Biden Catholic Hypocrite

Biden Touts Catholic Faith A Month After Vowing To Crack Down On Nuns https://t.co/5JSKx339Ks

— Mollie (@MZHemingway) August 10, 2020

Elizabeth Warren: Hobby Lobby, Women's RIGHT to Contraception (Video)

Elizabeth Warren, daughter of a woman with high cheekbones, says that "Republicans are on the attack, once again trying to put women's fundamental rights on the chopping block."

She and her Leftist colleagues are standing up to "fight back." They are sponsoring "new legislation to reverse the Supreme Court's shocking decision in Hobby Lobby, where the Court gave corporations the power to deny their employees access to birth control."

Here's video:



REPUBLICANS are on the attack, putting "women's fundamental rights on the chopping block"?

Theoretically, certainly, the Supreme Court isn't an arm of any political party. The Court's decisions are not REPUBLICAN decrees.

Warren is crazy.

Corporations cannot deny their employees access to birth control.

Are corporatipons preventing their employees from going to CVS or Walgreens or Walmart or Target or supermarkets and purchassing birth control?

Of course not.

That's a flat-out lie.

Warren is spreading disinformation.

She's a liar.

We know she likes to tell stories.

And she wants to be president.

Religious Liberty: Supreme Court 5-4

It's scary that something as fundamental to the American soul as religious liberty was upheld by just a 5-4 Supreme Court majority.

Our rights are being threatened by Leftists interested in making us subservient to a massive centralized government.

Rugged individualism is an antiquated notion.

Did you ever think that would be the case in America?

INDEPENDENCE Day?



Freedom isn't a given in the country anymore, alleged Land of the Free. I truly fear my rights are at risk.

I cherish my freedom.

You know what, Leftists?

You can't have it.

Hobby Lobby and Contraception Coverage

It's very important to note that Leftists deal in distortions/lies.

The truth is their enemy.

For example, the Hobby Lobby case:

Supreme Court rules that bosses can deny employees coverage of birth control. #HobbyLobby #NotMyBossBusiness

— Sandra Fluke (@SandraFluke) June 30, 2014

What a load!

Sandra Fluke's statement is flat-out false.

The Supreme Court did NOT rule that "bosses can deny employees coverage of birth control."

Leftists like Fluke and Leftist hacks in the media are truly running amok on this case.

In their coverage of the Supreme Court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case, no mainstream/Leftist media outlet that I heard included the fact that Hobby Lobby provides coverage for 16 of 20 contraceptives for its employees.

Yes, Hobby Lobby is paying for contraceptive coverage for its employees.

From Townhall:

The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate, and Hobby Lobby will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees. However, the Green family cannot provide or pay for four potentially life-threatening drugs and devices. These drugs include Plan B and Ella, the so-called morning-after pill and the week-after pill. Covering these drugs and devices would violate their deeply held religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception, when an egg is fertilized.

Get that?

Hobby Lobby DOES pay for contraceptives for its employees.

The Court ruled that the Green family does not have to PAY for abortifacients for its employees.

Good. That's a victory for religious liberty and the First Amendment.

It's ridiculous to suggest that the Court ruled that employers can impose their religious beliefs on their employees.

That's absolutely insane.

On his radio program yesterday, Mark Levin highlighted a crazy comment by Jeffrey Toobin, a lawyer and legal analyst for CNN.

JEFFREY TOOBIN: Ruth Bader Ginsburg's dissenting opinion is devoted to the proposition that [the ruling] is not narrow, that the idea that a privately held company can exercise religious beliefs in deciding which benefits and which customers to deal with is potentially a very broad idea.

Say what???

The Hobby Lobby ruling has absolutely nothing to do with "customers."

Toobin, as a lawyer, should know better than to twist this ruling like that.

I hate the Left's spin game and lies.

Sebelius Resigns

Kathleen Sebelius has resigned.

From the New York Times:

Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, is resigning, ending a stormy five-year tenure marred by the disastrous rollout of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement, the Affordable Care Act.

Mr. Obama accepted Ms. Sebelius’s resignation this week, and on Friday morning he will nominate Sylvia Mathews Burwell, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, to replace her, officials said.

The departure comes as the Obama administration tries to move beyond its early stumbles in carrying out the law, persuade a still-skeptical public of its lasting benefits, and help Democratic incumbents, who face blistering attack ads after supporting the legislation, survive the midterm elections this fall.

