Thoughts From Literature

I recently read Leo Tolstoy's classic novel Anna Karenina. In it I found this incredible passage which I wanted to share with you:

"Levin walked along the highroad with great strides, attending not so much to his own thoughts (he was still unable to disentagle them) as to a spiritual condition he had never experienced before.

The peasant's words had affected his soul like an electric spark, suddenly transforming and fusing into one a whole swarm of disjointed, impotent individual thoughts that had never stopped interesting him. These thoughts had occupied his mind, though he hadn't known it, even while he had been talking about letting the land.

He felt something new in his soul, and palpated this new thing with pleasure, not yet knowing what it was.

To live not for one's needs, but for God. For what God? And what could you say that was more senseless than what he said? He said it was unnecessary to live for one's own needs; that is, it's not necessary to live for what we understand, for what we're drawn to, for what we want, but we must live for something incomprehensible, for God which no one can understand or define. Well, and what of it? Didn't I understand those senseless words of Theodore's? And after I understood did I have any doubt of their truth? Did I find them stupid, obscure, inexact?

No, I understood them, just as he understands them; I understood them completely, and more clearly than I understand anything in life; I've never doubted it in my life, nor can I doubt it. And not I alone, but everyone, the whole world understands this alone completely, it's the only thing it has no doubt of and always agrees with.

Theodore says that Kirilov the house porter lives for his belly. That's understandable and rational. As rational creatures none of us can live in any other way than for our bellies. Then suddenly this same Theodore says living for your belly is bad, and that you have to live for the truth, for God, and I understand him from a mere hint! And I and millions of people who lived ages ago and are living now, peasants, the poor in spirit, and wise men who've thought and written about this, and said the same thing in their unclear way - we all agree on this one thing: what we should live for, and what it is that's good. There's only one thing I , together with everyone, know with certainty, know clearly and beyond question, and this piece of knowledge cannot be explained by reason - it is beyond that; it has no causes and can have no consequences.

If goodness has a cause, it is no longer goodness; if it has a consequence it is also not goodness. Consequently, goodness is outside the chain of cause and effect.

It is just this that I know, and that we all know.

And I had been seeking miracles; I regretted not having seen a miracle that would have convinced me. And here is a miracle, the only possible one, everlasting, surrounding me on all sides - and I never noticed it!

What miracle can be greater than that?

Can I really have found the solution of everything? Can my suffering really be over now? thought Leving, striding along the dusty road, unaware of either the heat or his fatigue, and with a feeling of relief after long-drawn-out suffering. This feeling gave him so much joy it seemed to him improbable. He was panting with excitement; incapable of walking any farther he left the road for the woods, and sat down on the uncut grass in the shade of the aspens. He took his hat off his sweating head and lay down, leaning on his elbows in the juicy, feathery forest grass.

Yes, I must think it through and clear things up, he thought, staring intently at the untrodden grass before him, and watching the movements of a little green beetle that was climbing up a stalk of couch grass and being hindered by a leaf of goutwort. Let's start all over again, he said to himself, turning aside the leaf of goutwort so that it wouldn't be in the beetle's way, and bending down another blade of grass for the beetle to pass on to. What is making me so happy? What have I discovered?

Before I used to say that in my body, in the body of this grass and of this beetle (there, he didn't want that blade of grass, it's spread its wings and flown away) a certain transformation of matter was accomplished in accordance with physical, chemical, and physiological laws. And in all of us, including the aspens, the clouds, and the misty nebulaein space, evolution takes place. Evolution from what? Into what? Infinite evolution and struggle? As though there could be any direction or struggle in the infinite! And I was astonished that in spite of the greatest mental concentration along those lines the meaning of life was not revealed to me, the meaning of my impulses and my aspirations. Whereas the meaning of my impulses is so clear to me that I live by them constantly, and I was astonished and overjoyed when a peasont expressed it to me: to live for God, for the soul.

