« January 2008 | Main | March 2008 »
Deal Hudson
The Window for February 24, 2008
Georgia Bishops Oppose State Human Life Amendment
My story about the division in the pro-life community in Georgia between Georgia Right to Life, on the one hand, and the Catholic bishops and National Right to Life, on the other.
To read the story click here.
Deal Hudson
A "John Paul II" Catholic Runs for Congress
The Window for February 14, 2008
Tom Rooney is Catholic and pro-life, he is running for Congress in Florida. He is the part of the Rooney clan that has owned the Pittsburgh Steelers since its founding in 1933. The entire family is helping Tom in his first run for public office.
To read more click here.
Marjorie Campbell, marjorie@marjoriecampbell.com
My husband does not know it yet, but I've given him a very Special Valentine's Day gift: I threw his Sports Illustrated "Swimsuit" 2008 in the recycle bin yesterday when it arrived in the mail. He'll never see it.
Happy Valentine's Day, honey!
Here's why I committed mail theft to honor my husband.
1. The issue - entitled "Barely Bikinis" - should be called "Bare, Naked Broads". The cover girl, Marisa Miller, wears but a string bottom - busy stewarding her God-given beauty with a strategically draped string of blue gems and carefully placed blond hair. Hmmmmmm. Compared to the 1965 cover girl, pictured here, Ms. Miller's future does not look too fertile, unless you value your crop by bucks and gasps of lust.
2. "Bare, Naked Broads" 2008 boasts another remarkable feature: if the "models" wear anything, they are mostly in the process of taking it off. Ms. Miller has her thumb teasingly tucked under one of only two strings that aspire to be a purchasable consumer item. I suppose if she wore what SI's male gapers actually want - nothing - then nothing would be sold as next year's top-selling swim suits.
3. On Tuesday night, Father Patrick said an intimate Mass for me, my husband and the other Board members of a Catholic preschool here in San Francisco. Father looked us in the eyeballs - as bold priests seem to enjoy in these small celebrations - and said, "When 40% of men are addicted to pornography, what does that tell us about our culture?" Uck. I did not want to hear that at Mass. And I did not want to see it on my kitchen counter, tempting bait for emasculating the men and boys I love into sex obsessed pansies.
4. Of course, the yearly swimsuit episode has become a major consumer event of controversy between sports seasons - it must be fueled anew every issue, just as teams recharge themselves with new plays, players and promises. It's a big game of Money, Lust and Sex in the Market. And I don't want to play. I like to play by Christ's rules whenever I can - without excuses. These rules include the Church's rules which are crisply and convincingly well put by Kansas City Bishop Robert Finn in his Ash Wednesday 2007 pastoral letter "Blessed Are the Pure of Heart". Read it here.
5. We have 14 and 11 year old sons. Need I say more?
So Happy Valentine's Day, my beloved. I have recycled your Sports Illustrated Bare, Naked Broads ... with the hope it will come back to you - perhaps the very paper upon which I write you my love letter next Valentine's Day.
Marc Nadeau
Deal,
Your comments about the current situation of the conservatives offer me the opportunity to add up to your observations from an historical perspective.
When I visit a bookstore, the history and biography sections are always the first I look into. And I have to admit that I have a profound and unquenchable fascination with American political history, ever since Ronald Reagan caught my attention during his 'Morning in America' - and smiling - campaign of 1984.
But before coming back to Reagan, let me make a few observations. Do you think George Washington could have made a comeback from Valley Forge if he had not been the utmost optimist who believed in his cause? Can you imagine Abraham Lincoln bringing Old Glory to victory if he had relinquished his determination to the low ebb of gutter sniping? The same applies to FDR, who enlisted America in the war against tyranny from a wheelchair. These three great presidents did not lack opponents, criticism and negativity in their times. They prevailed, because they were optimistic. And because they countered huge antipathy, opposition and negativity.
These days, too many conservatives are spending too much time expressing what they're against, rather than saying why their ideological home is the best place in town. Yet, they have a great role model to that end.
Last week-end, while absorbing your post, I finished Reagan's Disciple by Lou Cannon and Carl M. Cannon. The authors made, at least, four observations that totally relate to what you say.
1. In the 1980 primary season, the Reagan campaign ran negative adds against George H. W. Bush;
2. "Ordinary Americans (...) turned to the confident FDR and the optimistic Reagan because they promised hope in a time of despair at a time when their well-meant but hapless predecessors seemed overwhelmed by events beyond their control."
3. Five months after entering the White House, President Reagan succeeded in making most of his tax-cuts and budget proposals, under a Democratic Congress, "by cultivating the support of conservative and moderate Democrats (...)."
4. "Reagan was a conservative, to be sure, and he advanced many conservative principles. But he was also, as the situation required, a pragmatist, a negotiator, a diplomat and a statesman."
