Archive for April 2006
My connection has been going up and down all morning, mostly down (I’ll get a signal for about five minutes every hour). So I may not be online much today, though I’ll be a very unhappy camper if this doesn’t get corrected. I also have a medical appointment this afternoon, but I hope this is resolved before then.
The word on the blogosphere is that they’re considering Tony Snow. I took that more seriously when I saw it on Fox (I’m a bit fan of “trust, but verify,” you see).
I think he’d probably do a good job, though he’d have to give up his radio and TV shows. But if they are going to consider a talk show host, why not Rush? Rush would do a hell of a job, plus it would make every moonbat’s head explode.
Can you imagine Rush Limbaugh making mincemeat of the press corps once or twice a week?
Linked to Stop the ACLU.
From Gateway Pundit, via PA Pundits:
On Tuesday, April 11, 2006, Cindy Sheehan wrote:
* Her son arrived in California in a cardboard box
* Her son was carried over to the dock by a forklift
* Her mortuary refused to pay the cemetery
* Her son was treated as an over-sized piece of luggageBut… Now we know none of this is true!
Go read the whole thing.
Mohammed’s brother-in-law was murdered by terrorists. Read his account, and his statement of defiance.
Rhymes with Right (via Edwonk) points to an … well, let’s say intriguing article about a series of incidents in the Peoria school system, and the school’s reaction:
Up to the point a fourth-grader brought a box cutter to school and threatened to kill their daughter, Joe and Jessica Sweeney wanted to give Glen Oak Primary School a chance.
“This is our neighborhood. This is where we live. Let’s give the public schools a shot,’” is the way Joe describes their reasoning. “We’ve lived here six years. Let’s give it a shot.”
So they transferred 9-year-old Alexis and 8-year-old Jacob out of Peoria Christian School - which was “nice, but too expensive” - and opted for Glen Oak last September.
Well, there was your first mistake. Anyway:
From the beginning, it was uncomfortable. Both children were taunted with racial slurs, particularly Alexis. The Sweeneys tried to make this a life lesson, coaching their kids to respond appropriately. They advised the children to report any threats or poor treatment to teachers, assuming the adults were addressing the problems. And they prayed their kids were simply learning the uncomfortable truth that life can be tough. But the incidents didn’t stop, despite a lot of back-and-forth with the school. The kids kept their grades up, but they got pretty quiet.
In mid-March, matters came to a head during an after-school program. Alexis was alone in a bathroom when she was threatened by three other girls. Jessica went to the principal, who brought the ringleader in and made her apologize. Days later, the same girl was back - with a box cutter - threatening to kill Alexis. On the ride home after that incident, Jacob displayed a large bruise on his arm from being shoved to the ground and called a “stupid white boy.”
Jessica pulled both kids out of the school immediately.
“I’m done,” she says. “I’m done putting her life at risk because you won’t do anything.”
“This is beyond standard fourth-grade stuff,” agrees Joe. “This is becoming racial now. They’re not going back.”
Well, there you go. You should have left your kids in that Christian school in the first place. Expensive? Sure, but you get what you pay for, you know.
The school tried everything but dealing with the problem:
He feels this is a two-part problem. First and most importantly, they feel the school has failed to ensure the children’s safety. But, second, they don’t think Peoria School District 150 offered much in the way of alternatives or support. The Sweeneys were given the option to switch to Kingman Primary School. They refused. Alexis and Jacob would still be a small part of the handful of white children there.
“It’s racial harassment. It’s just the other way,” says Joe. “There needs to be a zero-tolerance policy of any type of harassment.”
One suggestion was that the family move. Again, they refused. Four houses along their street near Midtown Plaza belong to members of Jessica’s family. The kids have plenty of friends - and cousins - in the neighborhood. Their grandmother runs a small business up the block.
There’s a reason that school wouldn’t even acknowledge the racism, but I’ll get to that in a moment. And it’s not like the nature of the problem isn’t obvious:
Unlike other families who have pulled children from Peoria schools in favor of Catholic education or more upscale neighboring districts, the Sweeneys are in a unique position to publicly explain why. They are not fleeing the inner city. This is not a knee-jerk reaction against District 150. And it’s tough to brand them as closet racists.
They actually have three children. Their oldest son, Caleb, is bi-racial. He has attended District 150 schools and thrived.
“My son is in Von Steuben,” Jessica says. “He’s mixed. He doesn’t have one problem.”
But the parents came to their senses:
Then Rhymes with Right says:
THEY TOLD THE FAMILY TO SELL THEIR HOME AND MOVE! Could you imagine the outrage if they had been a black family in a mostly white school and had been told that the solution was for them to move somewhere where there were more of their own kind? That district would be under court supervision until two or three years after the Second Coming. Individuals would have lost their teaching and administrative credentials. But since the kids are only white, it really is not a big deal, I suppose.
No, no, no, you don’t get it — most likely because you’re not sufficiently exposed to these moonbats. So it’s time for Identity Politics 101.
