Yesterday on MSNBC, the anchorwoman got confused by:
1. Superdelegates
2. Delegates distributed by district (3 d's!)
3. Delegates being committed by word only.
For example, a delegate could support Mc100-years-in-Iraq but like Tax Hike Mike by the time the convention comes around. They should vote for McLol but could vote for the Huckster.
It was a glorious moment. For that one point in time, they admitted they were confused. Glorious!
Sunday, February 10, 2008
The fightin' 14th
Here's the fellow running against Ron Paul:
http://www.chrispeden.org/
Keeping the idea of a "noble America" alive and...well...on life support. We can't cut funds to NASA! Those evil Chinese are going into space! We need to claim space for ourselves! We need to keep our honor by not surrendering to those Islamo-fascists! Fred Reed certainly knows what honor really is...
I believe he says Ron Paul believes 9/11 happened because of America whie he believes it's Islamo-fascist terrorists. No doubt terrorists did it, but they didn't do it because we're free or prosperous. Some may want to make us submit to their laws, but most of the radicalized Muslims really just want to be left alone. Don't we all? Well, except Americans. We don't mind being taken care of by the government.
Anyhoo, here's to Ron Paul's congressional campaign!
I'm waiting for "Catho-Fascism" and the Pope being called a Theocrat and Terrorist. Just think about it. He wants Catholic Culture to spread. He's against the US' interventionist wars (yes, he is Catholic Neocons) and might be in league with the terrorists! After all, he regularly talks to middle eastern countries! Even Iran!
http://www.chrispeden.org/
Keeping the idea of a "noble America" alive and...well...on life support. We can't cut funds to NASA! Those evil Chinese are going into space! We need to claim space for ourselves! We need to keep our honor by not surrendering to those Islamo-fascists! Fred Reed certainly knows what honor really is...
I believe he says Ron Paul believes 9/11 happened because of America whie he believes it's Islamo-fascist terrorists. No doubt terrorists did it, but they didn't do it because we're free or prosperous. Some may want to make us submit to their laws, but most of the radicalized Muslims really just want to be left alone. Don't we all? Well, except Americans. We don't mind being taken care of by the government.
Anyhoo, here's to Ron Paul's congressional campaign!
I'm waiting for "Catho-Fascism" and the Pope being called a Theocrat and Terrorist. Just think about it. He wants Catholic Culture to spread. He's against the US' interventionist wars (yes, he is Catholic Neocons) and might be in league with the terrorists! After all, he regularly talks to middle eastern countries! Even Iran!
Thursday, February 7, 2008
McCain is Pro-Life?!
He just said he's proud of his pro-life record.
Bombing civillians and being a war monger is pro-life? I never knew. I guess I'm pro-choice then!
Bombing civillians and being a war monger is pro-life? I never knew. I guess I'm pro-choice then!
Papa, you have the support of this Traditional Catholic!
Pope Benedict XVI has released the revised Prayer for the Jews. I've stalked around message boards and seen a mixed reaction on some and complete hatred on others.
I quite like it. Nothing has changed except the language. It's become softer, in a good sense. The way some are reacting you'd imagine it to be
No, it's basically the same in a more charitable language. It's not watered down. It's not a mush. It's the same prayer in a different tone. What the Pope ultimately did was change the words and not the content. It seems like they're trying to criticize anything the pope does that doesn't involve:
1. Lifting the Excommunication
2. Getting rid of the NO overnight
3. Have some sort of Godly power where he can hear every litergical abuse ever.
4. Everything in Latin. Everything. Inclusing the picnic (okay, I'm joking, but I'm sure there's a Sede or two that believe this)
5. Cannonizing Archbishop Lefebvre
Anyway, I quite like the prayer. I don't care about the circumstances.
I glanced over a post where the US Bishops praised the Pope and affirmed what the prayer said. Wasn't one of the complaints about the old prayer? There we go, same substance, different language, the Latin Mass is even more free!
Anyone reading this (yeah right): don't say that this makes non-SSPX Latin Masses phoney.
P.S.
I wrote this because of a post I saw where a protestant was praised for bashing the Pope.
I quite like it. Nothing has changed except the language. It's become softer, in a good sense. The way some are reacting you'd imagine it to be
Dear [insert god here],
Please let the Jews come into a Church, but if they don't, we'll let them be. Give Christians the strength to read the talmud and possibly convert.
Thanks!
No, it's basically the same in a more charitable language. It's not watered down. It's not a mush. It's the same prayer in a different tone. What the Pope ultimately did was change the words and not the content. It seems like they're trying to criticize anything the pope does that doesn't involve:
1. Lifting the Excommunication
2. Getting rid of the NO overnight
3. Have some sort of Godly power where he can hear every litergical abuse ever.
4. Everything in Latin. Everything. Inclusing the picnic (okay, I'm joking, but I'm sure there's a Sede or two that believe this)
5. Cannonizing Archbishop Lefebvre
Anyway, I quite like the prayer. I don't care about the circumstances.
Let us pray also for the Jews.
May our God and Lord enlighten their hearts, so that they may acknowledge Jesus Christ, savior of all men.
Let us pray.
Let us kneel.
Arise.
Almighty and everlasting God, who desires that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of truth, mercifully grant that, as the fullness of the Gentiles enters into Thy Church, all Israel may be saved. Through Christ Our Lord. Amen.