Officials said Ms. Sebelius, 65, made the decision to resign and was not forced out. But the frustration at the White House over her performance had become increasingly clear, as administration aides worried that the crippling problems at HealthCare.gov, the website set up to enroll Americans in insurance exchanges, would result in lasting damage to the president’s legacy.

I don't care about Obama's legacy.

Do you think most Americans are concerned about the guy's legacy?

That's crazy.

The fact is Obama should have fired her months ago, even years ago.

Obama's legacy is already set. The resignation of Sebelius means nothing at this point.
_______________

This is funny:

Obama to announce at 5pm tomorrow that he's extending the deadline for Sebelius to leave.

— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) April 10, 2014

This, too:

Well it's a good thing that Sebelius resigned NOW, before she could do any real damage. #SarcasmoModeOn

— Dan Joseph (@DanJoseph78) April 10, 2014

And this:

Sebelius attempted to submit resignation a half dozen times over the last several days. Does that count as 6 resignations at HHS?

— RightWisconsin (@RightWisconsin) April 10, 2014

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: 'Pinocchios' From WaPo

"When 99 percent of women used birth control in their lifetime and 60 percent use it for something other than family planning, it's outrageous and I think the Supreme Court will suggest that their case is ridiculous." - Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz on MSNBC's The Ed Show, March 25

Is Debbie Wasserman Schultz clueless, or is she a liar?

Wasserman Schultz is either very stupid or very deceptive.

Even Glenn Kessler of the liberal Washington Post awarded her two "Pinnochios" for what she said about the Hobby Lobby case during an appearance on MSNBC.

Significant omissions and/or exaggerations. Some factual error may be involved but not necessarily. A politician can create a false, misleading impression by playing with words and using legalistic language that means little to ordinary people.

Actually, what Wasserman Schultz said deserved much more than two "Pinnochios."

She told a whopper.

Amy Ridenour, NewsBusters, points out that Wasserman Schultz managed to tell four lies in that one sentence.

The 60 percent number is a big lie. The real number is 14 percent.

The 60 percent lie wasn't even the first lie of the sentence. 99 percent of all women do not use birth control in their lifetime. In fact, by age 44, only 86.8 percent of women have ever had vaginal intercourse, even once.

Wasserman Schultz's two lies were meant to support a third lie. It doesn't matter to the HHS contraception mandate debate how many women use "the pill" to regulate hormones or for some other medical purpose other than birth control, because the minute the pill is used for something other than birth control, it falls outside the contraception mandate. And since it falls outside the contraception mandate part of ObamaCare, it doesn't matter what happens to that particular mandate in the courts for those who simply want coverage for a drug to regulate hormones, or for some other necessary medical purpose.

Wasserman Schultz wanted the audience to believe a fourth lie. Wasserman Schultz wanted viewers to believe some people (religious conservatives, of course) are trying to block women's access to routine health care. But nobody is. Even the Catholic Church, which famously objects to artificial birth control, does not object to women taking the pill for non-birth control purposes, and does not object to insurance policies covering the pill for non-contraceptive reasons.

This is what Democrats do.

They make stuff up.

They lie.



Liar.

Yup. Big, BIG lies.

The Gettysburg Address - 150 Years Ago

Today, 150 years ago, President Abraham Lincoln delivered one of the most enduring speeches in American history - The Gettysburg Address.

Transcript

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we cannot dedicate—we cannot consecrate—we cannot hallow—this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here gave the last full measure of devotion—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

So many Americans gave their lives for our way of life. The sacrifice they made to defend our freedom is so great.

"From these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they here, gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve these dead shall not have died in vain."
_________________

LEARN THE ADDRESS

To celebrate the 150th anniversary of the Gettysburg Address, documentarian Ken Burns, along with numerous partners, has launched a national effort to encourage everyone in America to video record themselves reading or reciting the speech. The collection of recordings housed on this site will continue to grow as more and more people are inspired by the power of history and take the challenge to LEARN THE ADDRESS.

_________________

UPDATE, from Breitbart: Obama Removes 'God' from Gettysburg Address

Washington DC talk show host Chris Plante reported today that Barack Obama omitted the words "under God" from the Gettysburg Address when reciting the great speech for a Ken Burns documentary.

