can go to atheist, communist, pro-abortion and LGBT sites for that. And sometimes, even those type of blogs are at least fun and light hearted, if not wrapped in hatred and loathing for everything sane and right in the world.
Examples:
That was from the short lived 'John Kelly loves slavery' scandal that the press tried to float. Ever since his smack down of the Urban Cowgirl, the press has tried to do what the press will do to anyone who blasphemes the god of leftism: discredit him. So when he dared to say what historians universally said up until the dark times, that the Civil War might have been the result of many factors, even if slavery was the driving force, of course charges of Nazi and racist and irredeemable deplorable flew like crows. That is, until all but the most zealous and fanatical realized all he was saying was what historians have universally said up until these dark times. Then it went away. Except on places like Mark's blog.
Or we have this little gem:
In case you can't read it, here's what it says:
"I appreciate his willingness to speak up, but Will is being dishonest (probably with himself first) by pretending that Nazism does not have historical roots in the US. He also soft-pedals the alt-right's open advocacy of ethnic/social cleansing, describing it as mere "identity politics". Denial is dangerous here.
Manifest Destiny was the model for "Lebensraum". Under Jim Crow the US was nothing more or less than an apartheid ethnostate, The German Nazis were very explicit about using Jim Crow and the Native American genocides as their reference for for what they wanted to accomplish, and they used our laws as the model for theirs. Some particulars like the cult of "blood and soil" were German inn ovations, but at the heart of historical German Nazism was a kernel of America-worship.
Modern hardline white supremacists certainly acknowledge the kinship: it's been true for a long time that you could find Confederate and Nazi flags on display together if you moved in those circles. More common now in public too. The rot began here and it will have to end here, or (if the average Americans persist in denial) not at all."
Yep. In other words, the good commenter hates America and sees it, not Nazi Germany, which was merely inspired by it, as the core evil of the 20th century. And America must be the final end of these things. Exactly how, she doesn't say.
When I was in college in 1988, I took a course on the history of the 20th Century. The professor, during the section on the rise of Nazism, made a quip that 'America, in some ways, was worse than Nazi Germany, because the Nazis were at least true to themselves, not hypocrites.' Pretty shocking, though not as many students were as shocked as you'd think. By then, we were hearing it more and more.
I knew a couple professors by then who took that assessment of things like Christianity, the United States, and Western civilization. One, who was as white as Jim Carrey, dressed only in African garb, to distance herself from any connections to that white, European and American heritage she found so repugnant. There were students who thought that way, too. I knew one young lady who was raised in S. America (her parents were there for reasons I never knew), who shared the 'Hurrah for Che, down with America!' attitude. I knew another girl who had a picture of Lenin in her apartment and indulged in some serious Sovietphilia.
I operate under the notion that I'm not the only one to find the only professors who thought that way, or the only college students who thought that way (though I note it was female students I knew, almost to a person, who were more open to the Communist/death to America chant - I only knew one male student to proudly voice that viewpoint). Since I doubt they were the only ones at my Alma Mater, and that my Alma Mater was not the only university producing such thought, it's not hard to see that, a couple generations later, we've seen exponential growth in people who can't figure out what was so bad about the USSR or Nazi Germany, when obviously the nation that needs eradicated from history is the United States, and every wretched thing it brought with it.
That Mark's blog has become ground zero in the Catholic blogosphere for such thought, in addition to the casual allowance for anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, anti-family, pro-choice, pro-LGBT, pro-socialist voices in the comments, is enough for me. I have no desire to go and see people setting up the future for one of the most catastrophically disastrous displays of stupidity ever visited on the human race.
Thursday, November 2, 2017
Ruins from an ancient past
A couple years ago, we went through an old shopping mall that was ground zero for teen life when I was growing up. It's mostly empty now. Exactly what is keeping it alive, I'll never know. We were just driving through the town, saw it, and couldn't resist a peek.
As we walked down alone through the mall, past one closed shop after another, we passed a small room containing some old video game machines. There were probably a half dozen or so, plus a couple arcade style games like pinball. None I had ever heard of.
