Yesterday, President Obama was interviewed for a segment on the death of Osama bin Laden that will appear on 60 Minutes this Sunday. Portions of that interview have already been released, and one thing has been made clear: the president has no intention of releasing the photos of bin Laden's corpse to the American public. To that I only have one thing to say: wrong decision, Mr. President.
I'm sure that Obama will outline the reasons for his decision when the entire interview is aired Sunday evening. But in the meantime, allow me to outline my reasons why the photos should be released.
First of all, America needs to make a statement to the rest of the world that you can't attack us on our soil, claim thousands of innocent lives, and get away with it. The fact that we've been unable to get bin Laden all these years has always been perceived by our enemies as a sign of weakness. Behind our backs, if not to our faces, they've laughed at us for failing in our attempts to bring him to justice.
Now that we've managed to accomplish the task, it's imperative that we let the world know that you can't outrun us, you can't hide from us, and you can't escape justice for the transgressions you carry out against our people. Sooner or later, we're going to get you. Our enemies need to be reminded of that, and what better way to remind them than with a picture of our most wanted terrorist lying in a pool of his own blood with a bullethole in his head.
It is well-known that in the Muslim world, conspiracy theories run amok. Most Muslims will refuse to believe that bin Laden is dead until they see the proof. Yesterday on Hannity, Anne Coulter made an excellent point on how Obama's strategy for dealing with the Muslim problem is completely backwards. Muslims don't respond to hyper-sensitivity; they respond to strength. If we want to win their respect, then we need to show them that we got our man, not hide the photos for fear that we might offend them.
Aside from sending a clear message to the rest of the world, there are other reasons, rooted in both logic and emotion, for publicizing the pictures. First, the whole rationale of sending in the Navy SEALS to carry out the mission was rooted in proof of death. We could have bombed the compound where bin Laden was hiding. We could have sent a drone to finish the job. But Obama chose to go with the SEALS. Why? Very simply, because he wanted to know for sure that we got him.
For the record, I agree with that. I think the president made the right decision here, and I would have done exactly the same thing. But here's where things begin to become incomprehensible. We sent in our elite forces, they got the job done, and they obtained proof of bin Laden's death. And now, we're not showing it to the public? Can someone please explain this to me? If you're not going to use the proof you so badly wanted in the first place, then why put the lives of those forty Navy SEALS at risk? It makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Finally, the photos should be released because we as Americans are ENTITLED to see them. It's not very often that I use the word "entitled," but in this case it is both appropriate and necessary. As taxpayers, we have been funding the war on terror for a decade. We paid for our government to carry out this operation. If our money was spent to carry out this task, how then can anyone justify not showing us the results?
If that is not enough, then know that we have paid an even heftier price in the war on terror. The events of 9/11/01 and the way they have forever changed our way of life have taken an emotional and psychological toll on us that can never be adequately measured. We didn't just pay the price financially. We paid the price in many other ways that were far more expensive. For that, we are more than justified in demanding that we get to see the final product.
I hope the president changes his mind, but I'm certainly not going to hold my breath. I've come to accept that the only way we're going to have the opportunity to see the photos is if he is defeated in the 2012 election. As far as I'm concerned, that just gives me another reason to vote Republican.
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
Time for America to Stop Playing the Fool
The killing of Osama bin Laden has brought new information to light, and I'm not talking about the many files we confiscated from the compound where he was hiding. I'm talking about our relationship with Pakistan and how it coincides with everything else that has been happening to our great country as of late.
If there is one thing we have learned from this historic incident, it is that we can no longer afford to trust Pakistan. In short, it's time for America to stop playing the fool.
In my opinion, this is the issue that has helped Donald Trump garner unprecedented media attention over the last month and rise to the top of the polls for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. Trump is capitalizing on the anger so many Americans are feeling toward the rest of the world at the moment. China manipulates their currency and takes our jobs, while millions of Americans are out of work. OPEC raises oil prices and makes a fortune, while Americans continue to get crushed by exorbitant fuel prices. And now, it's crystal clear that Pakistan has been accepting billions of dollars in aid from the United States to fight the war on terror, only to be hiding bin Laden in a compound near one of their military bases for the last several years.
If you believe they didn't know he was there, then I've got a bridge to sell you. If you believe Hilary Clinton when she says that Pakistan helped us in locating him, then you're a sad fool. The Pakistani government is full of liars from top to bottom, and their intelligence service (the ISI) is laced with corruption. We cannot trust them going forward, and it's time we sever our ties and fight our own battles with the terrorists on their terrain. It may be an affront to their sovereignty, but the safety of our citizens is far more important.
I can't wait to hear what Trump has to say when the dust settles. My guess is that he'll let the world know that if he were president, he'd demand that Pakistan pay back the billions of dollars in aid we gave to them, plus interest. He'll say that he'd call them out on what they did, refuse to have any future dealings with their government, and give India the green light to do whatever they need to do in their perpetual conflict with their archenemy. And you know what? He'd be right.
Our country holds all the cards as the world's dominant superpower. Yes, we're deep in debt and still suffering the effects of the worst economic crisis since The Great Depression. Yes, our military is maybe a bit overstretched as the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya continue. But we are still number one, and we need to capitalize on our status for the sake of the well-being of our nation.
There is absolutely no question that President Obama will get a big bump in the polls as a result of bringing bin Laden to justice. The same thing happened to President George H.W. Bush in 1991, after the United States made quick work of Saddam Hussein's elite forces in the first Gulf War. But we all remember what happened in 1992. The economy went south, and soon people forgot about Bush's victory in Iraq. Winning the Gulf War was not enough to carry him, as Bill Clinton claimed victory in the presidential election.