In a word, Reagan was a positive figure. Just like Barack Obama. Just like John McCain. While watching the developments of the Republican race, my wife and I oftentimes compare notes and wonder what may well happen during the next months. Expressing concern at the prospect that all this nagging against John McCain might distract his campaign or diminish his chances of winning at the ballot boxes come next November 4th, I strongly disagreed.
Radio hosts, activists and politicos who are trying to shoot down Senator McCain actually increase his likability among the general electorate. Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh are proud representatives of what is repulsive about the Conservative movement. Being opposed by that current is all but a negative feat. After all, maybe Limbaugh is right when he says that his opposition is actually helping the candidacy of John McCain.
From the Hanoi Hilton to the premature political obituaries of last summer, the Maverick got the better of bigger obstacles than the Monday-morning quarterbacks who are "among those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat" - to use an expression dear to another Maverick from another era, who succeeded against many difficult odds.
I don't know about you Deal, but in my book John McCain makes conservatism sunny again after a long rainy period. That's excellent news for the GOP.
Marjorie Campbell, marjorie@marjoriecampbell.com
Doug Sherman of Immaculate Heart Radio brought this beautiful video to my attention. Why? See if you can find his special interest in this ordination of 48 new priests to the Legion of Christ on December 22 2007 in Rome. 
http://www.legionariesofchrist.org/eng/articulos/multimedia_video.phtml?lc=id-_se-250_ca-_te-_rx-&tipo_art=&archivoid=611&origen=seccion
Deal Hudson
The Leading Pro-Life Judicial Activist Speaks Out on McCain
The Window for February 6, 2007
Manny Miranda, the Catholic attorney, who lead the resistence to the nomination of Harriet Miers, just endorsed John McCain.
Deal Hudson
The Window for February 4, 2008
Are U.S. Tax Dollars Supporting Abortion in China?
My article showing how the Swiss-based Global Fund is spending U.S. tax dollars on coercive abortion in China can be read at this link.
Marjorie Campbell, marjorie@marjoriecampbell.com
Marc wrote: While many of the readers of this blog are heading in front of their televisions or to attend Super Bowl Parties tomorrow, they should ask themselves who's got the best team spirit between McCain and Romney? The loyal soldier who played in the team against all odds or the disproportionate ego who flip-flopped his way in political life?
Well, my goodness, Marc. I know you are dying to get some Scotch from me, but I still get to pick out the bottles should your candidate becomes The candidate - a little balance on your part might go a long way at the liquor store on my part.
More, balance in discussing Mr. McCain and Mr. Romney is intellectually appropriate. Neither has a lock on legacy here - both have much to be said for their accomplishments and temperaments - and their "egos". Indeed, one of the greatest observed weaknesses of Mr. McCain appears well-stated this morning at the Wall Street Journal and raises the very real worry that, under the pressured headiness of the Presidential Race to the Finish, Mr. McCain's unpolished performances may punch serious punctures in his support ( particularly in contrast to the oratorical excellence of Mrs. Clinton or, even more, Mr. Obama):
The [debate with Mr. Romney] exchange, along with some others, reflects a couple of Mr. McCain's less appealing traits. One is his occasional penchant for antibusiness demagoguery, as when he attacked drug companies in a previous debate, only to have Mr. Romney respond, "Don't turn the pharmaceutical companies into the big bad guys." Mr. McCain shot back, "Well, they are."
It's also obvious that Mr. McCain takes politics personally, which can shade into self-righteousness when people oppose his positions. One of our colleagues called Mr. McCain's performance on Wednesday a "victory snarl," which was about right. Should the Senator sew up the Republican nomination, none of this is the way to unite his party, or to reassure conservatives that his fall campaign will be about more than his personal honor or renegade habits of mind. (read more).
But it does not take Mr. McCain's awkward flairs of emotion, embellishment and ego, or the Wall Street Journal's editorializing, to recommend a more balanced, analytic approach to this contest, Marc. Consider the "Catholic" comments taking exception to points in Deal's column at InsideCatholic.com "Is The Catholic Vote Giving John McCain the GOP Lead?"
Jeanine echoed the same concerns, "I'm worried about McCain-Feingold and about McCain's support for the Fairness Doctrine. Also, I have some concerns about McCain's status as a "maverick" Republican and about his membership in the Gang of 14. Has McCain sponsored pro-life legislation? Isn't he suspicious of voters who are conservative and pro-life? I don't really trust him. "
Then, on January 31, reader Judy Keeven sincerely added, "If you are supporting Sen. McCain, please RECONSIDER your choice. While he has many good qualities, his iriitable temperament, impatience and impulsiveness, and his reckless disregard for the truth (re: Romney's statement about time tables in Iraq) are huge red flags."
On the same day, Chris remarked, "His demeanor is anything but Presidential, in fact it is downright hostile. I shudder to think how he would act in high stress political negotiations with other world leaders."