We explained to our boys that, was a time, such places were teaming with kids, teens, even adults. You had to wait in line for the popular ones (Pac-Man was always standing room only). And they were everywhere. We even had one in our little town, at first near a downtown parking lot, then down a side street beside an old pharmacy. It didn't last more than a couple years. But it was there during the peak.
They say the Arabs used to have an old proverb that goes 'All things fear time, but time fears the pyramids.' That's because even by the time of Moses and the Exodus, the pyramids were relics from thousands of years earlier. Even today, people travel to see the ruins of ancient civilization, medieval castles, even baroque architecture and displays of hundreds of years ago.
I wonder how much of what we have today will last anywhere near that long. Two thousand years from now, the last couple centuries will be part of a larger period, perhaps the 'industrial' or 'technological early years', or something. Maybe the tech dark ages. You never know. Save for the world wars, beginning of nuclear weapons, and possibly the death of 2500 years of growth toward democracy and liberty, I doubt there will be anything to set one century apart from another. Anymore than we reckon periods of ancient Egyptian, Chinese or neolithic Europe by centuries, much less decades.
If the last couple generations are any indications, much of what we cling to now won't last the generation that birthed it. If technology has made change lickety-split for anything and everything imaginable, we seem to discard places and things as antiquated and archaic just as quickly. Things that define culture today are gone tomorrow. Not that change has ever been as slow as we sometimes make it. Believe it or not, on a cultural and social level, things could change fairly quickly, even wtihin decades, back in the day. That's, back in the Medieval or ancient day.
But today, the speed with which so many culturally defining phenomena pass into the shadows is telling. I can't help but wonder how much - if anything - will be left for historians a thousand years to even know about, much less study.
I thought of this when I saw a fun little romp through the history of arcades at the height of video game mania. If you can get past the picture of Spielberg with an open shirt in his office next to a game I never heard of, it's a pretty amusing little trip down memory lane for those who remember when MTV still played videos.
As we walked down alone through the mall, past one closed shop after another, we passed a small room containing some old video game machines. There were probably a half dozen or so, plus a couple arcade style games like pinball. None I had ever heard of.
We explained to our boys that, was a time, such places were teaming with kids, teens, even adults. You had to wait in line for the popular ones (Pac-Man was always standing room only). And they were everywhere. We even had one in our little town, at first near a downtown parking lot, then down a side street beside an old pharmacy. It didn't last more than a couple years. But it was there during the peak.
They say the Arabs used to have an old proverb that goes 'All things fear time, but time fears the pyramids.' That's because even by the time of Moses and the Exodus, the pyramids were relics from thousands of years earlier. Even today, people travel to see the ruins of ancient civilization, medieval castles, even baroque architecture and displays of hundreds of years ago.
I wonder how much of what we have today will last anywhere near that long. Two thousand years from now, the last couple centuries will be part of a larger period, perhaps the 'industrial' or 'technological early years', or something. Maybe the tech dark ages. You never know. Save for the world wars, beginning of nuclear weapons, and possibly the death of 2500 years of growth toward democracy and liberty, I doubt there will be anything to set one century apart from another. Anymore than we reckon periods of ancient Egyptian, Chinese or neolithic Europe by centuries, much less decades.
If the last couple generations are any indications, much of what we cling to now won't last the generation that birthed it. If technology has made change lickety-split for anything and everything imaginable, we seem to discard places and things as antiquated and archaic just as quickly. Things that define culture today are gone tomorrow. Not that change has ever been as slow as we sometimes make it. Believe it or not, on a cultural and social level, things could change fairly quickly, even wtihin decades, back in the day. That's, back in the Medieval or ancient day.
But today, the speed with which so many culturally defining phenomena pass into the shadows is telling. I can't help but wonder how much - if anything - will be left for historians a thousand years to even know about, much less study.
I thought of this when I saw a fun little romp through the history of arcades at the height of video game mania. If you can get past the picture of Spielberg with an open shirt in his office next to a game I never heard of, it's a pretty amusing little trip down memory lane for those who remember when MTV still played videos.