The same could happen to Obama next year. I really don't think that getting bin Laden will be enough to put him over the top in 2012. The polls show that Americans are increasingly disapproving of his economic policies, so unless the economy turns around, he will remain a vulnerable target.
It will be interesting to see if he implements any changes in our relations with Pakistan. Do you think Americans will be angry that Pakistan has been taking billions of dollars from us and laughing at us behind our backs? You know, the same Americans who are out of work, paying four dollars a gallon for gas, and struggling just to get by? Hmm...maybe just a little.
I will admit that the unity our country is experiencing during this joyous time is a welcome change from the bitter bipartisanship that has ruled Washington over the past several months. But let's face it: the love we're all feeling for each other will be short-lived. It's only a matter of time before our government gets back to work on the debt ceiling debate and the 2012 budget battle.
And that, my friends, is where we need to start getting serious and stop playing the fool. Enough is enough. We can't continue going down the road to financial ruin and allow the rest of the world to get rich off of us. There's little doubt that this will be the key to the 2012 presidential election. In the end, the winner will be the one who convinces the American people that he will no longer allow other countries to take advantage of us. He'll be the one who the people believe will take care of our own. He'll be the one who they believe will lead us back to prosperity, and once again make us the envy of all nations. I don't know who that person will be. But I am quite certain of one thing: he will not be Barack Hussein Obama.
If there is one thing we have learned from this historic incident, it is that we can no longer afford to trust Pakistan. In short, it's time for America to stop playing the fool.
In my opinion, this is the issue that has helped Donald Trump garner unprecedented media attention over the last month and rise to the top of the polls for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. Trump is capitalizing on the anger so many Americans are feeling toward the rest of the world at the moment. China manipulates their currency and takes our jobs, while millions of Americans are out of work. OPEC raises oil prices and makes a fortune, while Americans continue to get crushed by exorbitant fuel prices. And now, it's crystal clear that Pakistan has been accepting billions of dollars in aid from the United States to fight the war on terror, only to be hiding bin Laden in a compound near one of their military bases for the last several years.
If you believe they didn't know he was there, then I've got a bridge to sell you. If you believe Hilary Clinton when she says that Pakistan helped us in locating him, then you're a sad fool. The Pakistani government is full of liars from top to bottom, and their intelligence service (the ISI) is laced with corruption. We cannot trust them going forward, and it's time we sever our ties and fight our own battles with the terrorists on their terrain. It may be an affront to their sovereignty, but the safety of our citizens is far more important.
I can't wait to hear what Trump has to say when the dust settles. My guess is that he'll let the world know that if he were president, he'd demand that Pakistan pay back the billions of dollars in aid we gave to them, plus interest. He'll say that he'd call them out on what they did, refuse to have any future dealings with their government, and give India the green light to do whatever they need to do in their perpetual conflict with their archenemy. And you know what? He'd be right.
Our country holds all the cards as the world's dominant superpower. Yes, we're deep in debt and still suffering the effects of the worst economic crisis since The Great Depression. Yes, our military is maybe a bit overstretched as the conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya continue. But we are still number one, and we need to capitalize on our status for the sake of the well-being of our nation.
There is absolutely no question that President Obama will get a big bump in the polls as a result of bringing bin Laden to justice. The same thing happened to President George H.W. Bush in 1991, after the United States made quick work of Saddam Hussein's elite forces in the first Gulf War. But we all remember what happened in 1992. The economy went south, and soon people forgot about Bush's victory in Iraq. Winning the Gulf War was not enough to carry him, as Bill Clinton claimed victory in the presidential election.
The same could happen to Obama next year. I really don't think that getting bin Laden will be enough to put him over the top in 2012. The polls show that Americans are increasingly disapproving of his economic policies, so unless the economy turns around, he will remain a vulnerable target.
It will be interesting to see if he implements any changes in our relations with Pakistan. Do you think Americans will be angry that Pakistan has been taking billions of dollars from us and laughing at us behind our backs? You know, the same Americans who are out of work, paying four dollars a gallon for gas, and struggling just to get by? Hmm...maybe just a little.
I will admit that the unity our country is experiencing during this joyous time is a welcome change from the bitter bipartisanship that has ruled Washington over the past several months. But let's face it: the love we're all feeling for each other will be short-lived. It's only a matter of time before our government gets back to work on the debt ceiling debate and the 2012 budget battle.
And that, my friends, is where we need to start getting serious and stop playing the fool. Enough is enough. We can't continue going down the road to financial ruin and allow the rest of the world to get rich off of us. There's little doubt that this will be the key to the 2012 presidential election. In the end, the winner will be the one who convinces the American people that he will no longer allow other countries to take advantage of us. He'll be the one who the people believe will take care of our own. He'll be the one who they believe will lead us back to prosperity, and once again make us the envy of all nations. I don't know who that person will be. But I am quite certain of one thing: he will not be Barack Hussein Obama.
Monday, May 2, 2011
And Justice For All
I take one week off from my blog to prepare for some intense job interviews and all hell breaks loose! There's a royal wedding, more theatrics from The Donald, a strike on Gadhafi's compound that kills his son and grandchildren, all followed by two once-in-a-lifetime events that occurred on the same day. Mr. Trump will have to wait, for there are far more important things to talk about now.
Yesterday in Rome, over one million Catholics gathered to celebrate the beatification of Pope John Paul II. Blessed Pope John Paul II is now but one step away from sainthood. If the Vatican is able to confirm one more miracle attributed to him, then he will be canonized. Several claims have already been made, and I would wager that at least one will be confirmed. It's only a matter of time, most likely five or six years, before we start referring to our great pontiff as Pope Saint John Paul II.