Burns had filmed all living presidents as well as various Hollywood personalities and luminaries to pay homage to the speech which was delivered by Abraham Lincoln 150 years ago, today.

Plante broke the story on Washington DC talk radio station WMAL on his mid-morning program, "The Chris Plante Show."

WMAL reports:

Curiously enough, in his version of the speech, President Barack Obama's delivery contained an omission - in a line that every other celebrity delivered as "that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom," the President left out the words "under God."

The video of Obama's rendition of the speech can be seen below. It is unlisted (for now) on the Ken Burns YouTube page.

Why am I not surprised?

Jay Carney, Obama, the First Amendment, the Press

Once again during the press briefing today, Jay Carney insists that Obama is a "strong defender of the First Amendment.

It's driving me nuts!!!

He repeats that BS. He was saying that last week and he's saying it again.

Note to Carney: Saying something doesn't make it true.

Obama's record is abysmal when it comes to defending the First Amendment.

Obama has waged war on the First Amendment.


Another thing Carney keeps saying: "It was not appropriate to notify the president" and "I can't comment on an on-going investigation."

NOT APPROPRIATE TO TELL THE PRESIDENT THE IRS WAS TARGETING CONSERVATIVE CITIZENS???

What a load of crap!

Carney claims he learns about scandals when he reads about them in the newspaper, Obama's source.

It appears that the White House is blaming the media. If the media don't report, it doesn't merit Obama's attention.

Ridiculous! But not surprisisng. The game plan is to keep Obama in the dark to keep his hands clean. BAD PLAN!

There's a big difference between "engaging in a criminal investigation" and being aware that there is an investigation.

It's insane.

This administration is either utterly incompetent or the least transparent ever. Are they a pack of idiots or a pack of liars? Both?

Jay Carney: Obama and the First Amendment

In his press briefing yesterday, Jay Carney said the most ridiculous thing I've heard come out of his mouth. And he has spewed some truly unbelievable (false) stuff.

JAY CARNEY: Broadly speaking, I can tell you that the President is a strong defender of the First Amendment....

WHAT???

Obama is NOT a strong defender of the First Amendment.

Good grief. How could Carney even think he could attempt to sell that BS?

Obama has waged war on the First Amendment.

As a Catholic, I'm very aware of Obama's assault on my religious liberty.

Now, Obama is attacking freedom of speech and of the press.

The systematic targeting of conservatives by the IRS is an abuse that is positively chilling. That term may be overused but it applies. The Obama administration is engaged in chilling activity.

Obama a strong defender of the First Amendment?

No way. Obama has failed to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

As Marco Rubio put it, Obama has created a "culture of intimidation."

This must stop.

The buck stops with Obama.

Obama: 'I Am Not a Dictator'

A couple of weeks ago, Obama informed the American public that he's not the "emperor of the United States."

He cited that fact as a problem.



Poor guy. He says he has to struggle with that, not being emperor.

Today, Obama points out that he's not a dictator.

Really?

On several occasions, he's acted like one, ignoring the Constitution, stripping Americans of our rights. He's circumvented Congress. He declared the Senate to be in recess, completely disregarding the separation of powers.



Sometimes, Obama is a dictator. He just says he's not.

This could be Obama's "I am not a crook" moment.

Echoes of President Nixon:

OBAMA: I am not a dictator. I'm the president.

Obama doth protest too much, methinks.

Catholic Bishops Reject ObamaCare 'Compromise'

Yesterday, Catholic bishops responded to the Obama administration's latest "compromise" in its policy to force religious institutions to violate their beliefs, infringing on their rights.

Here's Cardinal Timothy Dolan's statement in response to the HHS proposal:

For almost a century, the Catholic bishops of the United States have worked hard to support the right of every person to affordable, accessible, comprehensive, life-affirming healthcare. As we continue to do so, our changeless values remain the same. We promote the protection of the dignity of all human life and the innate rights that flow from it, including the right to life from conception to natural death; care for the poorest among us and the undocumented; the right of the Church to define itself, its ministries, and its ministers; and freedom of conscience.

Last Friday, the Administration issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) regarding the HHS mandate that requires coverage for sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortions. The Administration indicates that it has heard some previously expressed concerns and that it is open to dialogue. With release of the NPRM, the Administration seeks to offer a response to serious matters which have been raised throughout the past year.We look forward to engaging with the Administration, and all branches and levels of government, to continue to address serious issues that remain. Our efforts will require additional, careful study. Only in this way can we best assure that healthcare for every woman, man and child is achieved without harm to our first, most cherished freedom.