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
Pumpkin with your shadows growing
Unfortunately, the rest were down for weeks at a time, limiting what little time there was. Already, with the two oldest out of school and moving into college and/or full time jobs, they naturally aren't around that much anymore. We're letting them live at home to save money, working full time hours, and avoiding debt for college. Don't worry, the deal was I still get my two cents worth from them, if nothing else by labor and chores.
Still, with social lives, school, jobs and just generally getting older, they aren't around like they used to be, as it should be, though that leaves our youngest adjusting to a house where one after another, his brothers aren't there the way they have been.
Despite that, however, with what time they do have, they devote to him, whether it's showing up for his last soccer game, or taking him out to eat, or making sure they all have time off on Halloween to go around with him for Beggar's Night. I can't complain. Even when they are dating, they tell the girls they need to have one night a week to be with family/their youngest brother. All is right with the world.
Despite it being a lost October, we recovered nicely on the last weekend. The oldest boys managed to make it to his last game and general Halloween fun, and then, even though a couple were still struggling with health, they all managed to have time off Halloween night to go around with him. Somehow, we have the feeling this was likely the last time they'll be able to afford that luxury. Already it was a near run thing. By next year, with all three out of school, going to college, working or doing whatever, it's unlikely they'll all be available again.
But they were this time. And that's what counts. Even if it was crunched into a couple half days, they managed one more time to touch base with all the fun: pumpkin carving and straw mazes, ghost runs at cemeteries, Halloween specials, and our annual Halloween extravaganza of candy and cider, pumpkin donuts and pumpkin seeds (roasted and spiced of course), and silent movies capped off with The Great Pumpkin.
I can say I'm thankful to them for taking me up on my request all those years ago. When we found out about our little Catholic surprise, I charged them to make sure their youngest (nine years younger than our third son) was part of the gang. I didn't want them to move on doing their thing, leaving him in the dust. As I told them, I didn't want them to be the party that our youngest missed. And for eight years, they have more than come through in flying colors. And that, if nothing else, made it a happy Halloween.
 |
| Yes, it was spitting snow at his last soccer game. |
 |
| Off to the old cemetery for the annual ghost run. |
 |
| Splitting up more than they used to, they still gather to explore. |
 |
| Freshly pressed cider and picked apples, straight from the location of my very first field trip in Kindergarten. |
 |
| Straw maze races: Even our youngest is too big, still for old time's sake |
 |
| I'll assume his older brother is letting him win |
 |
| But then sometimes I wonder |
 |
| You just can't have a Tricks or Treats table without pumpkin seeds, pumpkin doughnuts, doughnut holes, and fresh cider. |
 |
| What a lovely night for a curse |
 |
| For last minute, it wasn't horrible |
 |
| It's nice when they get their own pumpkins |
 |
| Turnips: Halloween like they say they did in the old country |
 |
| Our oldest dons his goto Sherlock Holmes get up |
 |
| Our second oldest decided to go as a glitch in the Matrix (that is, two sweatshirts of the same color) |
 |
| He wanted to be Linus, but we had no red striped shirt, and he didn't want to carry a blanket, so with some persuasion he was Kylo-Ren |
 |
| Sometimes I don't think it's all for their youngest's sake |
 |
| It fits his personality |
 |
| The boys together for one last Halloween hurrah...or will it be? Tune in next year... |
Well this is weird
So female porn stars are joining the Weinstain wagon and saying that male porn stars sexually assaulted them (not surprising warning: some graphic descriptions in this ironically headlined article).
No lawyer here, but I'd think on the job assault accusations would be devilishly difficult to prove in these cases. But again, we're watching the West slip into madness, which is the last step before terror and dark ages.
We're already at a point where people increasingly have no problem saying that someone should be punished simply because he is accused (I'm looking at you Tom Steyer). Why wrangle about due process and the rule of law when we can jump to mob rule and move straight to the scaffold?