I had the incredible honor of meeting him at Sacred Heart Cathedral in Newark during his visit to America in October of 1995. It was without question the most memorable day of my life, as I can still recall being screened by Secret Service agents as I walked into the cathedral at noon for a 5:30 evening prayer service. Several celebrities were there, including Bob Hope and Joe Piscopo, and eventually President Bill Clinton and the first lady arrived as well.
I can't even begin to describe the aura of the cathedral as the pope made his entrance. You knew something special was happening. You felt it in the air. One simply can't put it into words; it has to be experienced firsthand. I can tell you this much. That same feeling did not surface when the president strolled into his pew. It was as if the most powerful man on the planet was any other citizen on that day. His presence paled in comparison to that of the Holy Father, and by a wide margin at that.
I will always remember meeting the man to face to face, shaking his hand, and looking into his eyes. Those eyes were full of life, and they served to divert attention away from his failing health, which was already becoming somewhat apparent. He gave me a rosary which he blessed, and thankfully a photographer from the Vatican was there to snap a picture of my encounter with him. To this day, it remains the greatest moment of my life. Perhaps one day I can say that I held the hand of a saint.
But just as one thought this momentous occasion would dominate the news coverage throughout the day and well into the next, the unthinkable happened. President Obama announced late last night that U.S. special forces killed Osama bin Laden in a raid on his compound. Celebrations broke out throughout the country, from Washington to New York to the Mets-Phillies game in Philadelphia. All of a sudden, one of the rarest and most monumental of events in history was forced to take a backseat to the story of how America finally brought justice to the most reviled terrorist in the world.
Today, I can't stop thinking about how the most evil of men was killed on the same day that the most holy of men was elevated. Is it a coincidence? Note that when I pose this question, I do not mean to infer that Blessed Pope John Paul II had anything to do with the killing of bin Laden. What I am saying is that maybe there is a message hidden in there somewhere.
Perhaps it's God's way of telling us that in the end, there will be justice for all. How many times has it been said in the Scriptures that the wicked shall perish, while the just will prosper? When I first realized the magnitude of what occurred yesterday, it sent a shiver down my spine. I firmly do believe that God meant to send us all a message, and we'd be wise to heed it.
Today, we thank God for the gift of the legacy of Blessed Pope John Paul II, and for the justice administered to Osama bin Laden. Both are reasons to be grateful, and both are lessons we can learn from. For those of us who lived it, we'll never forget the date of May 1, 2011. Hopefully we'll always remember the message behind it as well.
Yesterday in Rome, over one million Catholics gathered to celebrate the beatification of Pope John Paul II. Blessed Pope John Paul II is now but one step away from sainthood. If the Vatican is able to confirm one more miracle attributed to him, then he will be canonized. Several claims have already been made, and I would wager that at least one will be confirmed. It's only a matter of time, most likely five or six years, before we start referring to our great pontiff as Pope Saint John Paul II.
I had the incredible honor of meeting him at Sacred Heart Cathedral in Newark during his visit to America in October of 1995. It was without question the most memorable day of my life, as I can still recall being screened by Secret Service agents as I walked into the cathedral at noon for a 5:30 evening prayer service. Several celebrities were there, including Bob Hope and Joe Piscopo, and eventually President Bill Clinton and the first lady arrived as well.
I can't even begin to describe the aura of the cathedral as the pope made his entrance. You knew something special was happening. You felt it in the air. One simply can't put it into words; it has to be experienced firsthand. I can tell you this much. That same feeling did not surface when the president strolled into his pew. It was as if the most powerful man on the planet was any other citizen on that day. His presence paled in comparison to that of the Holy Father, and by a wide margin at that.
I will always remember meeting the man to face to face, shaking his hand, and looking into his eyes. Those eyes were full of life, and they served to divert attention away from his failing health, which was already becoming somewhat apparent. He gave me a rosary which he blessed, and thankfully a photographer from the Vatican was there to snap a picture of my encounter with him. To this day, it remains the greatest moment of my life. Perhaps one day I can say that I held the hand of a saint.
But just as one thought this momentous occasion would dominate the news coverage throughout the day and well into the next, the unthinkable happened. President Obama announced late last night that U.S. special forces killed Osama bin Laden in a raid on his compound. Celebrations broke out throughout the country, from Washington to New York to the Mets-Phillies game in Philadelphia. All of a sudden, one of the rarest and most monumental of events in history was forced to take a backseat to the story of how America finally brought justice to the most reviled terrorist in the world.
Today, I can't stop thinking about how the most evil of men was killed on the same day that the most holy of men was elevated. Is it a coincidence? Note that when I pose this question, I do not mean to infer that Blessed Pope John Paul II had anything to do with the killing of bin Laden. What I am saying is that maybe there is a message hidden in there somewhere.
Perhaps it's God's way of telling us that in the end, there will be justice for all. How many times has it been said in the Scriptures that the wicked shall perish, while the just will prosper? When I first realized the magnitude of what occurred yesterday, it sent a shiver down my spine. I firmly do believe that God meant to send us all a message, and we'd be wise to heed it.
Today, we thank God for the gift of the legacy of Blessed Pope John Paul II, and for the justice administered to Osama bin Laden. Both are reasons to be grateful, and both are lessons we can learn from. For those of us who lived it, we'll never forget the date of May 1, 2011. Hopefully we'll always remember the message behind it as well.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Oddsmakers' Jobs Are Safe From Krauthammer
Last week, Pulitzer award-winning journalist and conservative columnist, Dr. Charles Krauthammer, laid out his early lines for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination. As you can tell from the title of this post, I did not agree with them at all.
Where do I even begin? For starters, he lists Tea Party darling Michele Bachmann at 20-1. Granted, I am a big fan of hers and her views are completely in line with everything I hold dear. But the fact is that Ms. Bachmann, much like President Obama, has absolutely no executive experience on her resume. To borrow the phrase from U.S. Congressman Colonel Allen West (R-Florida), she has never even run a lemonade stand.