I've discovered nothing. I've simply learned what I knew already. I've understood the force that gave me life not in the past alone, but is giving me life at this very moment. I've liberated myself from deception; I've learned to know my Master.

He summarized to himself the whole course of his thinking during the preceding two years, the beginning of which had been a clear, obvious thought about death at the sight of his beloved brother hopelessly ill.

At that time, having understood clearly for the first time that for every human being and for himself nothing lay ahead but suffering, death, and eternal oblivion, he decided that it was impossible to live that way, that he either had to interpret his life in such a way that it did not seem to be an evil mockery on the part of some devil, or else shoot himself.

But he did neither one thing nor the other; he went on living, thinking, and feeling; he even married at just this time, had many joys, and was happy whenever he wasn't thinking about the meaning of his life.

What did that mean? It meant he was living well but thinking badly.

He was living (without being aware of it) in accordance with the spiritual truths he had drunk in with his mother's milk, but he was thinking not only without acknowledging these truths but taking pains to evade them.

Now it was clear to him that he could live only thanks to those beliefs in which he had been brought up.

What would I be, how would I have lived my life, if I had lacked those beliefs? If I hadn't known you had to live for God and not for your own needs? I should have robbed, lied, murdered. None of the things that constitute the chief joys of my life would have existed for me. And though he made the greatest effort of the imagination he could nevertheless not picture to himself the bestial creature he himself would have been if he hadn't known what he was living for.

I was looking for an answer to my question. But thinking could not give me any answer to my question - it is not commensurate with it. It was life itself that gave me the answer, through my knowledge of what is good and what is bad. And I didn't acquire this knowledge in any special way; it was given to me just as it is to everyone - given just because I couldn't have gotten it anywhere.

Where did I get it from? Was it through reason that I managed to see that you had to love your neighbor and not throttle him? I was told that as a child, and I was glad to believe it because what was told me was what I already had in my soul. But who discovered it? Not reason. Reason discovered the struggle for existence and the law requiring anyone who interfered with the satisfaction of my desires to be throttled. That is a deduction made by reason. But it was not reason that could have discovered love of one's fellows, because that is unreasonable.

"Levin recalled a recent scene with Dolly and her children. The children, who had been left alone, had begun cooking raspberries over candles and squirting jets of milk into their mouths. Their mother, who had caught them in the act, tried to impress on them in front of Levin how much work it had taken the grown-ups to make what they were destroying, that the work had been done on their behalf, and if they broke the cups they wouldn't have anything to drink tea out of, and if they spilled the milk they wouldn't have anything to eat and would die of hunger.

And Levin was struck by the stolid, weary skepticism with which the children listened to what their mother was telling them. They were only annoyed that their absorbing game had been stopped, and didn't believe a word of what she was saying. Nor could they have believed, since they were unable to imagine the full volume of everything they made use of, and so could not realize that what they were destroying was the same as what they lived on.

All that comes about by itself, they thought, and there's nothing the least bit interesting or important about it, because it's always been that way and always will be. It's always the same thing over and over again. There's no reason for us to think about it, it's all there ready for us; what we want is to think up something of our own, something novel. Now there we thought up the idea of putting raspberries into a cup and cooking them over a candle and squirting the milk into each other's mouth. That's something novel, it's fun and not in the least worse than drinking out of cups.

Don't we do the same thing, didn't I do the same thing when I was using reason to look for the meaning of the forces of nature and the point of human existence? Levin went on thinking.

And don't all philosophical theories do the same thing when they embark on ways of thought strange and alien to man in order to lead him to a knowledge of what he's known for a long time, and knows with such certainty that he couldn't even go on living without it? Isn't it obvious and clear in the development of every philosopher's theory that he starts off by knowing just as unquestionably as the peasant, Theodore, and not in any way more clearly, the cardinal meaning of life, and simply wants to take a dubious intellectual path in order to return to what everyone knows?