In evaluating Friday's action regarding the HHS mandate, our reference remains the statement of our Administrative Committee made last March, United for Religious Freedom, and affirmed by the entire body of bishops in June 2012.

In that statement, we first expressed concern over the mandate's "exceedingly narrow" four-part definition of "religious employer," one that exempted our houses of worship, but left "our great ministries of service to our neighbors, namely, the poor, the homeless, the sick, the students in our schools and universities, and others in need" subject to the mandate. This created "a 'second class' of citizenship within our religious community," "weakening [federal law's] healthy tradition of generous respect for religious freedom and diversity." And the exemption effectuated this distinction by requiring "among other things, [that employers] must hire and serve primarily those of their own faith."

On Friday, the Administration proposed to drop the first three parts of the four-part test. This might address the last of the concerns above, but it seems not to address the rest.The Administration's proposal maintains its inaccurate distinction among religious ministries. It appears to offer second-class status to our first-class institutions in Catholic health care, Catholic education, and Catholic charities. HHS offers what it calls an "accommodation," rather than accepting the fact that these ministries are integral to our Church and worthy of the same exemption as our Catholic churches. And finally, it seems to take away something that we had previously—the ability of an exempt employer (such as a diocese) to extend its coverage to the employees of a ministry outside the exemption.

Second, United for Religious Freedom explained that the religious ministries not deemed "religious employers" would suffer the severe consequence of "be[ing] forced by government to violate their own teachings within their very own institutions. "After Friday, it appears that the government would require all employees in our "accommodated" ministries to have the illicit coverage—they may not opt out, nor even opt out for their children—under a separate policy. In part because of gaps in the proposed regulations, it is still unclear how directly these separate policies would be funded by objecting ministries, and what precise role those ministries would have in arranging for these separate policies. Thus, there remains the possibility that ministries may yet be forced to fund and facilitate such morally illicit activities. Here, too, we will continue to analyze the proposal and to advocate for changes to the final rule that reflect these concerns.

Third, the bishops explained that the "HHS mandate creates still a third class, those with no conscience protection at all: individuals who, in their daily lives, strive constantly to act in accordance with their faith and moral values. "This includes employers sponsoring and subsidizing the coverage, insurers writing it, and beneficiaries paying individual premiums for it. Friday's action confirms that HHS has no intention to provide any exemption or accommodation at all to this "third class."In obedience to our Judeo-Christian heritage, we have consistently taught our people to live their lives during the week to reflect the same beliefs that they proclaim on the Sabbath. We cannot now abandon them to be forced to violate their morally well-informed consciences.

Because the stakes are so high, we will not cease from our effort to assure that healthcare for all does not mean freedom for few. Throughout the past year, we have been assured by the Administration that we will not have to refer, pay for, or negotiate for the mandated coverage. We remain eager for the Administration to fulfill that pledge and to find acceptable solutions—we will affirm any genuine progress that is made, and we will redouble our efforts to overcome obstacles or setbacks. Thus, we welcome and will take seriously the Administration's invitation to submit our concerns through formal comments, and we will do so in the hope that an acceptable solution can be found that respects the consciences of all. At the same time, we will continue to stand united with brother bishops, religious institutions, and individual citizens who seek redress in the courts for as long as this is necessary.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York

February 7, 2013

I am so thankful for the leadership of Cardinal Dolan and the Catholic bishops on this issue.

Our religious freedom is under assault by the Obama administration.

Obama can't be allowed to chip away at our precious liberty.

If you're Catholic and you don't care about this, it's time for some reflection.

Obama: Guns and Executive Orders

I watched Obama's address on GUN CONTROL this morning.

I saw the children there, being exploited as props.

I saw the audience of Obama supporters, applauding his proposals.

Obama had on his serious face.

The stage was set. The performers emoted.

I didn't hear anything that Obama proposed that would have prevented the recent mass shootings.

I did hear a load of hypocrisy. Obama wants to fund "resource officers" in schools. He wants more police on the streets.

In other words, he believes ARMED protection is important in ensuring the safety of Americans.

The way to limit "gun violence" is with more guns. OK.

