A vent of frustration on Friday afternoon...

So there won't be any expansion by the HHS fools of the religious exemption clause in the mandate for health insurance coverage of birth control, including abortion. The MSM has decided to censor or minimize coverage of items such as the March For Life. Hollywood has produced a real POS in the form of "The Devil Inside", with what has become almost a standard in offhanded insults to the Magisterial authority of the Church. One of the most celebrated videos on YouTube features some clueless twerp who loves Jesus but hates religion (it strikes me as similar to saying you like rebuilding car engines but hate using hand tools).

The Book of Ecclesiastes tells us there is a time and a season for everything.

It's time for the Church Militant to get serious about that title:

Lock and load baby, and let's take the chains off Chang.

Now just watch as some government agency comes knocking on my door about this.

Go Granny!

Click to enlarge:

Waking up in "1984"...

If a nationwide event isn't covered, did it ever really happen? I think Winston Smith dealt with that question in "1984". As I recall, one of the defining statements of that book was "He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future." It isn't in our future, it's already here and starting to gel.

Should you be wondering what the Hell I'm blathering about NOW, it's the March For Life that took place all over the freaking country this past weekend and yesterday. Here in Dallas our diocese sponsored it on Saturday, since I had to stay with my son during his First Reconciliation retreat that day I had no chance to attend.

I thought I'd get some news of it from the Dallas Morning News.

HAH!

Zippo coverage. I'll be seeing some guys active in the prolife movement this Thursday evening so I'll get an update then.

But why wasn't anything found in the local fishwrap? Hey, the OWS movement here got a fair amount of coverage and they only numbered a few dozen or so. The newspaper breathlessly covered how they were initially camped out behind City Hall, how they were moved to a local park, how they disbanded after a few weeks. THAT was in the papers, maybe not on the front page but it was definitely easy to find.

Then theres the March For Life that happened in the nation's capital yesterday. Damned little and I do mean L-I-T-T-L-E coverage. There was a blurb near the bottom of the fifth page, approximately 30 lines of type in a single column. This is what was devoted to an event that saw over 400 thousand participants. Thats it.

For decent coverage of the event unnoticed by the MSM, go here: http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/over-400000-march-for-life-in-washington-dc-pics-and-videos/ (thanks to Adrienne for that).

Before anyone says, "Hey some of those videos/write ups come from Fox, the Washington Times, etc. So how can you claim inadequate coverage?" I'll mention that here in Dallas the leading newspaper has been silent, as already said at the beginning of this post. What was shown on the tube I really don't know since I don't watch it. I've looked at various blogs from around the nation, it seems the story is pretty much the same all over. One very noteworthy and troubling fact, the news outlets on the Internet have been either as silent or muted as their MSM counterparts.

Bottom line: There was a lot of prolife activity throughout the country over the weekend, culminating with a march in the nation's capital yesterday and the coverage of it by the nation's news media has been inadequate. That is especially apparent when you contrast it with the attention paid to the OWS movement. Maybe the prolife movement needed to start publicly shitting on police cars to get more attention.

Okay, all snark aside, I'm pondering the significance of this. Because LAST year there was much more extensive coverage of this event by local arms of the MSM.

What's it all about Alfie?

I doubt there is any formal conspiracy operating in the shadows, deliberately molding minds and hearts to the nefarious ends of an evil cabal. More likely it's a bunch of like minded elitist fools who think some things shouldn't be given a public forum. Chief amongst them would be the growing success of the prolife movement.

Because it IS getting more successful, a look at the same blinkered media proves that. When Planned Parenthood facilities are increasingly under close scrutiny due to proven malfeasance, the prolife movement is winning. When the same fishwrap that under reported this year's anniversary observances of Roe v. Wade runs a story regarding the effectiveness of "personhood" legislation, the prolife movement is winning.

I could give more examples but you get the point.

So what's proven here?