You see, only a Caucasian (preferably Christian, conservative, male and heterosexual) can ever display what multiculturalists define as “racism.” You’re not seeing an appropriate reaction from the loony leftists at the school district (or demonstrations by race whores Jackson and Sharpton) simply because this is not racism as defined by the PC school of Identity Politics.
Situations like this, you see, are “authentic street culture,” the type of thing PC multiculturalists celebrate. So are drive-by shootings, gang violence, or references to “ho’s and bitches” in rap or hip-hop (somebody’s going to have to explain the difference to me one of these days). No moonbat will ever cry in outrage on hearing a black call a white a honky — that’s not racism, that’s justified anger of an oppressed, disadvantaged, disenfranchised, marginalized community. You know, just as beheading Americans or murdering Israeli civilians in coffee shops is the justified anger of an oppressed, disadvantaged, disenfranchised, marginalized community.
In fact, I wouldn’t have been surprised if the school system had expelled those awful white kids for “disrupting” the school by being attacked.
Indian national made internet death threats against President
Vikram Buddhi, the Indian national studying in the US on a student visa, who made online threats to murder the President, Vice President, First Lady, and Secretary of Defense, is now being held without bail pending his next court appearance on April 26. From the (West Lafayette, IN) Journal and Courier:
A Federal district magistrate in Hammond has ordered Vikram Buddhi, a Purdue University graduate student accused of writing Internet threats against President Bush, be held without bond, saying he is a flight risk, Buddhi’s attorney said this morning.
Buddhi’s attorney, John Martin is trying the boys-will-be-boys-it-doesn’t-count-in-cyberspace argument, and if that doesn’t work, is asserting a First Amendment right to threaten assassination, murder, bombing, and rape.
Can the American Civil Liberties Union be far behind?
Let me pose a hypothetical question. Let’s say you had two options: You could either live free as a citizen of a Western democracy, or you could live in a dictatorship that required you to follow a strict code of behavior or be tortured. No, let’s add to that. That Western democracy happens to be established primarily for people of a different religious group than yours, but will gladly take you in as a citizen. That barbaric dictatorship is run by people of your religion, and above everything else, they hate anyone who practices the religion of that free country next door.
Let’s add further to the hypothetical question. Let’s say you could live in relative peace — in addition to being free — in that Western democracy, though you would run a risk of being blown up by terrorists. In the dictatorship, not only could you not live in peace, but you would be expected to encourage your sons to become terrorists and blow up people.
So being a reasonable human being, which nation would you chose? Where would you rather live?
This, more than the continued terrorist attacks by Hamas, demonstrates that Palestinians have no interest in living in peace next to the Israelis. If they did, they’d be swarming to Israel to live there, free, and in relative peace. But no, they would rather live in squalor, shaking their fists at the evil Jews, who unlike the Palestinians, were able to make the desert bloom, and create a thriving economy in an area with no oil and very few natural resources.
Palestinians aren’t oppressed, other than by their own choice. They have chosen to live in a terrorist state. They have chosen to live in a Shariah state. They have chosen poverty. And now, they are showing the world that not only do they have no interest in living in peace or creating a nation, but they are ever more committed to terrorist strikes at Israel.
The wall wasn’t enough. Israel should just have nuked the West Bank and Gaza Strip clean of the human scum that lives there, the scum no other Arab nation will allow anywhere near its borders because no Arab cares a whit about Palestine or Palestinians, other than as an excuse to hate Jews. Palestinians deserve no symathy or aid, only scorn.
And if you want to see a good rant about this, check out the Emperor.
It’s happening right now, and on Fox. Scott McClellan is resigning.
Hallelujah.
Speaking of corrupt, well, you just have to see it for yourself:
No one has been charged in the case, but the allegations have rocked the community. Jackson he has yet to speak with the woman, but said his group pledged to pay for her tuition even if her story proves false.
So Jackson feels there is no difference between rape victims and liars, just like Al Sharpton.
Hat tip to Bullwinkle Blog for this latest supreme idiocy from the UN:
Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) - Under threat of United Nations Security Council sanctions for its own nuclear program, Iran has been elected to a vice-chair position on the U.N. Disarmament Commission, whose mission includes deliberations on preventing the spread of nuclear weapons.
What better example could there be that the UN is not only an ineffective, pointless body, but a corrupt one as well?
Amazing.
This is hilarious, and spot on:
Math 1950-2005
Last week I purchased a burger at Burger King for $1.58. The counter girl took my $2 and I was digging for my change when I pulled 8 cents from my pocket and gave it to her. She stood there, holding the nickel and 3 pennies, while looking at the screen on her register. I sensed her discomfort and tried to tell her to just give me two quarters, but she hailed the manager for help. While he tried to explain the transaction to her, she stood there and cried. Why do I tell you this?
Because of the evolution in teaching math since the 1950s:
1. Teaching Math In 1950
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price. What is his profit?
2. Teaching Math In 1960
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is 4/5 of the price, or $80. What is his profit?
3. Teaching Math In 1970
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80. Did he make a profit?
4. Teaching Math In 1980
A logger sells a truckload of lumber for $100. His cost of production is $80 and his profit is $20. Your assignment: Underline the number 20.