It bothered me that Obama kept exploiting the horrific Newton shootings. The fact is no background check would have stopped what Adam Lanza did. He stole the guns he used from his mother. He murdered her. HE BROKE THE LAW. No ruling from King Obama, no law passed by Congress, can stop people from disregarding them if they choose.

I wish it were possible to keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill and evil individuals. I don't think it is. Those wishing to do harm to others can accomplish their goal.

What I found most disturbing about Obama's dance was his politicization of the problem.

Blaming Congress (aka Republicans) and talk radio and the NRA for gun violence in America is shameful. Blame the killers, Obama.

Obama kept yapping about protecting our children. This from the most radical pro-abortion president in our nation's history.

Respect life? Obama has two faces.

Obama blathered on and on about our "rights." He's the alleged defender of the 2nd Amendment and our inalienable rights.

Really?

Obama declared war on Catholics and stripped us of our religious liberty. Are we really supposed to buy that this imperial president is defending our freedom?

Obama's penchant for executive rulings, his bypassing of Congress and refusing to be bound by our Constitution's checks and balances, is beyond troubling.

Bottom line: Those people bent on murdering others are going to do it. Obama's "executive actions" won't impact them.

I didn't hear Obama address the real problem - the breakdown of the family and the lack of sound moral values in our society. I didn't hear Obama talk about right and wrong, good and bad, in terms of people's behavior. Yes, he spoke of getting the CDC to "study" the effects of violent video games on people; but that's a waste. That's nothing but window dressing.

It's time to address the reality that our country is no longer grounded in moral values.

Until Obama and his cohorts admit that the fault lies in the actions of twisted individuals rather than inanimate objects, nothing will change.

Cardinal Dolan: HHS Mandate - Catholics Won't Give In

At his news conference on Wednesday, Obama insisted the American people gave him a mandate to pursue his agenda.

Is Obama really that delusional?

Does his failure to acknowledge that half the country voted for Mitt Romney to be the president, making the mandate claim absurd, point to his arrogance?

Whatever, Obama's second term isn't going to be smooth sailing. He needs to admit that reality.

The divisiveness he campaigned on is going to come back to bite him.

His oppression of Catholics isn't going to be accepted by Church leaders.

Cardinal Timothy Dolan realizes Catholics must fight Obama's war on the Church and religious liberty in general.

From Dr. Susan Berry, Breitbart's Big Government:

Dolan asserted that the Church will not comply with the mandate that requires most employers, even those affiliated with religious organizations, to provide free contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients through health insurance plans.

“The only thing we’re certainly not prepared to do is give in,” Dolan said at a news conference. “Not violate our consciences, and not obey what we consider to be something immoral. That we’re committed on.”

Dozens of Catholic dioceses and other Catholic organizations have filed lawsuits in federal courts over the mandate, which is included in ObamaCare.

Though Cardinal Dolan admitted the bishops waited until after Election Day to see if the results of the election could change the health care requirements, he said, “now I think the bishops have taken a deep breath and said, we better get back to work and decide just what we are going to do.”

Dolan stated that though the Church is still willing to work with the administration, “I would say no door is closed except for the door to capitulation.”

I am so thankful for leaders like Cardinal Dolan.

He's not surrendering to Obama. He won't accept his assault on our fundamental freedom to exercise our religion. He won't give in.

Catholics and Obama

As a Catholic, the results of the presidential election have been difficult for me to process.

Catholics chose Obama over Mitt Romney.

The fact is Mitt Romney acts like a better Catholic than most Catholics in America.

Overwhelmingly, Hispanic Catholics voted for the most radical pro-abortion president in American history.

In spite of Obama's assault on the BILL OF RIGHTS and religious liberty, targeting Catholics, Hispanic Catholics voted for Obama.

Although Romney won among white Catholics, many of them also ignored Obama's stunning extremism on abortion and his attack on one of our fundamental freedoms, choosing to vote for Obama.

Obama waged war on the Catholic Church in America and he still won the Catholic vote.

He bet on the fact that most Catholics' faith is not a priority in their lives, and he won. He was right.

I'm shaken by that.

Latino Catholics: Immigration, Not Religion, Decided Vote

The Catholic Vote Went to Obama Over Romney Despite Contraception & Religious Freedom Debates

Despite HHS mandate, Catholic voters narrowly favor Obama over Romney

Most Catholics vote for Obama, but Latinos and whites divided

Reuters/Ipsos exit polling found that 51 percent of Catholics favored President Barack Obama, compared with 48 percent for Republican contender Mitt Romney. A report by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life had a similar finding, with 50 percent of Catholics for Obama and 48 percent for Romney, the same as the popular vote in the general population.