As I posted on January 18, you may get the King you long for - but it is not the obvious choice you seem intent to bark upon. We'd all do well to take Francis Wippel's advice: "I hate to see all this bickering among Catholics. I do not disrespect anyone here because of their choice for President. There is no clear-cut conservative candidate in this race, and as we sort through each candidate's record, I hope we can get to the facts while still respecting each other's viewpoints."
Marc Nadeau
Visibly, Mitt Romney is desperate. Lacking popular support at the base, he has poured many millions of dollars of his personal fortune to campaign for the highest office in the United States. But he now realizes that money can't buy everything.
Last week, he accused John McCain of using dirty tricks against him regarding his position about Iraq. On GOPUSA Forum, Thomas Sowell - who must also be desperate about the political fortune of the one-term liberal Governor of Massachusetts went as far as comparing John McCain to... Benedict Arnold! Don't change your glasses, you read well.
What would be Romney's team reaction if a McCain supporter or sympathizer was to say that, at least, the Maverick has never been brainwashed either about Vietnam or about Iraq? They would hit the roof. It is thus surprising that they try to take speck out their neighbor's eye when they have a log in their own.
When Senator McCain said that Romney once supported a timetable for withdrawal in Iraq, he was right. The one-term liberal Governor of Massachusetts did. You notably can attest for yourself here. Right Smart, a fellow blogger, thus remarked that this may have been the reason why anti-war protesters did not protest in front of Romney's HQ in Iowa way back in December.
That's not all. Romney, the new-born proud knight of Conservatism, is now trying to convince the GOP rank and file that he is the real conservative in the pack. Let's see the facts, for some clarity.
Like his positions on other issues - notably abortion - Romney flip-flopped about his true conservative allegiance. When he ran for the Senate in 1994, liberal Romney was afraid that being defined as a conservative and disciple of the Gipper might hurt him. In a word "he had little use of the policies of the Reagan Revolution". In 2008, he says that no, no, he ran "as Republican and as a conservative."
Furthermore, the same post reveals - or simply evokes something most of you already know or should know - that 1) he had considered entering the race as an independent, 2) he only became a member of the Party late in 1993 (a couple of decades after John McCain...), 3) he had voted for Democrat Paul Tsongas in the 1992 Democratic primaries and 4) he was openly bashing Jesse Helms - one of the architects of Ronald Reagan's ascension to the Presidency.
Now, wait a minute. This is the man who tries to teach John McCain a thing or two about conservatism and Party loyalty?
While many of the readers of this blog are heading in front of their televisions or to attend Super Bowl Parties tomorrow, they should ask themselves who's got the best team spirit between McCain and Romney? The loyal soldier who played in the team against all odds or the disproportionate ego who flip-flopped his way in political life?
Marc Nadeau
Deal,
Your comment about the importance of the Catholic Vote in the recent success of John McCain's campaign is very interesting and pertinent.
It also brings me to elaborate more about my perception of McCain's conservatism. In the last weeks and months, I have - like practically everybody - read and heard that some conservatives and Republicans are irritated by the Senator's stances on an issues like immigration.
The 2006 US Census reported that Hispanics represent approximately 15% of the population. From what I read, Catholicism is the dominant religion among this segment of the population. And like you mention in your post, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and California "are both heavily Catholic and Hispanic". Senator McCain is thus a very big plus for any electoral calculations within a victory scenario for November, making him very competitive in California for example.
But that's not all. The Maverick's position on abortion is not only "the most electable pro-life Republican", he's also the closest to the Catholic fiber on immigration.
Being myself a member of the Knights of Columbus, I oftentimes take pleasure in visiting the website of the organization to read various items. The other day, this article catched my attention in a particular way. Late in 2006, the Board of Directors of the Knights of Columbus released a position paper titled "Reform Should Provide Avenue to Legal Residency and Citizenship", in which they elaborated about the fact that "the vast majority of undocumented Mexicans and other Latin Americans in the United States are simply trying to build better livers for themselves and their families, but must struggle to do so from the shadows of American society."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the Knights of Columbus ("the world's largest Catholic fraternal service organization") certainly is not a liberal, left-leaning, organization. Of course, they're nonpartisan, but they're a living, eloquent, expression of Compassionate Conservatism. For more than 125 years, they have been on the front lines of the culture of life and they have shown their profound and sincere patriotism, notably with their fight to add the words "under God" to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.
These are also the main tenets of John McCain's career. So, if I had a choice of a candidate to invite for a visit at the Knights of Columbus's fabulous Museum in New Haven, Connecticut (one of the states that will vote next Tuesday), the Senator from Arizona would be my pick without hesitation.
John McCain is not only a real conservative, but he's a compassionate one whose views are espoused by a significant number of Republicans. If not, he certainly would not be on his way to be called upon to carry the banner of the GOP in the historic electoral battle ahead.