5. Teaching Math In 1990
A logger cuts down a beautiful forest because he is selfish and inconsiderate and cares nothing for the habitat of animals or the preservation of our woodlands. He does this so he can make a profit of $20. What do you think of this way of making a living? Topic for class participation after answering the question: How did the birds and squirrels feel as the logger cut down their homes? (There are no wrong answers.)
6. Teaching Math In 2005
Un lenador que se dedica a oprimir a los pobres trabajadores y destruir el medio ambiente destroza un bosque y los hogares de miles de ardillas y pajaritos para vender la madera por $100. Dado que no le paga a los pobres immigrantes que cortaron la madera, que tipo de justicia social se merece?
“Democrats couldn’t care less if people in Indiana hate them. But if Europeans curl their lips, liberals can’t look at themselves in the mirror.”
–Ann Coulter
Comment or trackback, as long as you link to this post.
Trackback URI:
http://rightwingnation.com/2006/04/19/wednesday-free-thread-6/trackback/
Last free thread is here.
I looked at religious groups here, and demographic groups here. As it turns out, some of the most interesting results show when we look at issue groups.
Let’s begin with the umbrella issue groups, then move to the more specific, starting with the most general:
Among self-identified conservatives, George has leads by 15 points, at 39%, over Romney, at 24%, and Rudy, at 23%.
However, self-described fiscal conservatives prefer Rudy (42%) by 20 points over George Allen (22%), and 24 points over Romney (18%).
But among Reagan conservatives, George Allen has his highest lead, at 68%, while Rudy trails far behind at 16%, and Romney at only 9%.
And we see almost the reverse among South Park conservatives, with Giulani at 60%, followed by Romney at 15%, and Allen at 13%.
George again takes the lead among those who identified border security as an important issue (40%), followed by Rudy (33%) and Mitt (27%).
We see nearly the same results here, with the only difference that Allen takes a somewhat larger percentage. Most interesting, however, are the next three groups:
In all three, Giulani takes a commanding lead (47%, 37%, 55%). Allen follows (20%, 32%, 29%), and then Romney (21%, 19% 5%). Note, however, that in the “war on terror” group, Romney drops all the way down to 5%. Why this much difference for Romney between the first two group (hawk and national security) and the “war on terror” group?
Here, Allen once again takes the lead, with 33%. Romney follows in a close second, at 31%, and Rudy drops to 19%.
Although I didn’t chart them, “independent” and “moderate” respondents are the only two groups who rated McCain in the double digits (thank God).
To summarize, Romney shows better than I’d thought, and overall, Allen does very well. But since Rudy has said again and again that he will not run, that leaves open an important question. How will all the respondents who want Rudy vote, if he does not run, as he says? That’s a big question mark, especially for the groups that favored Giulani over all other candidates.
Thanks to Hugh Hewitt for setting up the survey.
I already did the religious groups. Here are the demographic groups — remember that these are self-labeled (though here, I didn’t have to collapse any groups).
George leads with 32%, followed by Rudy (31%) and Romney (20%). This isn’t too surprising.
Also not surprising. Rudy leads with 36%, followed by George at 32% and Mitt at 22%.
Note here that among married respondents, George leads with 35%, but Romney is second at 29%, and Rudy is third, at 24%.
Among single respondents, however, Rudy leads (32%), followed by Romney (29%), and George (24%). This is a market departure from what we have seen so far, where George Allen leads in nearly all groups. We see the same here, and I find this truly interesting:
Self-labeled fathers preferred Mitt, at 31%. George and Rudy follow, at 26% and 21%, respectively. There was no “mother” among the self-chosen categories, but there was “security mom,” which follows:
Here, Rudy leads our other two front runners by 19%. George follows at 26%, and Romney at 16%.
Finally, we have the categories “military” and “veteran.” While “veteran” is farily straightforward, I’m interpreting “military” as a demographic label (that is, the respondent is serving in the military), and not an issue-related label (as in a respondent for whom the military is an important issue).
In the “military” category, George again takes the lead with 35%. Rudy and Mitt follow, with 27% and 23%, respectively.
Rudy has a 15-point lead among veterans, with 43% of the responses. Allen follows with 28%, and Romney is third, with 16% of the responses.
The demographic categories are somewhat more interesting than the religious ones, since several categories break the pattern of George Allen as a favorite, in favor of Giulani, and in one, fathers, Mitt Romney.
Next up: issue-oriented labels.
Welcome, Hugh Hewitt readers! There will be more analysis of the data; check back. And feel free to look around (you might want to check out the articles in the education category, if you want to know what it’s like to be a conservative on campus).
Demographic groups are here; issues groups are here.
This time from Hugh Hewitt’s latest candidate poll. A couple of caveats. First, like any survey, this should not be taken too seriously — this even more than most, because this reflects a highly selective sample (bloggers, and people who read blogs). Second, the labels are not provided by the survey, but are self-reported. This makes them more ambiguous than they usually are. Because they were self-reported, there are several categories I collapsed (agnostic and atheist into agnostic/atheist, and evangelical and evangelical christian into evangelical christian). When I collapsed categories, I averaged the percentages for each candidate. One of the labels reported was “religious,” which I almost dropped because of its ambiguity (”religious” to a Catholic can mean “in a religious order,” for example).