Once again the effectiveness of the alternative media in the form of individual bloggers is shown. Thats one fact evident by the hyperlinked article and the source leading me to it.

But the more sobering one is the growing inclination of the MSM to selectively report newsworthy items.

It's "1984" and we're in the midst of it.

‎"Under the spreading chestnut tree

I sold you and you sold me

There lie they, and here lie we

Under the spreading chestnut tree"

See you in the reeducation camps, comrades.

Obama on the anniversary of "Roe vs. Wade"

Obama Defends Roe v. Wade As Way for ‘Our Daughters’ to Have Same Chance As Sons to ‘Fulfill Their Dreams’By Fred Lucas

CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama says the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade is the chance to recognize the “fundamental constitutional right” to abortion and to “continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

The 1974 U.S. Supreme Court nationalized abortion law, prohibiting states from deciding on the matter. In his written statement, Obama acknowledged that abortion has been a divisive political issue.

Obama, while serving in the Illinois State Legislature and as president of the United States, has taken a hard line on abortion rights.

In his statement on the anniversary of the Roe v. Wade ruling, Obama said it reflects the broader principles of America.

“As we mark the 39th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, we must remember that this Supreme Court decision not only protects a woman’s health and reproductive freedom, but also affirms a broader principle: that government should not intrude on private family matters,” Obama said. “I remain committed to protecting a woman’s right to choose and this fundamental constitutional right.

“While this is a sensitive and often divisive issue -- no matter what our views, we must stay united in our determination to prevent unintended pregnancies, support pregnant woman and mothers, reduce the need for abortion, encourage healthy relationships, and promote adoption,” Obama said.

“And as we remember this historic anniversary, we must also continue our efforts to ensure that our daughters have the same rights, freedoms, and opportunities as our sons to fulfill their dreams.”

As a state lawmaker in Illinois, he voted four times against legislation to protect the life of a baby that survived a botched abortion. He voted against such legislation at the state level in 2001, 2002 and 2003.

The 2003 bill was assigned to the Illinois Senate Health and Human Services Committee, which Obama chaired at the time. It mirrored a law passed by Congress, which said nothing in federal law should be construed to undermine the Roe v. Wade ruling.

As president, Obama signed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, which would appropriate federal money toward insurance plans that pay for abortions.

On Friday, the Obama administration finalized regulations that order Americans – unless they work directly at a church – to purchase government-approved health insurance plans that cover sterilizations and contraceptives, including those that cause abortions.

Planned Parenthood also marked the anniversary of the Supreme Court's abortion ruling by setting up a Web site "to show the world exactly what Roe has meant in the past and still means today."

The "Since Roe" Web site invites women to add their own comments about "how Roe v. Wade has made a difference in your life."

(End of story, my comments follow.)

Obama's comments are just as strong and distasteful as when he made his "...punished with a baby..." remarks on the campaign trail. He evidently feels just as certain of victory in 2012 as he did four years ago.

Stand by folks, it's gonna get damned interesting.

Fritos and Twinkies on the black market...

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — The revamped school lunches at Los Angeles Unified School District have won awards, commending them for improving the menu at the second largest school district in the nation. Too bad the students don’t agree.

Rejecting healthful alternatives like vegetarian curries and tamales, quinoa salads and pad Thai noodles, students are throwing them in the trash by the thousands, bringing junk food from home and buying instant noodles and other decidedly unhealthy fare from the “black markets” that have begun to thrive at campuses across the district, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The wholesale rejection to its healthy menu comes about a year after a very public food fight with TV chef Jamie Oliver. Oliver filmed a few weeks of his ABC series “Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution” at one LAUSD campus, but the permit was terminated abruptly.

The series’ first season featured Oliver trying to revolutionize the eating habits and food policies of Huntington, W. Va.

The district said they welcomed Oliver, but not his cameras, in an effort to avoid gimmicks, like filling a school bus with 57 tons of white sand to represent the amount of sugar LAUSD students consume weekly in flavored milk.