She served as a state senator for six years and has been a member of the U.S. House of Representives for four years. How can anyone argue that she is ready for the presidency? Given the way Republicans have bashed Obama for his lack of executive experience and leadership skills, they'd be foolish to even consider nominating her in 2012. She may be raising a lot of money and will certainly get a lot of support from the Tea Party, but I'm putting her odds of winning the nomination at 100-1 at best. Yes, that's just a tad longer than those laid out by Krauthammer.
Dr. Krauthammer lists two former U.S. governors, Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty, as his favorites at 5-1. He rightly points out that Romney has tons of public and private sector executive experience, and uses a brilliant analogy to describe the major liability of Romneycare. Krauthammer calls Romney "Secretariat at Belmont, but ridden by Minnesota Fats."
As for Pawlenty, he is described as the "mouse that roars" who "could be the last man standing." But it is my view that neither Romney nor Pawlenty have the charisma necessary to win the nomination. Whether you like Obama or not, disagree with his views or not, you have to admit that he is a charismatic politician. The GOP can't afford to nominate someone who pales in comparison in this category, and that is why I see Romney and Pawlenty as having much longer odds, say 20-1.
What really shocked me though about Krauthammer's column is the way in which he lambasted Donald Trump. He said that he was more of a spectacle than a serious candidate. He even went so far as to call him "a provocateur and a clown, the Republicans’ Al Sharpton." Krauthammer finished his thought by saying that the Lions have a better chance of winning the Super Bowl than Trump does of winning the GOP nomination.
I really don't get the comparison to Al Sharpton. First of all, Sharpton, to use the phrase yet again, never even ran a lemonade stand. His executive experience is infinitesimal compared to that of Trump, making the Donald a far superior candidate for the presidency. Moreover, when did Sharpton ever finish atop the polls when he ran for president? Never. Meanwhile, Trump's views and candid comments are resonating with voters, enabling him to finish tied in the top spot with Mike Huckabee in a recent poll. Krauthammer doesn't even give a line on Trump, but I'll list him as one of the favorites at 10-1.
The rest of the field was handicapped as such: Mitch Daniels at 6-1, Haley Barbour at 7-1, and Newt Gingrich at 12-1. Krauthammer does not believe that either Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee will run, so he did not list odds for either one. Although I agree with Gingrich at 12-1, I think Daniels and Barbour should be listed down there with Romney and Pawlenty at 20-1. If Huckabee decides to run, I'd have him as the overall favorite in this race at 5-1, and I'd list Governor Palin at 15-1.
Only time will tell which one of us is more accurate, and come August of next year, I'll be sure to take a look back and see whose odds were more on target. In the meantime, anyone care to place a bet?
Where do I even begin? For starters, he lists Tea Party darling Michele Bachmann at 20-1. Granted, I am a big fan of hers and her views are completely in line with everything I hold dear. But the fact is that Ms. Bachmann, much like President Obama, has absolutely no executive experience on her resume. To borrow the phrase from U.S. Congressman Colonel Allen West (R-Florida), she has never even run a lemonade stand.
She served as a state senator for six years and has been a member of the U.S. House of Representives for four years. How can anyone argue that she is ready for the presidency? Given the way Republicans have bashed Obama for his lack of executive experience and leadership skills, they'd be foolish to even consider nominating her in 2012. She may be raising a lot of money and will certainly get a lot of support from the Tea Party, but I'm putting her odds of winning the nomination at 100-1 at best. Yes, that's just a tad longer than those laid out by Krauthammer.
Dr. Krauthammer lists two former U.S. governors, Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty, as his favorites at 5-1. He rightly points out that Romney has tons of public and private sector executive experience, and uses a brilliant analogy to describe the major liability of Romneycare. Krauthammer calls Romney "Secretariat at Belmont, but ridden by Minnesota Fats."
As for Pawlenty, he is described as the "mouse that roars" who "could be the last man standing." But it is my view that neither Romney nor Pawlenty have the charisma necessary to win the nomination. Whether you like Obama or not, disagree with his views or not, you have to admit that he is a charismatic politician. The GOP can't afford to nominate someone who pales in comparison in this category, and that is why I see Romney and Pawlenty as having much longer odds, say 20-1.
What really shocked me though about Krauthammer's column is the way in which he lambasted Donald Trump. He said that he was more of a spectacle than a serious candidate. He even went so far as to call him "a provocateur and a clown, the Republicans’ Al Sharpton." Krauthammer finished his thought by saying that the Lions have a better chance of winning the Super Bowl than Trump does of winning the GOP nomination.
I really don't get the comparison to Al Sharpton. First of all, Sharpton, to use the phrase yet again, never even ran a lemonade stand. His executive experience is infinitesimal compared to that of Trump, making the Donald a far superior candidate for the presidency. Moreover, when did Sharpton ever finish atop the polls when he ran for president? Never. Meanwhile, Trump's views and candid comments are resonating with voters, enabling him to finish tied in the top spot with Mike Huckabee in a recent poll. Krauthammer doesn't even give a line on Trump, but I'll list him as one of the favorites at 10-1.
The rest of the field was handicapped as such: Mitch Daniels at 6-1, Haley Barbour at 7-1, and Newt Gingrich at 12-1. Krauthammer does not believe that either Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee will run, so he did not list odds for either one. Although I agree with Gingrich at 12-1, I think Daniels and Barbour should be listed down there with Romney and Pawlenty at 20-1. If Huckabee decides to run, I'd have him as the overall favorite in this race at 5-1, and I'd list Governor Palin at 15-1.