Hispanic Catholics were far more likely to favor Obama - by 76 percent to 23 percent - than white Catholics, who favored Romney by 56 percent to 43 percent, according to the Reuters poll. Black Protestants favored Obama by 97 percent to 3 percent, while white Protestants favored Romney by 69 percent compared to 29 percent for Obama.

"When you talk about Catholics, there are really two Catholic votes, the white vote and the Hispanic vote, which look starkly different," said Robert Jones, chief executive of the Public Religion Research Institute. He said exit polls found that overall, voters were focused mainly on economic issues.

This election year saw strong advocacy on the conservative side of some issues by Catholic bishops, which caused discomfort for liberal Catholics. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops protested the Obama administration's health care mandate which requires Catholic hospitals and colleges to carry insurance that provides free contraception as a violation of religious liberty.

...The bishops' stands did not seem to have much influence on the vote, said Jones. Catholic attitudes on the healthcare mandate were unchanged in March and September polls, despite advocacy by church leaders.

"If the (Republican Party) has some reflecting to do about its inability to reach an increasingly multicultural country, Catholic leaders could benefit from similar soul searching when it comes to their own diverse flock," said John Gehring, Catholic program director at Faith in Public Life, a liberal advocacy group.

Liberal John Gehring believes the Republican Party and Catholic leaders need to bend to fit his agenda, one that does not include respect for LIFE and respect for the CONSTITUTION, religious liberty.

I completely disagree.

Catholic leaders are failing, but not because they need to "soul search" their way to mirroring the majority of voters self-identified as Catholics. The leaders are failing because they aren't communicating as they should. So much of Catholic teaching is ignored.

It seems many priests are comfortable with that, avoiding issues that are controversial.

Yes, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki, and the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops did take on Obama and his abuse of Catholics' freedom. They are to be commended for that. They issued strong statements expressing their concerns and organized efforts to raise of awareness of Obama's abuse.

But that's pretty much where it stopped.

While at Mass this weekend, I was thinking about how little is said by priests to guide Church members when it comes to practicing our faith in a way that reflects Catholic teaching.

There seems to be a great effort not to offend, a lot of sitting on the fence. There's a certain cowardice that is disturbing.

I was sitting in the pew, truly troubled about the lack of backbone, the weekly sins of omission that occur at Mass during the homily.

I'm still really upset about the results of the election. I'm fearful about the future. I was hoping for change, for things to get better for my family and friends, to get back on track. Adding to my uncertainty is how I feel about my Church.

To say I'm disillusioned is an understatement.

Election 2012: Many American Women Are Stupid

I am proud NOT to be one of the women who voted for Obama.

From The Hill:

The gender gap in the 2012 presidential election was the largest since Gallup began tracking the metric in 1952, according to data released by the polling firm on Friday.


President Obama won women by 12 percentage points, while Mitt Romney won men by 8. That’s a 20-point gender gap, edging out the 1984 election when Ronald Reagan defeated Democrat Walter Mondale in a landslide.

...The politics of gender played a significant role throughout the 2012 election, as Romney looked to cut into Obama’s advantage among female voters by framing the economy as a women’s issue.

The strategy worked for a while, as polls showed women flocking to the GOP challenger after his strong first debate performance. But Romney was unable to hold on to those gains in the final weeks of the campaign, and the Obama campaign relentlessly portrayed the GOP candidate as a throwback to the 1950s in his views on women's reproductive and pay equity issues.

Romney may also have been hurt by two Republican House candidates, former Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) and Indiana State Treasurer Richard Mourdock. Both Senate candidates, who lost their election bids, made controversial comments about rape and abortion that reignited the Democratic line of attack from earlier in the cycle that the GOP is looking to “turn back the clock” on women’s issues.

American women who actually bought into the Democrats' claim that Mitt Romney was the enemy of women and intended to "turn back the clock" on women's issues are embarrassingly ignorant.

The Democrats should not be proud that their idiotic "War on Women" crap worked. It's pathetic.

Apparently, the reality is a lot of American women are just plain stupid.

Good Lord, if they are so empty-headed that they don't realize that the economy most definitely is a women's issue and critical to their health and well-being, then they're hopelessly backward.