The kerfluffle led to LAUSD’s decision to change the menu in favor of healthier options. The district decided to do away with chocolate- and strawberry-flavored milk.

Now, the Times reports cartons of plain milk are being thrown away en masse, unopened, along with uneaten entrees. Participation in the school lunch program has dropped by thousands of students, who are ditching lunch and are suffering from hunger-related ailments.

The complaints have been heard and LAUSD is planning changes to the menu, the Times reports. Burgers and (healthy) pizza are coming back, and dishes like quinoa salads and brown rice cutlets are out.

L.A. Unified serves 650,000 meals daily.

(End of story, my comments follow.)

Gee, who couldn't see this one coming? A black market for junk food? Who'd a thunk it?

Catholics should prepare for Civil War II.

Found this on http://catholiclane.com:

Obama’s Contempt for Religious Liberty

Posted By Bill Donohue


Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on today’s announcement from the Obama administration that it is going forward with its original “Obamacare” policy that mandates coverage of sterilization and contraceptive services in most healthcare plans:

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius said today that aside from houses of worship, all other religious agencies and organizations will be required to provide sterilization and contraceptive services, including abortifacients, in their employee healthcare plans; none will be allowed to charge co-pays or deductibles. The policy goes into effect in August 2013 for these entities; all others will be required to provide these services in August 2012.

Sebelius explained how her directive applies to non-church religious entities such as Catholic hospitals and universities: “Employers wishing to take advantage of the additional year must certify that they qualify for the delayed implementation. This additional year will allow these organizations more time and flexibility to adapt to this new rule.” She also said, “I believe this proposal strikes the appropriate balance between religious freedom and increasing access to important preventive services.”

The language is Orwellian. With stunning magnanimity, Sebelius tells Catholic non-profits that they can take advantage of their one-year reprieve as long as they seek the blessings of the federal government. If they pass muster with the bureaucrats, then they have time to figure out how they can prostitute their religiously ground convictions, or prepare for bankruptcy. To top things off, after shoving the radical secular agenda down the throat of Catholics—and other people of faith who share their concerns—Sebelius congratulates the Obama administration for striking a “balance” between religious liberty and Obamacare. But, of course, no balance was struck: the edict grants nothing to those who believe in religious liberty, and she knows it.

That this dictatorial edict is being announced in an election year indicates both contempt for the First Amendment and plain stupidity.

(End of story, my comments follow.)

No damnit, it does NOT indicate plain stupidity. It shows how confident the present Administration is of winning this year's election.

Look at how the most reliably conservative (and prolife) candidates have been picked off, one by one. I spoke briefly about it recently: http://agangershome.blogspot.com/2012/01/republican-whack-mole.html

Soon we'll have the choice of Obama or ObamaLite (Romney). I've no doubt there will be an unexpected revelation about "Mittens" waiting to be used in the campaign should he seem likely to win. Look to the past and how Obama won his selection as the Democratic Senatorial candidate and final election to the Illinois seat in the Senate.

Once he's solidly in place for another four years we can expect the American Dictatorship to go full throttle. I foresee the complete demise of our representative government. Then all dissenters will be dealt with in harsh and uncompromising terms.

Stand by folks, it's going to get damned rough with no guarantee of relief.

Here are more stories on the topic: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/obama-administration-refuses-to-change-contraception-mandate and also http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/religious-leaders-blast-hhs-over-contraception-mandate

Michael Voris, "RealCatholic TV" and Archbishop Vigneron.

I normally don't comment on volatile issues within the Church. Face it, if we're attacking one another just who benefits from the fighting? It isn't those trying to follow Christ. So I've not spoken out about (former) Father John Corapi, Father Pavone, Our Lady of Medjugorje, the 4th Secret of Fatima, Father Thomas Euteneuer or any other controversial items. The hate and discontent raised amongst the Faithful is already too much, why should I add to it?