Only time will tell which one of us is more accurate, and come August of next year, I'll be sure to take a look back and see whose odds were more on target. In the meantime, anyone care to place a bet?
Friday, April 22, 2011
Christ Continues to Be Crucified
Today is Good Friday, a day when we as Christians recall the crucifixion and death of our Savior and honor the sacrifice he made for our sins. And though it occurred over 2,000 years ago, the fact remains that Christ continues to be crucified to this very day.
He is crucified by the liberal media, who are quick to jump all over stories that have an anti-Christian aura to them. They take advantage of every opportunity they have to demonize the Catholic Church, and they're only too happy to devote press coverage to individuals or institutions that say things or do things to offend Christians. While Islam remains a sacred cow that the media goes out of its way to protect, Christians, especially Catholics, are viewed as targets with massive bullseyes on their backs.
He is crucified by the entertainment industry, in movies, on television, and in music. Sometimes these entities glorify views that are antithetical to Christian beliefs. Sometimes they'll cleverly disguise their agenda with veiled references. Sometimes they'll even unleash direct, overt attacks on Christianity. What I find most disturbing about it is that the entertainment industry exerts a great deal of influence on our youth, and thus on the future of our society. This can only serve to prolong the vicious cycle of secular assaults on Christian values.
He is crucified by our government, who do everything they can to push Him further and further away. Whether it's a judge who rules that nativity scenes or displays of crosses are unconstitutional, a legislator who votes in favor of a woman's right to murder her unborn child, or a public school that confiscates bibles and rosaries, it is quite evident what direction our leaders have been moving in over the past several decades.
He is crucified throughout the world by Muslims who are intolerant of other religious views. Of course, you'll never see the liberal media devote significant coverage to the many Christians who have been harassed, assaulted, tortured, and even murdered in countries like Indonesia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Nigeria. And to think that our armed forces have come to the rescue in an effort to liberate some of these countries, that so many of our brave men and women have given their lives to these missions...and for what? So that Muslims can persecute Christians?
Finally, Christ continues to be crucified by each and every one of us through our sins. And so, on this Good Friday, I urge all of my Christian friends to reflect on their lives and the ways in which they have crucified Christ through their own actions. By being truly sorry and making reparations for our sinful acts, we can alleviate His suffering. While we may not be able to change the situations I described above, we can help counter the evil all throughout the world by confessing our sins, doing our penance, and putting forth our best effort to emulate Christ in every way possible. Remember to bow your heads and take a moment of silence at noon today, and never forget that every crucifixion is followed by a resurrection.
He is crucified by the liberal media, who are quick to jump all over stories that have an anti-Christian aura to them. They take advantage of every opportunity they have to demonize the Catholic Church, and they're only too happy to devote press coverage to individuals or institutions that say things or do things to offend Christians. While Islam remains a sacred cow that the media goes out of its way to protect, Christians, especially Catholics, are viewed as targets with massive bullseyes on their backs.
He is crucified by the entertainment industry, in movies, on television, and in music. Sometimes these entities glorify views that are antithetical to Christian beliefs. Sometimes they'll cleverly disguise their agenda with veiled references. Sometimes they'll even unleash direct, overt attacks on Christianity. What I find most disturbing about it is that the entertainment industry exerts a great deal of influence on our youth, and thus on the future of our society. This can only serve to prolong the vicious cycle of secular assaults on Christian values.
He is crucified by our government, who do everything they can to push Him further and further away. Whether it's a judge who rules that nativity scenes or displays of crosses are unconstitutional, a legislator who votes in favor of a woman's right to murder her unborn child, or a public school that confiscates bibles and rosaries, it is quite evident what direction our leaders have been moving in over the past several decades.
He is crucified throughout the world by Muslims who are intolerant of other religious views. Of course, you'll never see the liberal media devote significant coverage to the many Christians who have been harassed, assaulted, tortured, and even murdered in countries like Indonesia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, and Nigeria. And to think that our armed forces have come to the rescue in an effort to liberate some of these countries, that so many of our brave men and women have given their lives to these missions...and for what? So that Muslims can persecute Christians?
Finally, Christ continues to be crucified by each and every one of us through our sins. And so, on this Good Friday, I urge all of my Christian friends to reflect on their lives and the ways in which they have crucified Christ through their own actions. By being truly sorry and making reparations for our sinful acts, we can alleviate His suffering. While we may not be able to change the situations I described above, we can help counter the evil all throughout the world by confessing our sins, doing our penance, and putting forth our best effort to emulate Christ in every way possible. Remember to bow your heads and take a moment of silence at noon today, and never forget that every crucifixion is followed by a resurrection.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Reflection on Holy Week
For Catholics, and perhaps for all Christians, this coming week is the most solemn time of the year. We'll be celebrating the Easter Triduum beginning this Thursday, which is Holy Thursday. On that evening we will commemorate the Last Supper, and participate in a procession with the Blessed Sacrament following Mass. The following day, of course, is Good Friday, to be followed by Holy Saturday and Easter Sunday.
This is a time of year for all of us to reflect on our lives, especially the disappointments, troubles, and sorrows we've endured over the past year. It provides us with a unique opportunity to view our pain and suffering in the context of Christ's own passion and death.
All of us, no matter how hard we try to live a good life, endure pain and suffering. It's part of the human condition, and something none of us can avoid. I know I've had my fair share over the past year, losing my job, having three surgeries, mourning the loss of my grandmother, and watching helplessly as my 6 year-old nephew was diagnosed with a horrible disease. I think all of us have a year like that at some point during our lives.