Really, how clueless can they be?

Those ads painting Romney as bent on "getting rid" of Planned Parenthood were thoroughly deceptive.

Obama and the Democrats, as we know, are shameless. They will say anything.

Contraception? A game-changer?

How sad!

I guess one problem for the Romney campaign was that it gave American women too much credit.

At least some of us don't need the big, strong government to take care of our every need.

We're strong. We understood what was at stake in this election and we voted for Romney.

Romney Transition Website

Oh, what might have been!



From the New York Daily News:

Mitt Romney may have lost the White House, but for a brief time Wednesday a transition website went live — calling him "President-Elect" and offering Americans a view of a presidency that might have been.

The site was only up temporarily, but screen grabs preserved by Politicalwire.com show Romney's team was ready to roll with information about the Jan. 21 presidential inauguration and future Cabinet nominees.

...SolutionStream, the Utah-based company that designed the site, didn't say why the mock-up went live, but confirmed it was ready to go if Romney had defeated President Obama on Tuesday. The former governor of Massachusetts fell short of beating the President, who was marching closer to winning Florida on Thursday and bringing his electoral vote count to 332 vs. Romney’s 206.

Jason Thelin, an owner of SolutionStream, told The Huffington Post that the site was a “tiny” project and was thrown together in a day and a half.

His company was contacted by Romney transition volunteers about 10 days before the election, he said.

After The Huffington Post inquired about the site Wednesday, it was soon taken down.

According to Politico, Romney’s transition team — called “The Readiness Project” — was being led by Mike Leavitt, the former Health and Human Services secretary under President George W. Bush and a former Utah governor. Romney’s campaign had not been eager to talk about his transition plans before the election.

But the website gave a sense of what Romney would have done had he won.

“On his first day in office, Mitt Romney will issue an executive order that paves the way for the federal government to issue Affordable Care Act waivers to all 50 states,” according to a section called “Repealing the Affordable Care Act.” “He will then work with Congress to repeal the full legislation as quickly as possible.”

Oh, my God.

EVERYTHING could have been so different.

Instead of this overwhelming, all-encompassing sense of impending doom, I'd be hopeful and optimistic and so relieved.

You know that feeling of relief you have when a crisis is averted, when your worst fears vanish?

What might have been, what might have been.

It was possible, but a few million Republican voters shamefully decided to sit this one out.

If transforming America was their intent, congratulations to them. Their goal is on the road to realization.

In Obama strongholds, the turnout was massive. In the city Milwaukee, 87 percent of registered voters cast ballots.

That's close to the sort of voter turnout Saddam Hussein would get.

Dramatically more Milwaukeeans voted in 2012 than in 2008!

Eighty-seven percent turnout is better than attendance on a given day in some failing Milwaukee Public High Schools, with 60 percent truancy.

I don't understand why people came out in droves to obstruct a change in leadership that would have brought back jobs and prosperity and respect for our most fundamental freedoms. Loyalty to Obama is nice but voting for failure is not smart. Voting for free stuff is stunningly short-sighted.

Some Americans really love free contraceptives and abortion on demand, don't they?

Economic growth? Jobs?

Who cares?  Working is for chumps.

GIMME.

Obama: A 'PROP' Being Propped

Obama is a prop.

That sums up his presidency.

I assume Obama was about to go on to say that the people have the power in this campaign, not him.

That's true.

However, Obama's choice of words, that he's a prop, is as unfortunate as it is spot-on.

He's on stage, serving as part of the scene in the theatrics.

His role as a prop has been utterly ineffective. He's not really part of the action.

He's just there, an empty suit, not making things better via his policies or his leadership.

And then the instances when he abused the office and grabbed power, dictating and oppressing, the imperial president, Obama made things worse.

And then we have the mainstream media, "propping" up Obama, shamelessly hiding the truth from the American public, going AWOL time and time again, on Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the oppression of Catholics' religious liberty, even the economy.

The last four years the story has been the Leftists propping up the prop in chief.

Enough.

Time for REAL hope and REAL change.

Vote Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan.

Catholic Voters: Rejecting Obama

Catholic voters, like me, rejected Obama in 2008.

In 2012, many more Catholics are turning on Obama, and supporting Mitt Romney instead.

I wonder if it has something to do with Obama's assault on the Bill of Rights and his attack on Catholics' freedom to exercise their faith.