The Voris/Arbp. Vigneron dust up is different because too many Catholics are ready to go to the mat for the wrong reasons. I'm talking specifically about the defenders of Michael Voris and his "RealCatholic TV" organization.

For those who aren't Catholic and really don't give a rip, this whole affair has been over the term "Catholic" in Voris' organization's title. The Archbishop has said Voris & Co. never received permission to use that word and they should cease immediately. That's where the fun begins.

Hey, Voris DOES put out a lot of thought provoking things via his webcasts on YouTube. Some of them are damned good, some of them are of completely Looney Tunes quality.

One thing he does is routinely claim many Church problems as having originated approx. 50 years ago (read "Fruits of Vatican II"). It's an almost reflexive statement on any given topic. He's as wrong as a football bat, Vatican II and it's changes HAVE been used to cover some abuses but many more of our problems are merely the fruits of long festering rot in the Body of Christ.

If you don't agree with me, fine. It's only my opinion, I'll stick by it until proven wrong. But you will notice that I don't cover my rants with the "Catholic" cloak of respectability, which is what Voris does.

The Archbishop was right in calling him to task on this, he needs to stop trying to pass his commentary off as almost Magisterial in origin.

Voris DOES have a lot of education in the Faith, he received a Sacred Theology Baccalaureate (STB) from Sacred Heart Major Seminary/Angelicum in Rome – Magna Cum Laude. That's a far cry from my own 8 years of attendance at Our Lady of Perpetual Payments Elementary School and the single year of schooling in a now defunct Catholic high school. But he, like myself, is a member of the laity. He is not a member of the clergy, he is not a part of the teaching Magisterium. He is expressing ONLY his own opinions as a Catholic (as I am here) and they should be more easily identified as such. They're not so identified and IMO can be readily mistaken as official Church positions.

So whatever other faults Arbp. Vigneron may have, he is right on the money in this instance. As the leader of the Archdiocese of Detroit he has the responsibility to protect his flock from possibly erroneous teaching. The fact that the teaching we're talking about has a worldwide reach is unimportant, it reaches into the AOD and so it needs to be addressed by the Archbishop there. End of story.

Be "okay" with gay or else...

Here is the standout line, hyperlink to the article included: This is not marriage equality. It is the setup for a knockdown.

Admittedly the article is written by a Pentecostal and not a Catholic. But we should be concerned, there will be no differentiation made when this law kicks in. Plus the Catholic Church is always a target of opportunity for anyone with an agenda.

If anyone thinks this won't spread from Washington, think back to how gay marriage has gone from one state to being an issue in so many others. It hasn't happened here in Texas yet. But the key word is "yet".

The bottom line is that those of us adhering to traditional values can no longer expect to have a "live and let live" attitude about this topic. It'll soon be a case of choosing a side and standing by for the consequences. I see a lot of hate and discord coming, not the least in my own wife's family. There are a heck of a lot of gay aunts and cousins there, up until now it's just been something not discussed. I doubt that will be allowed to continue.

Gird your loins for battle and pray for all concerned. God's will be done.

About Gingrich's ex spewing her venom...

As you can tell by the title of this post, I'm just a tad critical of the man's ex coming forward at this time to tell the whole wide world what a two legged walking waste of human flesh the man is.

Yep, noted.

Hey, I am NOT for Gingrich getting the GOP nomination. I am NOT a supporter of his. But this just stinks a bit.

Am I being paranoid in noting that as serious contenders to Romney winning the nod for Republican candidate raise their heads above ground level there seems to be a game of "Whack A Mole" being played?

Bachmann started to take off, then the wheels came off her bus due to several gaffes. Since we have a Chief Executive who made his own share of verbal screw ups while campaigning (here is fairly good list compiled back in 2008: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/224544/barack-gaffes/michelle-malkin)

So Bachmann cratered. Bye, bye.