But no matter how difficult the struggle may be, we can take comfort in the fact that we are not alone. God Himself knows our suffering. He put Himself in our position by taking the form of a man, and then accepting and even embracing a tragic, brutal death. The agony in the garden, the scourging at the pillar, the crowning with thorns, the carrying of the cross, and the crucifixion form the five sorrowful mysteries of the Holy Rosary, and they paint for us the picture of the extreme affliction Christ suffered during his last hours.
For me, it is a comfort to know that God understands our pain. He has been there before, and He knows exactly what we are going through. In fact, He knows a lot more about it than us, because His fate was far more painful and cruel than anything we will ever endure throughout the course of our lives.
But the greatest part about it all has to do with what followed this historic atrocity. Though a righteous man who lived his life for others was unjustly accused, convicted, tortured, and executed, the final result was greater than anyone could have ever imagined. For it is the Resurrection of Christ that gives us hope and strengthens our faith in times of trial.
As human beings, we experience suffering and death in many forms. Whether the loss of a loved one or a friend, the end of a marriage or long-term relationship, the loss of employment, or the loss of our homes and other possessions we hold dear, death manifests itself in many ways. But no matter what shape it takes, death can and will ultimately be succeeded by a resurrection.
I can sense that my resurrection is coming. Signs are popping up that this difficult, arduous time in my life is coming to an end, and that a transition to a new stage is already in process. I anticipate that this will be accompanied by a renewed sense of joy, one which will be greatly welcome! How amazing it is that this is all happening during this time of year, when Easter is fast approaching and the Resurrection of Christ will be celebrated around the world.
I hope that all of you who have suffered over the past year can also take solace in this, and that you too realize that no matter how great the pain, a resurrection will come. It may already be on its way. Hang in there, and to all of my Christian friends, Happy Holy Week!
This is a time of year for all of us to reflect on our lives, especially the disappointments, troubles, and sorrows we've endured over the past year. It provides us with a unique opportunity to view our pain and suffering in the context of Christ's own passion and death.
All of us, no matter how hard we try to live a good life, endure pain and suffering. It's part of the human condition, and something none of us can avoid. I know I've had my fair share over the past year, losing my job, having three surgeries, mourning the loss of my grandmother, and watching helplessly as my 6 year-old nephew was diagnosed with a horrible disease. I think all of us have a year like that at some point during our lives.
But no matter how difficult the struggle may be, we can take comfort in the fact that we are not alone. God Himself knows our suffering. He put Himself in our position by taking the form of a man, and then accepting and even embracing a tragic, brutal death. The agony in the garden, the scourging at the pillar, the crowning with thorns, the carrying of the cross, and the crucifixion form the five sorrowful mysteries of the Holy Rosary, and they paint for us the picture of the extreme affliction Christ suffered during his last hours.
For me, it is a comfort to know that God understands our pain. He has been there before, and He knows exactly what we are going through. In fact, He knows a lot more about it than us, because His fate was far more painful and cruel than anything we will ever endure throughout the course of our lives.
But the greatest part about it all has to do with what followed this historic atrocity. Though a righteous man who lived his life for others was unjustly accused, convicted, tortured, and executed, the final result was greater than anyone could have ever imagined. For it is the Resurrection of Christ that gives us hope and strengthens our faith in times of trial.
As human beings, we experience suffering and death in many forms. Whether the loss of a loved one or a friend, the end of a marriage or long-term relationship, the loss of employment, or the loss of our homes and other possessions we hold dear, death manifests itself in many ways. But no matter what shape it takes, death can and will ultimately be succeeded by a resurrection.
I can sense that my resurrection is coming. Signs are popping up that this difficult, arduous time in my life is coming to an end, and that a transition to a new stage is already in process. I anticipate that this will be accompanied by a renewed sense of joy, one which will be greatly welcome! How amazing it is that this is all happening during this time of year, when Easter is fast approaching and the Resurrection of Christ will be celebrated around the world.
I hope that all of you who have suffered over the past year can also take solace in this, and that you too realize that no matter how great the pain, a resurrection will come. It may already be on its way. Hang in there, and to all of my Christian friends, Happy Holy Week!
Friday, April 15, 2011
Time for the Church to Get Tough With "Catholic" Politicians
Those who know me are well aware that I am a blue-blood Catholic to the heart. Always have been and always will be. I embrace the teaching of the Church, from Her doctrines on abortion to euthanasia to the Immaculate Conception of Mary to the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist.
But just because I pray every day, go to Mass every Sunday, and do my best to live out my Catholic faith on a daily basis doesn't mean that I have to defend my bishops in each and every thing they do. Lord knows they've made several mistakes, and as human beings they will continue to do so.
One thing I've been saying for years is that the Church needs to involve itself more in the ongoing debates that have shaped and will continue to shape our society. Too many of our bishops are content to hide in their cathedrals, and though they often give the impression that they're taking an active role in policy-making, in reality they aren't doing all they can do.
There are many leaders in our government who call themselves Catholics. They go to Church on Sunday with their families, put their money in the collection basket, and give everyone the impression that they're devout followers of Christ. Yet when they go into the chamber of the statehouse or the Capitol to cast a vote on a hot-button social issue, whether abortion, euthanasia, or gay marriage, they go against the teaching of the Church. How do they justify this?
What they have said is this. While they may personally be opposed to abortion or gay marriage, they have to represent the majority of their constituents and need to set their personal beliefs aside. Do you buy that? If so, then I have a bridge to sell you.
The logic in that statement is flawed for several reasons. First of all, if you are really the devout Catholic you proclaim yourself to be, how can you go against your conscience? In reality, what you're doing is selling out. Second, if your constituents elected you and they're aware of your faith, why would you go against the teachings of that faith? Weren't they aware that they were getting a Catholic in office? Unless of course you ran on the platform of, "I won't let my beliefs interfere with the job." In which case you're selling out again.