Let’s start with the general labels:
The most ludicrous and dishonest aspect of university “speech codes,” “diversity policies,” “sexual harassment,” and similar programs is that the university administrators know that their policies are unconstitutional — and don’t care. All you need to do to see this is peruse the list of universities that have immediately capitulated once somebody utters that magic word: Lawsuit. “First Amendment” works equally well to motivate universities to drop their “sensitivity” policies.
The latest university to immediately back down is Ohio State. You will recall that the university was bringing “sexual harassment” charges against a librarian because he recommended books that made a couple of faculty members feel “unsafe”:
Ohio State University officials on Friday cleared Scott Savage, a librarian at the Mansfield campus, of harassment charges filed against him based on his recommendation of an anti-gay book for a freshman reading assignment. A conservative group had threatened to sue the university if the charges were not dropped. They were dropped the same day that the group went public with its complaints about the way the librarian was being treated.
Before you cheer, realize that universities will continue to violate the Constitution at every opportunity, in the name of “multiculturalism” and other such nonsense, until somebody with a brain and a conscience takes charge.
Hat tip to Alpha Patriot
Annoyed that Michelle Malkin would dare to criticize the Santa Cruz leftists for running the military off campus, they have assaulted her with lovely, tolerant, multicultural email. I love it when liberals show their true colors, and demonstrate just how full of hate they are. My favorite, if you can use that word in this context:
From: NorthCentralGuy@aol.com NorthCentralGuy@aol.com
Mailed-By: aol.com
Date: Apr 17, 2006 7:47 PM
Subject: TIPSomeone ought to sew your cunt up with barbed wire. Not that it gets any use, you facist, hate spewing, disgraceful piece of shit.
In related news, one media nutcase goes off the deep end:
And unhinged propagandist Keith Olbermann misleads whatever viewers he has and names me the World’s Worst Person of the day (click link for video - .WMV file)…on a day when a Palestianian suicide bomber committed a bloody, brutal act of terrorism against innocent civilians at a Tel Aviv restaurant and Hamas officials rallied behind the carnage.
Complete wackjobs.
When we last left Yale, they had admitted Sayed Rahmatullah Hashemi, a Taliban official with a third-grade education, of course, for the sake of “multiculturalism” and “understanding.”
The Yale administration apparently can’t get enough rotten egg on their faces. It seems they are seriously considering hiring Juan Cole away from Michigan, a man who has published no scholarship that can be called scholarship, only lengthy reality-challenged diatribes about the evils of America, Israel and the Joos.
If you’re seeing a pattern here, a vile and hateful pattern, that’s because you’re rational. Anti-semitism is the new chic trend on campus. Support your nation and Israel against the barbarians, and get fired; hate America, Israel, and the Jews, and become the darling of the AAUP.
Are academics so clueless and out of touch that they don’t hear the warning bells? Do they honestly believe they can continue to take tax monies to pay faculty to teach kids to hate their own country — and Jews — and nothing will ever happen to them?
The “multiculturalism,” “diversity training,” and identity politics must end, or administrators will find the trustees and legislatures taking control.
Comment or trackback, as long as you link to this post.
Trackback URI:
http://rightwingnation.com/2006/04/18/tuesday-free-thread-6/trackback/
Last free thread is here.
And speaking of “safe, legal, and rare,” Hillary, I have another question. Pro-abortion folks are always claiming that only very few abortions are performed as birth control. Yet, the data seem to contradict that:
|
Reported Reasons for Abortions
|
||
|
Reason
|
Percent
|
Birth Control?
|
| Wants to postpone childbearing | 25.5% |
Y
|
| Wants no (more) children | 7.9% |
Y
|
| Cannot afford a baby | 21.3% |
Y
|
| Having a child will disrupt education or job | 10.8% |
Y
|
| Has relationship problem or partner does not want pregnancy | 14.1% |
Y
|
| Too young; parent(s) or other(s) object to pregnancy | 12.2% |
Y
|
| Risk to maternal health | 2.8% |
N
|
| Risk to fetal health | 3.3% |
N
|
| Other | 2.1% |
N
|
| Total percentage, birth control | 91.8% | |
So how does that work? Do liberals only count somebody who uses the words “birth control” as birth control? If a woman gets an abortion because she wants to postpone childbearing (25.5%), how is that not birth control? How about if she just doesn’t want another baby (7.9%), or feels that having a child would inconvenience her education or job (10.8%), why don’t those count in liberal la-la land as birth control? And because I’m such a nice guy, and I’m in such a good mood, I won’t ask you the obvious question (you know, about why they didn’t just not have sex).
I’d really like to know. Really, I would. Maybe it’s just me, but it looks like birth control is by a huge margin the biggest reason for abortions.
