Top Tips for the Faithful!

Hey, faithful Catholics!  Here's a top tip: if your favorite Catholic "apologist" posts this sort of photo on his public Facebook profile (emphasis on public):

you may want to reconsider whose ideas about Catholicism you should be taking seriously.

As an addendum: if you are a "communications" dude for the ne plus ultra of conservative American bishops -- like, say, Bishop Loverde of the Arlington, VA diocese -- you just might have better things to do than publicly scold a priest for calling out said Catholic "apologist".  After all, conservative bishops have much, much more pressing things to think about.  Don't they? At least, that's most what Catholics believe when they donate to the Bishop's Appeal...

Finally, our last top tip for the day: If you are frequenting a Catholic "portal" that is rife with Catholic bloggers vociferously defending their Catholic "blogbrother" who publicly online poses behind a gun ... that just might be a portal to nowhere.  Or worse.

The mask slips again

We don't belong to the government. Honestly, how wrongheaded, how un-American, how statist is this concept? I'm a citizen of this country, I'm a resident of this state, of my town. So, what -- do I belong to the federal government? Or just maybe two-thirds of me and state & local owns the other third? This is a statement truly worthy of ridicule.

So let's review. First, they tell us we're racists because we don't like their ideas. Was Karl Marx black? Lenin? Ted Kennedy? Harry Reid? Didn't think so.

Then Obama says "You didn't build that!" Meaning our businesses, our careers, our projects. Stuff the government could never have conceived on it's own anymore than a computer can turn itself on and start composing the 9th Symphony.

Now we have this smarmy, didactic voice asserting that "gee, whiz, we ALL belong to the government! That's what we have in common, don't you know! Because we have to have multiculturalism and our own favorite coffee shops and sports teams. So what, oh what, pray tell, shall unite us? THE GOVERNMENT! We belong to it!"


Unfortunately we are going to hear even sillier things from the Obama campaign, and I doubt they will stop even if Romney and Ryan win. Romney kills people with cancer, Ryan wants to push your grandma off a cliff and then we'll all party while black people drown. Because we like that kind of thing....

Hey, just found this on Facebook. Now this is more like it:

Another scary way in which Obama is Carter redivivus

Obama said "please", Egypt said "no". Excerpt:

The US government asked its good buddy Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy to inspect an Iranian ship suspected of carrying arms to Syria while it passed through the Suez Canal. Remember that to do so is arguably in Egypt’s own interest since Cairo is supporting the rebels while Tehran backs the regime.

The Egyptian government, despite three decades of massive US aid, licensing to produce advanced American tanks and other equipment, strategic backing and an invitation to Washington to meet Obama – refused. Indeed, Morsy headed for Tehran to attend a “nonaligned” conference.

Does this mean Egypt is going to ally with Iran? No, Egypt will fight Iran for influence tooth and nail. The two countries will kill each others’ surrogates. But it means Morsy feels no friendlier toward America than he does toward Iran. And Cairo will not lift a finger to help Washington against Tehran unless, perhaps, America is willing to put a Muslim Brotherhood government in place in Syria, which might well happen.

In other words, under Jimmy Carter’s watch we got Islamist Iran – and, yes, things could have turned out very differently – and under Obama’s watch – and, yes, things could have turned out very differently – we got Islamist Egypt.

Please feel free to discuss the remarks by Father Benedict Groeschel

Here's Bill Donohue's comments on the Fr. Groeschel flap. It seems to me like the good priest might have taken more care about how he stated his points, but the usual suspects (e.g., Rod Dreher) have served up the typical over-the-top, manufactured reaction.

Here's Bill Donohue's take. Feel free to add your own insights in the comments.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on remarks made by Father Benedict Groeschel in the National Catholic Register regarding the sexual abuse of minors:

A quarter century ago, Father Groeschel and seven other priests broke away from a religious community to found the Franciscan Friars of Renewal. His service to the Church over the past half-century has been nothing less than heroic. His ministry to the least among us is especially noteworthy.

Father Groeschel holds a Ph.D. in psychology from Columbia University, and has put his training to work by counseling some of the most mentally and socially challenged people in our society. In addition, for the past four decades he has been screening men for the priesthood, weeding out those who should not be ordained. His record is impressive.

In a recent interview, he hypothesized how a young person (14, 16 or 18, as he put it) could conceivably take advantage of a priest who was having a nervous breakdown. He also referred to Jerry Sandusky, the disgraced Penn State football coach, as “this poor guy.” For these remarks, and related comments, he is now being labeled as a defender of child abuse.

The accusation is scurrilous. In the same interview, Groeschel emphatically said that priests who are sexual abusers “have to leave.” His reference to Sandusky was exactly the way a priest-psychologist might be expected to speak: “poor guy” conveys sympathy for his maladies—it is not a defense of his behavior! Indeed, Groeschel asked, “Why didn’t anyone say anything?”

Groeschel is nearly 80 years old. A few years back, he was almost killed in an auto accident that left him disabled; it has definitely taken a toll on him. I have known him for two decades, and recently spent an afternoon with him. I’ve read his books, listened to his tapes—on sexual abuse—and have come to know a great priest. To condemn him for one part of one interview is wholly unjust.

Update on searching Oiho on Google

I blogged earlier on the results from googling Oiho, Obama's famous bodily misspelling of Ohio. I speculated that Google might not remove their auto-correction, but it looks like they have. Top of the list is Twitchy.com referring to the mishap as Obama's Dan Quayle. So, good.

Also check out IMAO's "Fun Facts" page on OIHO. Hilarious. My fave:

The state is named “Oiho” which is a Native American Warren tribe word for “You didn’t build that teepee”.

They know Obama effed up with "you didn't build that"

Context, schmontext. "You didn't build that" continues to haunt the Preezee of the United Steezee. Yes, we noticed this too.

Nevertheless, there are signs that they see a vulnerability. Obama has not repeated the words that sparked the controversy, and he has toned down the broader argument — that government help is essential to business success — in the six weeks since he ad-libbed the line near the end of a long campaign swing. His speeches have been shorter, with fewer references to wealthy Americans. He is more cautious about portraying the choice that he quite forcefully described that night between Romney’s worldview and his own.

Shorter Obama speeches is an immediate positive effect.

It doesn't matter what Plouffe and Axelrod say in the attempt to spin this mistake. It was a major one, it slipped out when Obama was tired and unguarded at the end of a long day, as the article points out. The "We built this" response is short, pithy, and it resonates with likely voters. We're not stupid.

Here we go again!

"Meet George and Harold..."

Uh, not that I APPROVE of such gross potty humor (cough, cough). Although I did point out that the pear in the painting at Panera looked like it had butt cheeks. (Well it did!) Then two of my kids recited this entire rap. I'm not sure everyone in Panera appreciated the performance. That place really has gotten less crowded since our mostly prepubescent male family started eating a Sunday brunch there, though.


I've only read three of the infamous Dav Pilkey's books, so I'm not an expert. The plots are generally less fantastic than the contrivance behind the Bourne Legacy, a film I thoroughly enjoyed despite the lack of any villains as dangerous as Talking Toilets or Professor Poopypants.

Just so you know for future reference, if you snap your fingers around Mr. Krupp, the mean school principal, he turns into Captain Underpants. But if you throw water on Captain Underpants's head he reverts to Mr. Krupp. The principal seemingly has no idea of the existence of his much cooler alter-ego who wears a window curtain as a cape and has no use for the principal's cheap toupée.

One more thing: Remember that Professor Poopypants changed his name to Tippy Tinkletrousers so people would stop making fun of him.