Well then, what if the children were left alone to get hold of or manufacture cups for themselves, milk the cows, and so on? Would they start any mischief? They would just die of hunger. And suppose we were left with all our nonsense and ideas, with no conception of the one God, the Creator! With no conception of what goodness is, no explanation of moral evil!

Just try to build anything without these conceptions!

We destroy because we are spiritually sated. We're just children after all!

Where did I get the joyful knowledge I have in common with the peasant, which is the only thing that gives me any peace of mind? Where did I get it?

I who have been brought up in the conception of God, as a Christian, and have filled my whole life with those spiritual blessings given me by Christianity, overflowing with these blessings and living by them, I too am a destroyer just like the children, that is, I want to destroy what I live by. And the moment an important moment in life comes, just like the children when they're cold and hungry, I go to Him, and I feel even less than the children when they're scolded by their mother for their childish mischief than my own childish attempts at wanton madness should be reckoned against me.

Yes - what I know I don't know by reason, it has been given to me, disclosed to me, and I know it by my heart, and by my faith in the chief things taught by the Church.

The Church? The Church! Levin repeated to himself, turning over on the other side; leaning on his elbow he began gazing into the distance at a herd of cattle that were going down to the river along the farther side.

But can I believe in everything taught by the Church? he thought, testing himself by thinking up everything that might destroy his present peace of mind. He deliberately began recalling all the doctrines of the Church that had always seemed to him the most strange and used to put him off. The Creation? But how did I explain existence? By existence? By nothing? The Devil, sin? But how do I explain evil? Atonement?

But I know nothing, nothing, and there's nothing I can know except what is told to me as to everyone.

And now it seemed to him that there was not a single one of the beliefs of the Church that disturbed the chief thing - faith in God, in goodness, as the sole purpose of mankind.

Every doctrine of the Church could be led back to the belief in the service of the truth rather than of personal needs. And each one would not only not disturb that, but was necessary for the consummation of the principal miracle constantly being manifested on earth, which consists in enabling every individual, in common with millions of the most diverse human beings, sages and fools, children and graybeards - everyone, the peasant, Lvov, Kitty, paupers and kings - to understand beyond question one and the same thing, and to live that life of the spirit that is the only thing worth living for and the only thing we cherish.

Lying on his back now he gazed high up into the cloudless sky. Don't I know that to be infinite space, and not a rounded vault? But no matter how I screw up my eyes and strain my eyesight I cannot help seeing it as rounded and limited, and in spite of my knowledge of its being infinite space I'm undoubtedly right in seeing it as a firm blue vault; I'm more right than when I strain to see beyond it.

Levin had stopped thinking now and was merely listening in as it were to mystic voices that seemed to be carrying on a gay and earnest discussion of something.

Can this be faith? he thought, afraid to believe in his happiness. 'I thank Thee, my God!' he murmured, gulping down the sobs that were rising within him, and with both hands wiping away the tears that filled his eyes.

The Freedom of "Choice" Act

This is a video of a talk I gave this morning at the Youth and the Future of the Pro-Life Movement Conference at Nassau Community College. It's followed by a transcript of my speech because the video is kind of hard to hear.



Being that “surgical abortion is an invasive procedure in which sharp instruments are placed inside the uterus, a small organ in the woman’s body” and which in some cases requires an anesthetic, it would seem that all people, both pro-life and pro-choice, could agree that certain safeguards need to be in place to protect the woman undergoing this procedure. Certainly we should at least be able to agree that abortion merits the same safeguards as other surgeries. However, abortion supporters in the government have, in the past five months, focused much of their attention on trying to force through a bill, questionably titled the Freedom of Choice Act, or FOCA, which repeals all safety measures currently in place, and bans any future such safeguards.