What was that you said about abortion again? You wanted to keep abortion safe, legal, and rare? Really? According to USA Today, in seven states (DC is counted here), 25% or more of pregnancies end in abortion. DC is the highest, where 37% of pregnancies end in abortion:
| State | Pregnancies aborted (%) |
| DC | 37 |
| NY | 33 |
| NJ | 29 |
| MD | 29 |
| FL | 27 |
| CA | 26 |
| NV | 25 |
Keep abortions rare? Hillary, if you call 25% or more of preganancies ending in abortion rare, then you’re on some seriously bad drugs. Hat tip to PA Pundits
The national average is 17.47%. And the full list:
|
State
|
Pregnancies Aborted (%)
|
|
DC
|
37 |
|
NY
|
33 |
|
NJ
|
31 |
|
MD
|
29 |
|
FL
|
27 |
|
CA
|
26 |
|
NV
|
25 |
|
RI
|
24 |
|
MA
|
23 |
|
CT
|
23 |
|
DE
|
22 |
|
HI
|
21 |
|
MI
|
21 |
|
OR
|
21 |
|
WY
|
21 |
|
WA
|
21 |
|
IL
|
21 |
|
VA
|
20 |
|
NC
|
19 |
|
NH
|
18 |
|
PA
|
18 |
|
NM
|
17 |
|
OH
|
17 |
|
GA
|
17 |
|
TX
|
16 |
|
MO
|
16 |
|
VT
|
16 |
|
ME
|
15 |
|
TN
|
15 |
|
SC
|
15 |
|
AZ
|
15 |
|
AL
|
14 |
|
CO
|
14 |
|
MT
|
14 |
|
AK
|
14 |
|
MS
|
14 |
|
MN
|
14 |
|
WI
|
13 |
|
NE
|
12 |
|
IN
|
12 |
|
KS
|
12 |
|
LA
|
12 |
|
IA
|
12 |
|
AR
|
11 |
|
OK
|
11 |
|
WV
|
10 |
|
ID
|
10 |
|
KY
|
9 |
|
ND
|
9 |
|
SD
|
8 |
|
UT
|
6 |
Actually, it’s not. It’s one more example that the ACLU and its affiliates ironically do not understand the Constitution. This is what the establishment clause is supposed to protect — and not putting up Christmas trees.
Oh. You want to know what I’m talking about? Sure. It seems that a single teacher at a Catholic school in New York got pregnant, and told her administrators that she was going to have the baby, but had no intention of marrying the father — and they fired her:
Fired teacher, unwed and pregnant, sues Catholic school
NEW YORK (AP) — The New York Civil Liberties Union has filed a federal discrimination complaint against a Catholic school, charging that it unjustly fired an unmarried teacher for being pregnant.“I don’t understand how a religion that prides itself on forgiving and on valuing life could terminate me because I’m pregnant and choosing to have this baby,” Michelle McCusker said Monday at a news conference to announce the suit.
The 26-year-old preschool teacher was fired last month from St. Rose of Lima in Queens, according to published reports. The Diocese of Brooklyn also was named in the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission complaint.
“This is a difficult situation for every person involved, but the school had no choice but to follow the principles contained in the teachers’ personnel handbook,” diocese spokesman Frank DeRosa said in a statement.
The handbook says that each teacher must “convey the teachings of the Catholic faith by his or her words and actions.”
What’s amazing is that the NYCLU don’t get it — and they put it on their website:
NEW YORK — The New York Civil Liberties Union today charged a private Catholic school with discriminating against an unmarried Catholic schoolteacher by firing her because she became pregnant.
What part of “private Catholic school” don’t these idiots understand?
“Michelle McCusker was fired because she chose to have a child,†said Donna Lieberman, Executive Director of the NYCLU.
No, moron, she was fired because she chose to have a child out of wedlock, at a private Catholic school. What is so difficult to understand about that?
John Leo identifies a broader problem:
There’s a broader problem: many institutions are now using anti-bias laws and regulations to trample the ministerial function.
No doubt, though that’s not the root problem here. The problem is that the government is not supposed to be able to intrude on non-governmental agencies — you know, as in, for example, private Catholic schools. This is the legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the best legislative example of that chestnut, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
Barry Goldwater wouldn’t vote for it for this very reason: The government can adopt all the non-discrimination policies it wants, for its own employees; the government has no business telling anyone else who they may or may not hire or fire, or dictate any “anti-discrimination” policies in the private sector.
It’s fortunate this woman was fired, since she’s too stupid to understand why she got fired — and therefore too stupid to ever be allowed anywhere near a classroom.
Comment or trackback, as long as you link to this post.
Trackback URI:
http://rightwingnation.com/2006/04/17/monday-free-thread-6/trackback/
Last free thread is here.
Homily by the Holy Father at the Easter Vigil
(Saint Peter’s Basilica, 15 April 2006)
“You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen, he is not here†(Mk 16:6). With these words, God’s messenger, robed in light, spoke to the women who were looking for the body of Jesus in the tomb. But the Evangelist says the same thing to us on this holy night: Jesus is not a character from the past. He lives, and he walks before us as one who is alive, he calls us to follow him, the living one, and in this way to discover for ourselves too the path of life.