Third, engaging in this practice means you believe that morality is subjective. Abortion may be wrong for you, but it doesn't have to be wrong for anyone else. Well, that's just totally bogus. Any evil act, whether murder, robbery, rape, or adultery is wrong regardless of who commits it. It can't be right for one and wrong for another. Morality is objective, not subjective. Unless of course you think that the Muslim terrorists who truly believe they're right in killing infidels through suicide bombings and beheadings are justified in their actions.
The bottom line is that politicians who play this game are the biggest phonies of them all. They want society to perceive them as loyal Catholics who go to Church with their families. They want to be viewed as good stewards who donate their time, talent, and treasure. But they also want to remain popular enough to hold public office so they can remain in a position of power, authority, and high social status. Does this sound like a sellout to you? Sure seems that way to me.
You can't have it both ways. But the Church is letting them do it. Why? You got me.
Here's a recent example that illustrates my point perfectly. Last month, the Maryland House of Delegates killed a bill that sought to legalize gay marriage. That's the good news. The bad news is that several "Catholic" politicians in Maryland's state government stood on the wrong side of the issue. I find that extremely distressing.
Governor Martin O'Malley, a graduate of the Catholic University of America and a parishioner at St. Mary's in Annapolis, promised to sign the bill if it got to his desk. Speaker Mike Busch, a graduate of St. Mary's High School who actually returned to his alma mater to teach before seeking public office, was very outspoken in endorsing the bill. And who was the bill's original sponsor? None other than State Senator Richard Madaleno, a graduate of Georgetown Preparatory School.
Supposedly all of these men met with Church leaders to discuss the bill before it was introduced. But it's clear that this was nothing more than a formality. They did what they felt they had to do to give the Church the impression that they're listening. They did what they needed to do to justify their own actions as "Catholics." But they knew all along what they were going to do, and they went ahead and did it. That is, they tried, but in the end they failed.
In response to this travesty, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, lamented the apparent lack of clarity and conviction in the Archdiocese's catechesis on marriage. Alright, that's a start. I agree wholeheartedly with him that the Church needs to be more firm and more clear in articulating Her doctrine on faith and morals. But how does that remedy the current situation?
U.S. Bishops need to take a stand, once and for all. They need to form a united front against the assault on the Church and on Her teachings, and they need to start hitting back. They allow themselves to be played for fools, standing back and watching while politicians like O'Malley, Busch, and Madaleno leave their Catholic faith at the statehouse entrance. Why do they continue to do this?
I suppose it could be that they would argue that Jesus would never publicly condemn or excommunicate these men. After all, he was loving, kind, gentle, merciful, and compassionate.
While Christ was all of those things, he was also quick to stand up for the truth, even when it meant scolding those who were in power. He didn't hesitate to overturn the tables of the moneychangers and vendors in the temple and throw them out. Sorry, but to me this doesn't sound like a guy who would let these politicians get away with what they're doing. Did he not say that with great power comes great responsibility? He'd call them out on it, at the very least. Our bishops won't even do that.
I've heard it said that the bishops are also afraid of the negative publicity that would come with such a move. No doubt there would be a backlash from the liberal media, but they already bash the Church whenever the opportunity presents itself. So how could taking a stand against hypocritical politicians possibly make things worse?
Another possibility, and one I try not to think about for fear that it may be the correct answer to my question, is that they don't want to alienate these leaders from their parishes. Chances are they donate a great deal of money to the Church, and there is a certain status that is associated with having the governor or speaker sitting in your pews every Sunday. But does this really mean we should kowtow to them? If so, then our bishops are selling out every bit as much as the politicians.
One point no one can argue is that religion does not have nearly as prominent a place in our society as it did in the first half of the 20th century. Granted, there are many, many reasons for that. But unless our bishops stop subscribing to the doctrine of wimpism, we're never going to regain that prominence.
Allow me to conclude with this. To me, the most misunderstood passage in the gospels is the one where Jesus utters, "Turn the other cheek." It has become a hallmark for Christians over the years, but its meaning has been completely twisted by the faulty translation.
Jesus never said, "Turn the other cheek." What he said was, "If someone slaps you on your right cheek, then give him your left cheek." How is that different, you ask? Well, just as it is today, back then the vast majority of people were right-handed. In order to slap someone on the right cheek, you'd have to give them a backhand slap.
Striking someone with the back of your hand is demeaning. It's as if you're dismissing the person completely, implying that they're somehow beneath you. So what Jesus meant is this. Don't let anyone belittle you. Don't let anyone make you out to be less than who you are. Stand up for yourself. And though he may not have actually said it, I believe he'd like for us to hit back if the onslaught continued.
And that is what our bishops need to do. Start hitting back. Speak out against these politicians. Condemn their actions. You don't have to issue a proclamation that they're going to hell. Just tell the world how hypocritical they are. Tell them that they have no business receiving Communion when they show up in Church on Sunday. These are the things we need to start doing if we're ever going to be relevant again. Otherwise, the entire world will go to hell: literally and figuratively.
But just because I pray every day, go to Mass every Sunday, and do my best to live out my Catholic faith on a daily basis doesn't mean that I have to defend my bishops in each and every thing they do. Lord knows they've made several mistakes, and as human beings they will continue to do so.
One thing I've been saying for years is that the Church needs to involve itself more in the ongoing debates that have shaped and will continue to shape our society. Too many of our bishops are content to hide in their cathedrals, and though they often give the impression that they're taking an active role in policy-making, in reality they aren't doing all they can do.
There are many leaders in our government who call themselves Catholics. They go to Church on Sunday with their families, put their money in the collection basket, and give everyone the impression that they're devout followers of Christ. Yet when they go into the chamber of the statehouse or the Capitol to cast a vote on a hot-button social issue, whether abortion, euthanasia, or gay marriage, they go against the teaching of the Church. How do they justify this?