Next up was Herman Cain, who would have completely negated any cries of "racism" from supporters of B.O.. Well as we all know, there began an increasing crescendo of complaints regarding his treatment of women. Since the man had a squeaky clean image, I'd guess that was correctly seen as his Achilles heel. Isn't it odd how all stories regarding his randy libido immediately stopped once he dropped out of the race? Purely coincidental of course.

Now Newt is in the cross hairs. The tales of sexual impropriety seem to be picking up from where they left off with Herman Cain. They aren't starting with a charge of sexual harassment or sophomoric groping from a middle-aged man. Nope, the ex is coming out swinging (no pun intended) with tales of his asking for an open marriage with her.

I'd been waiting for Cain to be accused of a menage a trois with the Amor sisters from the Addams Family, maybe it'll get tacked onto Gingrich instead? Who knows.

But it just seems weird how any contenders posing a threat against "Mittens" seem to get picked off when their popularity starts to rise.

Just another coincidence, I'm sure.

When the man is right, the man is right....

We're Turning into a Bunch of Damned* Nazis!

Absolutely worth reading.

"Undocumented" immigrants: Doing the murders Americans won't...

Found at latimes.com:

Hikers stunned by grisly human head discovery in Hollywood Hills

The search for human remains resumed at sunrise Wednesday in the Hollywood Hills, where a human head was found by two dog-walkers the day before.

The entrance to Bronson Canyon in Griffith Park was closed by a police blockade Wednesday morning, and coroner's office vans were on scene, along with a canine unit.

Authorities were attempting to learn more about the man whose head was found wrapped in a plastic bag Tuesday afternoon near the "Hollywood" sign.

Neighbors who frequent the park said they were stunned after hearing what had been found.

Liam Lesevour, 35, said it was "freaky" to know a human head was found in the same place he walks his dog, Tiger, each morning.

With all the law enforcement activity, "everybody here just assumed it's just a hiker that got stuck," said Carole Joseph, who has lived nearby more than 40 years and was walking her 10-year-old shepherd, Sadie, on Wednesday morning.
Many of the regulars believe the head must have been dumped there sometime after the Tuesday morning rush. In the mornings, there are always at least 10 people walking through the park, sometimes even before dawn.

Had it been there Tuesday morning, they said, surely another dog would have spotted it.

"If it was up there in the morning, he would have found it," Lesevour said, pointing to Tiger, a 4-year-old greyhound and pitbull mix.

(End of story, my comments follow.)

Well who'd a thunk it? Porous borders with a Third World toilet to the south that is being overrun by drug cartels known for violence. Gee ma, didn't see this one coming now did we?

Look for the routine "Nothing to worry about, nothing to see here." declarations from our elites. This will be done with a total disassociation from any efforts to work for "comprehensive immigration reform" while the DOJ prosecutes states like Arizona for having the temerity to try securing their border with the aforementioned toilet.

A joke? Or not?

Guy #1: I spent some time in Okinawa with the army.

Guy #2: Oh, I think my brother lives in Okinawa!

Guy #1: Where in Okinawa?

Guy #2: Tulsa.

If you think this is funny, please recall that not too long ago we had a Congressional Representative voice his fears that too many military personnel on the island of Guam could be catastrophic: http://youtu.be/zNZczIgVXjg

Yep, they live amongst us and they can reproduce. Be afraid, be very afraid.

VD Hanson on cutting the military.

I've copied this in it's entirety, it is just THAT good!