Urbi et Orbi Message of His Holiness Benedict XVI
(Easter Sunday, 16 April 2006)
Dear Brothers and Sisters!
Christus resurrexit! - Christ is risen!
During last night’s great Vigil we relived the decisive and ever-present event of the Resurrection, the central mystery of the Christian faith. Innumerable Paschal candles were lit in churches, to symbolize the light of Christ which has enlightened and continues to enlighten humanity, conquering the darkness of sin and death for ever. And today there re-echo powerfully the words which dumbfounded the women on the morning of the first day after the Sabbath, when they came to the tomb where Christ’s body, taken down in haste from the Cross, had been laid. Sad and disconsolate over the loss of their Master, they found the great stone rolled away, and when they entered they saw that his body was no longer there. As they stood there, uncertain and bewildered, two men in dazzling apparel surprised them, saying: “Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, he is risen†(Lk 24:5-6). “Non est hic, sed resurrexit†(Lk 24:6). Ever since that morning, these words have not ceased to resound throughout the universe as a proclamation of joy which spans the centuries unchanged and, at the same time, charged with infinite and ever new resonances.
And again, it raises its putrid head, this time at Oregon State:
I admit: calling Mohammad a pedophile wasn’t nice, but then, a fifty-something year-old man having sex with a nine year-old girl isn’t very nice either.
One wonders what liberals would call Mohammed having sex with a nine year-old, if not pedophilia? Oh sorry, I’m acribing logic and consistency where neither exists.
Following publication, at least several circles of Hell broke loose. Things went well beyond the usual letters to the editor; there were protests and demands for my firing, our drunk-driving student body president attacked the column, part of one of my following columns was screened by the president of the Muslim Student Association and censored; said MSA president was subsequently hired as a columnist in an affirmative-action move, and a new student group was formed.
This organization is essentially composed of Muslims and liberals from OSU’s student government, administration, and faculty. It was named PEACE, which stands for (in a clear instance of choosing the acronym before the words in it) “Pluralistic Encouragement for A Community of Excellence.†Their first act was to put on a demonstration against my column; currently they’re holding open discussions to draft an “ethos statement†for the school.
It’s unfortunate that these students have enough free time on their hands to form an organization to support pedophilia.
“We’ve finally given liberals a war against fundamentalism, and they don’t want to fight it. They would, except it would put them on the same side as the United States.”
Ann Coulter
Christ is risen!
It began last night at 8:15 and was over at 10:45. The New Fire ceremony needs tweaking: There just isn’t enough room for hundreds of people to walk around the church, with or without candles. The Exultet was lovely. There was the Blessing of the Water, and there were 21 people accepted into the Church last night. The Monsignor welcomed each one individually, which was time-consuming, but the only appropriate way to welcome new members, and they were all confirmed, and all received First Communion last night.
And as soon as I’m fully awake, I’m going out to plant some more things.
Let us proclaim the mysery of faith!
Christ has died, Christ is risen, Christ will come again!
Exultet!
Gregorian chant mp3: Exultet!
Remember that “sexual harassment” case at Ohio State, the one where “sexual harassment” charges were filed because a librarian’s book selection made several faculty members feel “unsafe”? (And yes, those are sneer quotes, meant exactly thus.) Well, it gets even stupider (hat tip to Ace of Spades):
Ohio State University (Mansfield) professors J.F. Buckley and Norman Jones are alleging [”sexual orientation harrassment”], in a complaint that they have filed with the University. A conservative OSU reference librarian (Scott Savage) suggested that several books be included in the first-year reading program; one of the books — The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian — is apparently anti-gay.
Ah, so these delicate little flowers read the book and found it to be … well … threatening, I suppose? No (emphases mine):
Based on the emails copied in the initial cease and desist request, it appears that the situation quickly morphed from an argument over the scholarship of the books to one involving academic orthodoxy and the right of the librarian to recommend books containing the authors’ views. Accusations of homophobia flew freely (of course).
The main point of contention is The Marketing of Evil, the Amazon.com review of which contains this statement:
“Few people realize…that the ‘gay rights’ movement—which transformed America’s former view of homosexuals as self-destructive human beings into their current status as victims and cultural heroes—faithfully followed an in-depth, phased plan laid out by professional Harvard-trained marketers.”
So our “treatened” faculty member hasn’t read the book, and can’t attest to its contents — he’s only read the Amazon review of the book. But of course, there’s more:
The recommendation leaked out of the committee, and an associate English Professor, J.F. Buckley, sent a series of (as I read them) hysterical emails to the faculty, in which he explained (among other things) that he “as a gay man, no longer felt at ease to use the library or teach in a manner that tries diligently to engage every perspective - save that of the bigot.”
In other words, label any thought you want silenced as “bigotry,” and then you can have it squashed. How … liberal.
From the Tampa Tribune (emphases mine):
TAMPA - Capping an ordeal that spanned more than a decade, former University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian has reached a deal with prosecutors, agreeing to be deported after admitting involvement with a terrorist organization, an attorney involved in the negotiations said.