The Freedom of Choice Act would make invalid any state laws regarding parental notification and consent. Such laws typically require that the abortionist notify at least one parent of “an unemancipated minor daughter prior to abortion.” Most states with such laws only require notification of the parents, however, some require their consent. Mr. Stephen Wagner, in his book Common Ground Without Compromise, offers that if we were all to “adopt the pro-choice position for a moment and say that abortion is the removal of a mass of tissue,” it would then resemble liposuction. “Can’t we all agree that no minor girl should be allowed to get liposuction without parental notification? Abortion and liposuction are similarly invasive. We would never trust a minor child to select her own physician for liposuction or make sure on her own that she receives the correct post-operative care in order to heal properly.” It seems to make sense that parents of minors should at the very least know about any sort of surgery, particularly such an invasive and dangerous surgery as abortion, that their daughter will be undergoing, especially, being that, if the girl suffers any complications from the operation her parents are responsible for her. Proper medical care can not be given to anyone if the cause of the medical problem is unknown. Therefore, if a girl’s own parents do not know that the injuries she is suffering from could be due to her recent abortion, how is a doctor supposed to administer proper treatment? Especially, considering that the girl herself has most likely not been informed of the possible complications of abortion.

This highlights a further issue with FOCA. In all other surgeries, “the doctor is required to explain in detail what the procedure is, its possible complications, etc. Only then does the patient give ‘informed’ consent.” Once again FOCA would overturn all current laws requiring informed consent and ban all future such laws. Surely, this can not be in the best interests of women. Essentially, while elected officials trumpet the Freedom of Choice Act they are removing the ability for any sort of informed choice. Under the Freedom of Choice Act abortionists are not only allowed to withhold information from their patients but even to avoid direct questions by the patient. This attitude was deplored by pro-choice feminist Naomi Wolf in her 1995 article “Our Bodies, Our Souls” when she stated that “To insist that truth is in poor taste is the very height of hypocrisy. Besides if these images are often the facts of the matter, and if we then claim that it is offensive for pro-choice women to be confronted with them, then we are making the judgment that women are too inherently weak to face a truth about which they have to make a grave decision. This view is unworthy of feminism.” Though I certainly have no expectation of abortionists showing photos of aborted children to women wishing to have an abortion, as Naomi Wolf speaks of pro-lifers doing, I believe it is at the very least to be expected that these so-called respectable doctors would inform a woman going in for an abortion of “the full factual information on the surgery, its possible complications [both] immediate and long-term, and, also, full details about ‘what she carries,’” as is done in other surgeries, such as liposuction, to use our previous example. Certainly, it is insulting to women to forego presenting them with “the best arguments and facts on both sides,” thereby effectively refusing them “choice.”

Of course, in all my references thus far to those who perform abortions I have used the word doctors. However, FOCA proposes to make it acceptable for any medical professional, such as nurse practitioners, physician’s assistants, and even dentists, to perform abortions. Abortionist Dr. William Rashbaum stated that “A high level of operator skill is at least as important in abortion as it is in any surgical endeavor. Abortion is a blind procedure that proceeds by touch, awareness of the nuances of sensations provided by instruments, honesty, and caution. While competent orientation in the performance of an abortion is essential, abortion, almost more than any other operation, demands experience to develop skill . . . Well trained, highly experienced and reputable gynecologists found, to their dismay, that when abortions became legal and they began performing them, the complication rates were frequently quite high.” If the complication rates are so high even among such “highly experienced and reputable gynecologists” what can we expect from medical professionals who have no experience in the gynecological field? I am reminded of a case in 1980, right here on Long Island, at an abortion mill run by Mr. William Baird, in which an ear, nose, and throat doctor attempted to perform an abortion. Nineteen year-old Robin, on whom he operated, was 20 weeks pregnant, not the 11-12 weeks that the physician had supposed. Robin went into shock during the procedure, was walked downstairs by staff members, and sent in a taxi to the hospital. Robin underwent a hysterectomy, needed 16 units of blood, and 6 hours of surgery. A month of Robin’s life was spent in the hospital, 4 days of which were in the Intensive Care Unit. After her discharge from the hospital Robin continued to suffer physical problems with her legs and bladder. This is only one example of what can happen when unqualified persons perform complex and potentially life-threatening surgeries. In fact, let us reverse the situation, would you want an abortionist to remove your tonsils? Then why would you allow an ear, nose, and throat doctor to perform the far more complex abortion procedure? Another honest abortionist, Dr. William Rashbaum, stated that “After I had done a thousand [abortions], I thought I was an expert, but, by the time I had done 5,000, I realized I was learning a lot. At this point, having done somewhere around 12,000 procedures, I’m beginning to think I’m reasonably competent.” After performing 12,000 abortions this doctor is only reasonably competent and yet the pro-choice politicians wish to allow dentists and ear nose and throat doctors, who have no training and no experience in the realm of abortion to perform this complex and dangerous procedure. These politicians could in no way be more flippant towards the health and safety of women.