What they have said is this. While they may personally be opposed to abortion or gay marriage, they have to represent the majority of their constituents and need to set their personal beliefs aside. Do you buy that? If so, then I have a bridge to sell you.
The logic in that statement is flawed for several reasons. First of all, if you are really the devout Catholic you proclaim yourself to be, how can you go against your conscience? In reality, what you're doing is selling out. Second, if your constituents elected you and they're aware of your faith, why would you go against the teachings of that faith? Weren't they aware that they were getting a Catholic in office? Unless of course you ran on the platform of, "I won't let my beliefs interfere with the job." In which case you're selling out again.
Third, engaging in this practice means you believe that morality is subjective. Abortion may be wrong for you, but it doesn't have to be wrong for anyone else. Well, that's just totally bogus. Any evil act, whether murder, robbery, rape, or adultery is wrong regardless of who commits it. It can't be right for one and wrong for another. Morality is objective, not subjective. Unless of course you think that the Muslim terrorists who truly believe they're right in killing infidels through suicide bombings and beheadings are justified in their actions.
The bottom line is that politicians who play this game are the biggest phonies of them all. They want society to perceive them as loyal Catholics who go to Church with their families. They want to be viewed as good stewards who donate their time, talent, and treasure. But they also want to remain popular enough to hold public office so they can remain in a position of power, authority, and high social status. Does this sound like a sellout to you? Sure seems that way to me.
You can't have it both ways. But the Church is letting them do it. Why? You got me.
Here's a recent example that illustrates my point perfectly. Last month, the Maryland House of Delegates killed a bill that sought to legalize gay marriage. That's the good news. The bad news is that several "Catholic" politicians in Maryland's state government stood on the wrong side of the issue. I find that extremely distressing.
Governor Martin O'Malley, a graduate of the Catholic University of America and a parishioner at St. Mary's in Annapolis, promised to sign the bill if it got to his desk. Speaker Mike Busch, a graduate of St. Mary's High School who actually returned to his alma mater to teach before seeking public office, was very outspoken in endorsing the bill. And who was the bill's original sponsor? None other than State Senator Richard Madaleno, a graduate of Georgetown Preparatory School.
Supposedly all of these men met with Church leaders to discuss the bill before it was introduced. But it's clear that this was nothing more than a formality. They did what they felt they had to do to give the Church the impression that they're listening. They did what they needed to do to justify their own actions as "Catholics." But they knew all along what they were going to do, and they went ahead and did it. That is, they tried, but in the end they failed.
In response to this travesty, Cardinal Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, lamented the apparent lack of clarity and conviction in the Archdiocese's catechesis on marriage. Alright, that's a start. I agree wholeheartedly with him that the Church needs to be more firm and more clear in articulating Her doctrine on faith and morals. But how does that remedy the current situation?
U.S. Bishops need to take a stand, once and for all. They need to form a united front against the assault on the Church and on Her teachings, and they need to start hitting back. They allow themselves to be played for fools, standing back and watching while politicians like O'Malley, Busch, and Madaleno leave their Catholic faith at the statehouse entrance. Why do they continue to do this?
I suppose it could be that they would argue that Jesus would never publicly condemn or excommunicate these men. After all, he was loving, kind, gentle, merciful, and compassionate.
While Christ was all of those things, he was also quick to stand up for the truth, even when it meant scolding those who were in power. He didn't hesitate to overturn the tables of the moneychangers and vendors in the temple and throw them out. Sorry, but to me this doesn't sound like a guy who would let these politicians get away with what they're doing. Did he not say that with great power comes great responsibility? He'd call them out on it, at the very least. Our bishops won't even do that.
I've heard it said that the bishops are also afraid of the negative publicity that would come with such a move. No doubt there would be a backlash from the liberal media, but they already bash the Church whenever the opportunity presents itself. So how could taking a stand against hypocritical politicians possibly make things worse?
Another possibility, and one I try not to think about for fear that it may be the correct answer to my question, is that they don't want to alienate these leaders from their parishes. Chances are they donate a great deal of money to the Church, and there is a certain status that is associated with having the governor or speaker sitting in your pews every Sunday. But does this really mean we should kowtow to them? If so, then our bishops are selling out every bit as much as the politicians.
One point no one can argue is that religion does not have nearly as prominent a place in our society as it did in the first half of the 20th century. Granted, there are many, many reasons for that. But unless our bishops stop subscribing to the doctrine of wimpism, we're never going to regain that prominence.
Allow me to conclude with this. To me, the most misunderstood passage in the gospels is the one where Jesus utters, "Turn the other cheek." It has become a hallmark for Christians over the years, but its meaning has been completely twisted by the faulty translation.
Jesus never said, "Turn the other cheek." What he said was, "If someone slaps you on your right cheek, then give him your left cheek." How is that different, you ask? Well, just as it is today, back then the vast majority of people were right-handed. In order to slap someone on the right cheek, you'd have to give them a backhand slap.
Striking someone with the back of your hand is demeaning. It's as if you're dismissing the person completely, implying that they're somehow beneath you. So what Jesus meant is this. Don't let anyone belittle you. Don't let anyone make you out to be less than who you are. Stand up for yourself. And though he may not have actually said it, I believe he'd like for us to hit back if the onslaught continued.
And that is what our bishops need to do. Start hitting back. Speak out against these politicians. Condemn their actions. You don't have to issue a proclamation that they're going to hell. Just tell the world how hypocritical they are. Tell them that they have no business receiving Communion when they show up in Church on Sunday. These are the things we need to start doing if we're ever going to be relevant again. Otherwise, the entire world will go to hell: literally and figuratively.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)