“My understanding was that he was to plead guilty” to conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist organization, said William Moffitt, who represented Al-Arian until a judge allowed him to withdraw from the case last month. The deal calls for Al-Arian to receive a sentence roughly equal to the time he has served behind bars since he was arrested in February 2003, Moffitt said.
So the darling of the AAUP — well, other than Ward Churchill — whom the AAUP insisted was not a terrorist was indeed a terrorist. Will the AAUP apologize to the nation, to the administration, and most importantly, to the families of those murdered on 9/11 and the families of our military for defending a terrorist? Will this even appear in the pages of the Chronicle?
I doubt it.
Linked to Blue Star Chronicles
I wasn’t hacked. I just forgot to take the ads out of one of the files.
I just got back a little while ago from Good Friday services at OLV. My first mistake was not leaving early enough; OLV is on the other side of town, and I have no choice but to drive through State College. The traffic was bumper to bumper all the way, and as I discovered, there were many others on their way to OLV.
It’s a medium size church, but a large congregation (there are four Masses on Sundays, plus the anticipatory Saturday night Mass). When I got there, the parking lot was full, and I ended up parking six blocks away. And the church was packed.
OLV is the conservative parish here. Gregorian chants and dignified liturgies (the “singing nun” liturgies are across the street from the house here, at St. Josef Stalin). It is ugly, though, what I call 70s grotto architecture. It’s larger than it looks, especially when compared to a traditional architecture church, because it’s very wide.
The choir is first rate (it’s a college town, after all) and the architects had music in mind when they designed the acoustics. You have to strain to understand the homily — too much echo.
Father Godspell officiated, with the customary three deacons. I call him Father Godspell because he’s the most liberal of the priests on staff, though the extent of his liberalism is his tendency to mention Godspell in every single homily he gives. He’s a very nice man, and I don’t mean it as a jibe.
Speaking of his homily, yes, he did mention Godspell, but if he’d had any temptation to turn Good Friday into a celebration of Marxism or a condemnation of the White House, he resisted it. He spoke of the mystery of Christ’s death — which, I would like to point out, is exactly what Good Friday is all about, and therefore, what he should have been speaking of.
According to ancient tradition, we venerated the cross (that took a good forty minutes) while the choir sang softly. It was quite a lovely service. On Good Friday we commune, but there is no Mass; all of the consecrated Hosts are from Holy Thursday, and the Tabernacle is cleared. The next Mass will be the Easter Vigil, tomorrow night.
Crucem tuam adoramus Domine; et sanctam resurrectionem tuam laudamus et glorificamus: ecce enim propter lignum venit gaudium in universo mundo.
The Gospel According to Saint John, 18:1-19:42
When Jesus had said these things, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where there was a garden, into which he entered with his disciples. 2 And Judas also, who betrayed him, knew the place; because Jesus had often resorted thither together with his disciples. 3 Judas therefore having received a band of soldiers and servants from the chief priests and the Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. 4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said to them: Whom seek ye? 5 They answered him: Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith to them: I am he. And Judas also, who betrayed him, stood with them.
6 As soon therefore as he had said to them: I am he; they went backward, and fell to the ground. 7 Again therefore he asked them: Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. 8 Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he. If therefore you seek me, let these go their way. 9 That the word might be fulfilled which he said: Of them whom thou hast given me, I have not lost any one. 10 Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it, and struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. And the name of the servant was Malchus.
11 Jesus therefore said to Peter: Put up thy sword into the scabbard. The chalice which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it? 12 Then the band and the tribune, and the servants of the Jews, took Jesus, and bound him: 13 And they led him away to Annas first, for he was father in law to Caiphas, who was the high priest of that year. 14 Now Caiphas was he who had given the counsel to the Jews: That it was expedient that one man should die for the people. 15 And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. And that disciple was known to the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the court of the high priest.
16 But Peter stood at the door without. The other disciple therefore, who was known to the high priest, went out, and spoke to the portress, and brought in Peter. 17 The maid therefore that was portress, saith to Peter: Art not thou also one of this man’s disciples? He saith: I am not. 18 Now the servants and ministers stood at a fire of coals, because it was cold, and warmed themselves. And with them was Peter also, standing, and warming himself. 19 The high priest therefore asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. 20 Jesus answered him: I have spoken openly to the world: I have always taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither all the Jews resort; and in secret I have spoken nothing.
21 Why asketh thou me? ask them who have heard what I have spoken unto them: behold they know what things I have said. 22 And when he had said these things, one of the servants standing by, gave Jesus a blow, saying: Answerest thou the high priest so? 23 Jesus answered him: If I have spoken evil, give testimony of the evil; but if well, why strikest thou me? 24 And Annas sent him bound to Caiphas the high priest. 25 And Simon Peter was standing, and warming himself. They said therefore to him: Art not thou also one of his disciples? He denied it, and said: I am not.
26 One of the servants of the high priest (a kinsman to him whose ear Peter cut off) saith to him: Did I not see thee in the garden with him? 27 Again therefore Peter denied; and immediately the cock crew. 28 Then they led Jesus from Caiphas to the governor’s hall. And it was morning; and they went not into the hall, that they might not be defiled, but that they might eat the pasch. 29 Pilate therefore went out to them, and said: What accusation bring you against this man? 30 They answered, and said to him: If he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up to thee.