January 15, 2012
Cutting the Military Is a Bad Idea
by Victor Davis Hanson
Ricochet.com

After World War II, Harry Truman and Louis Johnson wanted to cut the Marine Corps; by winter 1950 what was left of it almost single-handedly saved the reputation of the collapsing US military in Korea. After Vietnam, we were told there was no more need for large ground forces — until the Middle East heated up and we won the Gulf War in four days with huge ground forces. Then came massive cuts in the late 1980s and 1990s — until Iraq and Afghanistan proved that we still needed boots on the ground. So now, with President Obama’s cuts to the defense budget, the future is supposed to be all air, naval, drones, special forces, and counter-insurgency. Apparently the North Koreans will never again cross the 38th Parallel; or some rogue nation will never help plan or subsidize another 9/11; or some future European or Asian dictator will never again threaten his neighbors — or if all the latter come true, drones and missiles will suffice. I find all that hard to believe. Some other considerations:

A) There are really only two ways to audit the Obama administration's new cuts to defense — are we presently spending more on defense in terms of GDP (say, over 5%) than usual during "peacetime" and is the percentage of the federal budget inordinately devoted to defense (say, over 30%)? In truth, we are spending in the postwar age what we usually do between major wars, even though we just fought two major wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

B) Yes, it could be wise to shift emphasis to Asia, but Europe was where most American lives were lost in the 20th century. We do not yet know the strategic ramifications of the unwinding of the EU. NATO ('keep Germany down, Russia out, and the US in') is now a cocktail-party construct, and will fade away without a strong US presence. An ascendant Turkey has always bullied Greece when the former was confident and the latter weak, and there are lots of hot spots from the Ionian coast to Cyprus. The Balkans are not settled yet, and the democratic futures of the former Soviet Republics are still up in the air. Libya would have been impossible without US/NATO bases in Italy.

C) The military is not all fighting and hardware. The training offered 1 million youths is in many cases superior to what they now find on today's college campuses. They leave the military with skills and responsibilities, and without student loans; all too often, in contrast, our twenty-something students pile up debt without skills or real learning on contemporary campuses. We trust 20-year olds in the military to guide $100 million jets on carriers; in contrast, I find it dangerous to walk across a campus parking lot with 20-year-old students running through stop signs.

D) The drawdown is not occurring in a vacuum, but is the bookend of a loud new 'reset'/'lead from behind' strategy that deprecates traditional allies like Britain and Israel while failing miserably in outreach to supposedly new neutrals like Syria and Iran — all in a landscape of bowing, apologizing, and Cairo speechifying. All of these developments serve as force multipliers to the military retrenchment and confirm the impression of our enemies that the world is now entirely negotiable in a way not true four years ago. The unspoken irony is that the military and our anti-terrorism protocols served Obama well when he arrived: he found a quiet Iraq with almost no monthly American casualties, a decimated al Qaeda (largely destroyed in Iraq), anti-terrorism measures that had foiled over 30 plots against the mainland (and were all demagogued by candidate Obama before President Obama embraced them), major powers like China, Russia, and Iran wary of pressing the US, allies like Japan, Taiwan, Germany, and South Korea secure under the US nuclear umbrella, and the most seasoned and experienced US military in generations.

E) The new $500 billion cuts must be considered against the nearly $5 trillion Obama has borrowed since assuming office, in addition to what he will borrow this next year. A defense budget that was tolerable prior to 2008 becomes apparently unsustainable with expenditures for Obamacare, vast new green projects like Solyndra, expansions in food stamps and unemployment insurance, and vast increases in the size of the non-military federal government. At least with the military our money earns safety and deterrence, while with Obama's massive new Keynesian projects we do not get more jobs, more energy production, or more wealth created — only more dependency, more class strife and 1% vs. 99% class warfare, as one's status is not judged by absolute material standards but only in relationship to being worse off than someone wealthier. Some of us might prefer a new frigate manned by professionally trained American youth to another resurrection of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae, another cash infusion into GM, yet another failed private/public windmill or solar factory, or another 20 weeks tacked on in unemployment insurance to the increasingly dispirited jobless.

©2012 Victor Davis Hanson

MLK quote, my way of observing his birthday.

"When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews, you are talking anti-Semitism."

I'm probably a "Christian Zionist". So shoot me. DILLIGAF, LAMDILLIGAF.