These are only a very small sampling of the horrors which the Freedom of Choice Act wishes to inflict on women. With the strong public outcry against FOCA following President Obama’s election, politicians have resorted to underhanded tactics in order to deceive the American people. While the president continues to insist that the Freedom of Choice Act is no longer a priority, he and the Congress continue to pass it piece-by-piece. Do not allow them to get away with this! I encourage everyone to familiarize themselves with this heinous act in order to oppose it in all its forms.

Notre Shame

I am furious that Notre Dame University has invited President Obama to give their commencement address on Sunday. This is 100% inappropriate behavior for a Catholic University, particularly the University which has formerly been regarded as THE Catholic University in America. As a sidenote, Notre Dame has long been distancing itself from this title and with this move has finally forfeited all right to such.

Now, there are appropriate ways to respond to this abomination and there are inappropriate ways. Students at Notre Dame have been the paramount example of the appropriate way to respond. On their website, http://www.ndresponse.com/, students have laid out their plans for protest. These plans are appropriate, above all, because they are rooted in PRAYER. In fact, what better way to fight a battle than by calling on aid from those more powerful than oneself? The action of the University is a direct offense to "Notre Dame" (French for "Our Lady"), what better way to deal with it then, than by appealing to her Son?

The protest which the student group has GAINED PERMISSION FOR (note how they appropriately continue show respect for their university and it's faculty), on Saturday and Sunday, begins at 9:30 p.m. Saturday night with Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament in an on-campus chapel. Bishop D'Arcy, the bishop of South Bend, Indiana where the University of Notre Dame resides, will be attending Adoration (for the first time in years he will not be attending Notre Dame's commencement). Adoration will conclude at 10:45 a.m. Sunday with Benediction. At 11:15 a.m. Sunday Mass will be celebrated followed at 12:30 p.m. by "a rally affirming the uniquely Catholic and pro-life foundation of Notre Dame" ( http://www.ndresponse.com/commencement.html). The rally will include six speakers linked with Notre Dame: Rev. John Raphael, SSJ; ND '89, Elizabeth Naquin Borger; ND '78, former Chairman of the Board of the Women's Care Center, Dr. David Solomon; Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame; W.P. and H.B. White Director of the Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture; Chair of the steering committee for the Notre Dame Fund to Protect Human Life, Rev. Wilson Miscamble, CSC; ND '77 (M.A.), '80 (Ph.D.), '87 (M. Div.); Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame, Lacy Dodd; ND '99; Room at the Inn Board of Directors, Charlotte, North Carolina; and Chris Godfrey; ND Law '93; Life Athletes (Founder and President); starting offensive guard for Super Bowl XXI Champion New York Giants.

At 2:00 seniors who have made the admirable decision to forego their graduation, invite supporters to join them for a Vigil for Life at the Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes. "Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, will be leading a Scriptural Rosary during this prayer vigil." (http://www.ndresponse.com/commencement.html) At 3:45 there will be a final blessing before the departure of travelers. At 6:00 NDaffirmLife.org will be hosting a post-commencement party for the courageous students who chose to forego their own graduation in order to stand up for life.