31 Pilate therefore said to them: Take him you, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said to him: It is not lawful for us to put any man to death; 32 That the word of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he said, signifying what death he should die. 33 Pilate therefore went into the hall again, and called Jesus, and said to him: Art thou the king of the Jews? 34 Jesus answered: Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or have others told it thee of me? 35 Pilate answered: Am I a Jew? Thy own nation, and the chief priests, have delivered thee up to me: what hast thou done?
36 Jesus answered: My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would certainly strive that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now my kingdom is not from hence. 37 Pilate therefore said to him: Art thou a king then? Jesus answered: Thou sayest that I am a king. For this was I born, and for this came I into the world; that I should give testimony to the truth. Every one that is of the truth, heareth my voice. 38 Pilate saith to him: What is truth? And when he said this, he went out again to the Jews, and saith to them: I find no cause in him. 39 But you have a custom that I should release one unto you at the pasch: will you, therefore, that I release unto you the king of the Jews? 40 Then cried they all again, saying: Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.
Then therefore, Pilate took Jesus, and scourged him. 2 And the soldiers platting a crown of thorns, put it upon his head; and they put on him a purple garment. 3 And they came to him, and said: Hail, king of the Jews; and they gave him blows. 4 Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith to them: Behold, I bring him forth unto you, that you may know that I find no cause in him. 5 (Jesus therefore came forth, bearing the crown of thorns and the purple garment.) And he saith to them: Behold the Man.
6 When the chief priests, therefore, and the servants, had seen him, they cried out, saying: Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith to them: Take him you, and crucify him: for I find no cause in him. 7 The Jews answered him: We have a law; and according to the law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. 8 When Pilate therefore had heard this saying, he feared the more. 9 And he entered into the hall again, and he said to Jesus: Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer. 10 Pilate therefore saith to him: Speakest thou not to me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and I have power to release thee?
11 Jesus answered: Thou shouldst not have any power against me, unless it were given thee from above. Therefore, he that hath delivered me to thee, hath the greater sin. 12 And from henceforth Pilate sought to release him. But the Jews cried out, saying: If thou release this man, thou art not Caesar’s friend. For whosoever maketh himself a king, speaketh against Caesar. 13 Now when Pilate had heard these words, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat, in the place that is called Lithostrotos, and in Hebrew Gabbatha. 14 And it was the parasceve of the pasch, about the sixth hour, and he saith to the Jews: Behold your king. 15 But they cried out: Away with him; away with him; crucify him. Pilate saith to them: Shall I crucify your king? The chief priests answered: We have no king but Caesar.
14 “The parasceve of the pasch”… That is, the day before the paschal sabbath. The eve of every sabbath was called the parasceve, or day of preparation. But this was the eve of a high sabbath, viz., that which fell in the paschal week.
16 Then therefore he delivered him to them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him forth. 17 And bearing his own cross, he went forth to that place which is called Calvary, but in Hebrew Golgotha. 18 Where they crucified him, and with him two others, one on each side, and Jesus in the midst. 19 And Pilate wrote a title also, and he put it upon the cross. And the writing was: JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20 This title therefore many of the Jews did read: because the place where Jesus was crucified was nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, in Greek, and in Latin.
21 Then the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate: Write not, The King of the Jews; but that he said, I am the King of the Jews. 22 Pilate answered: What I have written, I have written. 23 The soldiers therefore, when they had crucified him, took his garments, (and they made four parts, to every soldier a part,) and also his coat. Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. 24 They said then one to another: Let us not cut it, but let us cast lots for it, whose it shall be; that the scripture might be fulfilled, saying: They have parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture they have cast lot. And the soldiers indeed did these things. 25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother’s sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.
26 When Jesus therefore had seen his mother and the disciple standing whom he loved, he saith to his mother: Woman, behold thy son. 27 After that, he saith to the disciple: Behold thy mother. And from that hour, the disciple took her to his own. 28 Afterwards, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, said: I thirst. 29 Now there was a vessel set there full of vinegar. And they, putting a sponge full of vinegar and hyssop, put it to his mouth. 30 Jesus therefore, when he had taken the vinegar, said: It is consummated. And bowing his head, he gave up the ghost.
31 Then the Jews, (because it was the parasceve,) that the bodies might not remain on the cross on the sabbath day, (for that was a great sabbath day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. 32 The soldiers therefore came; and they broke the legs of the first, and of the other that was crucified with him. 33 But after they were come to Jesus, when they saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34 But one of the soldiers with a spear opened his side, and immediately there came out blood and water. 35 And he that saw it, hath given testimony, and his testimony is true. And he knoweth that he saith true; that you also may believe.
36 For these things were done, that the scripture might be fulfilled: You shall not break a bone of him. 37 And again another scripture saith: They shall look on him whom they pierced. 38 And after these things, Joseph of Arimathea (because he was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly for fear of the Jews) besought Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus. And Pilate gave leave. He came therefore, and took the body of Jesus. 39 An