So you never know. We might be at a stage where a woman's accusation can wait until after the cigarette and still carry weight. Our society has become that stupid. It's almost as if we found freedom too difficult, and will settle for mob rule and tyranny, as long as it applies to everyone else. Just like we approach terrorist attacks - acceptable as long as they strike everyone else.
No lawyer here, but I'd think on the job assault accusations would be devilishly difficult to prove in these cases. But again, we're watching the West slip into madness, which is the last step before terror and dark ages.
We're already at a point where people increasingly have no problem saying that someone should be punished simply because he is accused (I'm looking at you Tom Steyer). Why wrangle about due process and the rule of law when we can jump to mob rule and move straight to the scaffold?
So you never know. We might be at a stage where a woman's accusation can wait until after the cigarette and still carry weight. Our society has become that stupid. It's almost as if we found freedom too difficult, and will settle for mob rule and tyranny, as long as it applies to everyone else. Just like we approach terrorist attacks - acceptable as long as they strike everyone else.
The reason I don't condemn entire organizations
Just because their leader, or even a group of leaders, does something wrong in his or her personal life. That would be stupid. 'Nuff said.
All Saints Day and true diversity
Diversity is one of many words with almost no meaning today. It is supposed to mean something, usually along the lines of 'everyone respect everyone else who is different.' Usually it's just a punch line to win an argument on behalf of liberalism, if that. Diversity in many circles typically means being indoctrinated into various dogmas as prescribed by the Left.
Not that diversity is itself a bad thing. Quite the contrary, it had the potential of making America the great nation it was. Likewise, diversity abused or misused can become the rot which eats away at the same country's foundations. But at its best, diversity is a good thing, since no two of us rascally humans are alike, and acknowledging the fact that we each bring something unique to the table can actually be quite good.
And next to the historic United States, there is no other tradition on Earth where true diversity is demonstrated more obviously than the Communion of Christian Saints. Look across the globe, and there really is no monolith in the Church. That's because the call was to make disciples of the nations. Not just this or that group, or demand others come and be like us.
And so we have a laundry list of diversity in its best form, one that is commonly known as the Communion of Saints. Michael Flynn does a fine job reminding us about just why real diversity is a blessing, and something worth more than just a dashed off after thought following the loot and parties of All Hallow's Eve.
Not that diversity is itself a bad thing. Quite the contrary, it had the potential of making America the great nation it was. Likewise, diversity abused or misused can become the rot which eats away at the same country's foundations. But at its best, diversity is a good thing, since no two of us rascally humans are alike, and acknowledging the fact that we each bring something unique to the table can actually be quite good.
And next to the historic United States, there is no other tradition on Earth where true diversity is demonstrated more obviously than the Communion of Christian Saints. Look across the globe, and there really is no monolith in the Church. That's because the call was to make disciples of the nations. Not just this or that group, or demand others come and be like us.
And so we have a laundry list of diversity in its best form, one that is commonly known as the Communion of Saints. Michael Flynn does a fine job reminding us about just why real diversity is a blessing, and something worth more than just a dashed off after thought following the loot and parties of All Hallow's Eve.
We should not be politicizing the terrorist attack in Manhattan
Those who have made politicizing human suffering their MO are correct in this case, we shouldn't elevate politics to the god which alone can bring salvation. We should come together and mourn, pray, reflect, unify and seek to aid those who are suffering. That is the response of a nation with people of good will.
So this is a time to reflect, mourn, pray and lift up those killed and the families they left behind. Those who are saying we shouldn't politicize this, or that President Trump should back off, are correct. And next time, we'll remember what they said this time. But for now, God's blessings on those who lost their lives to this evil, and may God give peace and strength to the survivors and the loved ones left behind.
So this is a time to reflect, mourn, pray and lift up those killed and the families they left behind. Those who are saying we shouldn't politicize this, or that President Trump should back off, are correct. And next time, we'll remember what they said this time. But for now, God's blessings on those who lost their lives to this evil, and may God give peace and strength to the survivors and the loved ones left behind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)