Every moment of this protest shines forth the love of Christ which all Catholics are called to radiate. The kindness of thinking to include a post-commencement party for those courageous students who have glorified Christ through their foregoing an event so long and happily anticipated, in order to stand up for the little ones, is truly moving. I am truly impressed with the students of Notre Dame for organizing this protest, which so beautifully represents what the Catholic Church stands for.

In addition the students of ND Response have been organizing protests ever since the university's announcement of President Obama as the commencement speaker. Following Palm Sunday Mass at the Basilica of the Sacred Heart on April 5, 2009, students participated in the first official demonstration, a prayerful rally held in front of the University's main building. On Friday, April 17, the first Notre Dame March for Life began at 6:00 p.m. in the Grotto of Our Lady of Lourdes followed by speakers and a march. Two ongoing events have been a nightly Rosary at the Grotto and a Red Envelope campaign to Fr. John Jenkins, the President of the University, who is responsible for bringing President Obama to Notre Dame. All supporters, both students and non-students, have been asked to address a red envelope to Fr. Jenkins and include this message on the outside of the envelope: "Fr. Jenkins, This envelope represents one child who died because of an abortion. It is empty because the life that was taken is now unable to be a part of our world. This envelope was going to be sent to President Obama on March 31st. However, as he is scheduled to receive an Honarary Doctorate of Laws Degree from Notre Dame on May 17th, we ask that you deliver it to him on our behalf at that time." Non-student supporters are also asked to pray a nightly Rosary in communion with those at the Grotto, and, from April 8 to May 17, the forty days leading up to the commencement, supporters have been asked to assist in praying 1 million Rosaries for a conversion of heart for President Obama. In addition, the students also encouraged student supporters to attend the University's Fifth Annual Eucharistic Procession on April 26, not for the purpose of causing any disruption, but to take the opportunity to "pray for Our Lady's University" (http://www.ndresponse.com/commencement.html).

In stark contrast with the students of Notre Dame, we have also had some shining examples of inappropriate ways to deal with the University of Notre Dame's abhorrent actions. I am happy for students of Notre Dame that none of their own have been involved in such inappropriate protests. However, there have been those who have seen fit to take matters into their own hands, and even go so far as to criticize Bishops(!) for not engaging in their antiquated tactics which have had no effect whatsoever. Randall Terry is a good man who has, sadly, never lost the Operation Rescue mentality. Getting arrested saved lives and made a difference at the time. It has not been feasible for many years. It is certainly not appropriate in this situation. And it is certainly not appropriate for the recently converted Terry to think himself equal to reprimanding Bishops (St. Padre Pio once belted a guy for daring to criticize a bishop). Where the Notre Dame students have admirably shown respect to all, even to those who have forfeited any right they had to respect, others have acted with contempt. Clearly, all involved have good intentions, however, when it becomes obvious that one's actions are causing more harm than good, it is appropriate for one to cease such actions immediately. I would call on all those acting in contempt of Notre Dame's policy that on-campus demonstrations be organized by students and approved by the university, to cease their divisive actions and place themselves at the
service of the Notre Dame Response students.

That being said, the University has also acted heinously towards protesters. There are certain actions, such as parading around baby dolls covered in fake blood, which I would absolutely support the University's dealing appropriately with. However, for a Catholic university to arrest men and women for praying the Rosary is despicable. The video below shows the aggressive arrest of the 80 year old Father Norman Weslin. I can not think of words horrendous enough to describe the day when Our Lady's University authorised the arrest of a priest in the service of the Son of Our Lady.



The following is the official video of ND Response:

Book Review

COMMON GROUND WITHOUT COMPROMISE
by Stephen Wagner

By far the best book I have read on the abortion issue! Should be read by those on both sides of the issue and those who take no side. The more people who follow the advice laid out in this book, both in terms of the abortion issue and in all aspects of life, the better off we will be.