From Joel B. Pollak, Breitbart's Big Government:

Yesterday, the Romney campaign told reporters that it expected to win at least some of the “blue states” in which it is now competing with Obama in the Midwest, including Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. The campaign did not give a specific reason for its optimism, but one thing these states have in common is a high proportion of Catholic voters. And Catholic voters have shifted dramatically towards Mitt Romney.

In September, the left and the media were exultant when the Pew poll seemed to show a surge for Obama among Catholic voters. He led by fifteen points, 54-39.

Today, that bubble has burst completely, and Obama is back down to a two-point lead, 48-46. (Few headlines this time from the mainstream media.)

Among white Catholics, Romney has jumped to a 14-point lead (54-40) after being tied with Obama in September in the poll.

To understand just how significant that is, consider that in 2008, Obama won Catholics by 9 percent (54 to 45) and lost white Catholics by just 5 percent (47 to 52). In 2004, the Catholic vote went narrowly to Bush overall (more widely among white Catholics), and in 2000 it went narrowly to Gore (and narrowly to Bush among white Catholics).

The 14-point lead Romney currently enjoys among white Catholics is almost without precedent.

Catholic voters are abandoning Obama for the same reason many other voters are: the sluggish economy, Romney’s strong performance in the presidential debates, Obama’s dishonesty and failure in Benghazi.

Yet Catholic voters have reason to feel particularly aggrieved, given the Obama administration’s battle with the Catholic church over the mandate in Obamacare that employers cover abortion drugs and contraceptives.

...Obama’s collapse among Catholic voters, and especially white Catholics, also suggests that the 2012 election is about much more than the economy, even if the economy is the most important issue. For many voters, the choice is also an ideological one, between a president who has attempted to increase the power of the government at the expense of religious liberty, and one who has committed to traditional values and small government.

I have so many reasons to vote for Mitt Romney and not Obama.

Near the top of that list is Obama's abuse of power and oppression of Catholics.

In addition to Obama's disastrous performance as president, I am at odds with him ideologically.

It definitely deeply concerns me that my religious freedom is under assault.

As Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki wrote in January 2012, "We cannot—we will not—comply with this unjust law."

I really never thought an American president would have the audacity to so flagrantly disregard the Constitution. It is unconscionable.

Obama HHS Mandate and Freedom of Religion

From Wisconsin Right to Life:

A dramatic new television ad, produced by Wisconsin Right to Life, is airing in most of Wisconsin's media markets. The ad draws attention to the fact that the federal administration is ordering Catholic hospitals and universities to provide coverage for abortion-inducing drugs, even though abortion violates deeply held Church beliefs.

Wisconsin Right to Life Executive Director Barbara Lyons said, "To follow the administration's orders means Catholic hospitals and universities face a dilemma - serve only Catholics and deny care to all others, defy the administration and face huge financial penalties --or close their doors altogether. Wisconsin Right to Life believes this is an untenable situation that the public needs to be aware of."

I know the horrible economy is driving this election. It should be. Obama has been a disaster, thwarting economic growth. He has caused so much misery, especially for the middle class.

However, Obama's assault on the Bill of Rights, his oppression of Catholics, would be reason enough for me to reject him.

I never thought an American president would have the audacity to so flagrantly disregard one of our fundamental freedoms, but Obama is.

Disgraceful.

Americans of all faiths and no faith should be repelled by Obama's assault on our liberty.

Obama's Campaign: Three Bs and One C

Obama's reelection campaign is a reflection of his presidency, not a pretty picture.

The Obama presidency has been a disaster. His record is abysmal.

Can he appeal to voters by asking, "Are you better off than you were four years ago?"

Of course not.

His list of presidential accomplishments is so pathetic that he's running as if he's the challenger rather than the incumbent.

Charles Krauthammer explains the shocking smallness of Obama, as revealed in last night's debate.

Video.



Obama's personal, petty attacks  on Mitt Romney fell flat. The American people don't want to see the president behave in such an unpresidential manner.

Obama's floundering campaign can be summed up with three Bs and one C:

Big Bird

Binders

Bayonets

Contraceptives

That's it. That's all he's got.

Could Obama be any smaller?

In 2008, he was larger than life.

Something happened when he became president.

He started to shrink.

Shrink, Shrank, Shrunk.

Obama does not deserve a second term. He didn't deserve one.