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid

On April 7 Janet Napolitano, the head of homeland security, released a nine page document warning of "radicals on right". Not 10 days later CNN's Susan Roesgen was reporting from the Chicago tax day tea party which was organized to protest the bailouts, stimulus package, wasteful spending, and all around misuse of American's tax dollars:



"This is anti-cnn since it is highly promoted by the right wing conservative network Fox". You see, what this document does is allow the leftist media to come out of the closet. Whereas they used to at least have to put up the pretense of being unbiased, now they will surely present it as their patriotic duty to beat up on the right.

The Washington Times reports that "A footnote attached to the report by the Homeland Security Office of Intelligence and Analysis defines "rightwing extremism in the United States" as including not just racist or hate groups, but also groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority"

First off, racist? Umm, clearly Ms Napolitano must have failed history cuz umm, who freed the slaves? The right. Who supported the fourteenth and fifteenth amendments? The right. Shall I go on?

Secondly, "groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority"? Once again Ms. Napolitano insists on advertising her ignorance because the United States was founded as 13 independent states united under a very loose federal government. This country was founded on loyalty to individual states not to a massive federal government which has long since overstepped it's bounds.

"It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single-issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration," Which is why the pro-life movement has to remain a 100% peaceful organization. Pro-Lifers: please remember, the devil hates us. And he will do anything and everything to trip you up. Screaming at people, especially at women entering clinics, is not pro-life and you are not helping anyone when you do that. That is the devil twisting your righteous anger and using it to hurt the cause.

"The report . . . makes clear that the Homeland Security Department does not have 'specific information that domestic rightwing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence.'It warns that fringe organizations are gaining recruits, but it provides no numbers." Well then what's the point of publishing it? Oh, of course, silly me, to smear the right, and give the left an excuse to treat us unfairly. In fact, could this be a ploy to implement the "fairness" doctrine?

As a p.s. here are two little notes of interest about cnn's reporting:

Susan Roesgen tells the man with whom she is arguing that the stimulus will give $50 billion to Illinois, but how much of that do you think this guy is gonna get? I would be willing to bet most of my possessions that it's a whopping ZERO!

She goes on to state that "this is not really family viewing" yet later on the very same network it was perfectly acceptable for Anderson Cooper to state that "It's hard to talk when you're teabagging."

Notre Dame Scandal

"Bernie Madoff has declined an honorary doctorate in economics from the University of Notre Dame, but all is not lost. Barack Hussein Obama, enabler in chief of abortion, has agreed to speak at the 2009 commencement and to receive an honorary doctorate of law. That abortion and its advocacy violate a primary precept of natural law reinforced by the Catholic Church’s explicit doctrine is a mere bagatelle. Wackos of all kinds will kick up a fuss, of course, but their protest will go unnoticed in South Bend. The pell-mell pursuit of warm and fuzzy Catholicism will continue. How better to defend the faith than to celebrate a man who advocates polishing off babies even after they are born? The newly created Herod Award will be added to the university’s recognition of the chief magistrate. Administrators are hugging themselves with delight at this massive publicity coup. The national championship in football has eluded Notre Dame for many years, but when the president dribbles onto the stage at the great event, the hall will erupt in ecstatic applause; the president, Father Jenkins, will wring his hand; and a final nail will be driven into the coffin of a once-great Catholic university. No one will note nor long remember what Barack Obama says on the occasion. Who listens to commencement addresses? But the Lady atop the golden dome, recalling the flight into Egypt, will exhibit one of her many titles: She who weeps."

— Ralph McInerny, professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, is author of the Father Dowling mystery series.

"The One Thing I Can't Get Back Is the One Thing I Miss"

I was told today that I've lived a very sheltered life. I have. My innocence has been teased in the past both by my friends and those who were not my friends. I'm glad I've lived a sheltered life. I wish it could have been more sheltered. I know things that I wish I didn't know. And it's not through any fault of those who love me that I've learned these things. It's because society tells us that if we don't know these sickening things we're ignorant. We're naive and stupid and old fashioned. Innocence once lost can't be regained. And now "the one thing I can't get back is the one thing I miss."