I glanced over a post where the US Bishops praised the Pope and affirmed what the prayer said. Wasn't one of the complaints about the old prayer? There we go, same substance, different language, the Latin Mass is even more free!
Anyone reading this (yeah right): don't say that this makes non-SSPX Latin Masses phoney.
P.S.
I wrote this because of a post I saw where a protestant was praised for bashing the Pope.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Traditional Conservatism: Altar and Throne
I firmly believe that Altar and Throne governments are better than any other forms. The Cult of Liberty stands in direct defiance of this, and is always self-destructive. I hear people quote Ben Franklin imploring us to never give up liberty for safety. The ideas of liberty were new then. Perhaps early American liberty actually worked for a while, but French liberty degraded to bloodshed and hatred.
We must not give up liberty for protection and safety, but we shouldn't give up the Altar and Throne for liberty.
American liberty died during Lincoln's presidency, and quite possibly before then. Soon, protecting it became the reason the government should expand. One can't have liberty if they're poor, uninsured, jobless, etc. The very thing that was supposed to limit government made it expand.
Altar and Throne politics never did this. The state never expanded to a monsterous size to protect it.
I think it's the best position since the Church exists for two reasons. First and most important, the spiritual. The Church is in charge of the Salvation of Souls. Second, the secular. The Church has a power to limit government. I don't think it's a coincidence that France became dictatorial and violent after the French Revolution. It's certainly not a coincidence that dictators rose after the Papal States were destroyed. The 20th century was the Church's weakest period since She was persecuted in Rome. Communism and Fascism rose because the Church was not in place to keep a check on government powers.
Kings are rulers of their state, but they are all part of the "Kingdom of Christiandom" ruled by Christ the King.
There are three other forms Altar and Throne politics can morph into: Throne and Altar, Throne, and Altar.
Although I admire him quite a lot, Louis XIV tried to make France a Throne and Altar state. The king was above the Church. He led France out of the realm of Christiandom by allying with the Ottoman Turks. Modern day protestants try to make America into a similar state, although their government will be astronomically larger than the "absolute monarch." What this form ultimately does is divinize the state and/or the ruler.
America and most other Republics are Throne states. The Altar is completely out of the picture. As I've mentioned, America did fairly well but fell into tyranny. Without the Church, the State can grow into a parasite. It sucks away life and freedom from the host (the people). Like Throne and Altar, the state becomes divinized. Unlike it, though, it's a secular church with no checks and balance from an outside faith. They'll petition religioud leaders to support their endeavors but know that patriotism runs deeper than faith in most people.
Altar governments are the most dangerous. The ruler, state, policies, and laws are divine. People turn a blind eye to corruption because the rulers are either gods or prophets of a god.
And yet I upport Ron Paul who talks about liberty and the constitution. Why is this? Well, in the 18th century we would be opposed to eachother (I am an economic anarchist though). Like I said in my last blog post though, we are allied against the enemy-the Neocons. We both believe in limiting the power of the state. We both believe in peace. We just disagree on the way to keep it.
Nonetheless, he is the best candidate I've seen. I am proud that I voted for him and would do it again and again. I consider the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party my allies and would vote for one if I like them.
We must not give up liberty for protection and safety, but we shouldn't give up the Altar and Throne for liberty.
American liberty died during Lincoln's presidency, and quite possibly before then. Soon, protecting it became the reason the government should expand. One can't have liberty if they're poor, uninsured, jobless, etc. The very thing that was supposed to limit government made it expand.
Altar and Throne politics never did this. The state never expanded to a monsterous size to protect it.
I think it's the best position since the Church exists for two reasons. First and most important, the spiritual. The Church is in charge of the Salvation of Souls. Second, the secular. The Church has a power to limit government. I don't think it's a coincidence that France became dictatorial and violent after the French Revolution. It's certainly not a coincidence that dictators rose after the Papal States were destroyed. The 20th century was the Church's weakest period since She was persecuted in Rome. Communism and Fascism rose because the Church was not in place to keep a check on government powers.
Kings are rulers of their state, but they are all part of the "Kingdom of Christiandom" ruled by Christ the King.
There are three other forms Altar and Throne politics can morph into: Throne and Altar, Throne, and Altar.
Although I admire him quite a lot, Louis XIV tried to make France a Throne and Altar state. The king was above the Church. He led France out of the realm of Christiandom by allying with the Ottoman Turks. Modern day protestants try to make America into a similar state, although their government will be astronomically larger than the "absolute monarch." What this form ultimately does is divinize the state and/or the ruler.
America and most other Republics are Throne states. The Altar is completely out of the picture. As I've mentioned, America did fairly well but fell into tyranny. Without the Church, the State can grow into a parasite. It sucks away life and freedom from the host (the people). Like Throne and Altar, the state becomes divinized. Unlike it, though, it's a secular church with no checks and balance from an outside faith. They'll petition religioud leaders to support their endeavors but know that patriotism runs deeper than faith in most people.
Altar governments are the most dangerous. The ruler, state, policies, and laws are divine. People turn a blind eye to corruption because the rulers are either gods or prophets of a god.
And yet I upport Ron Paul who talks about liberty and the constitution. Why is this? Well, in the 18th century we would be opposed to eachother (I am an economic anarchist though). Like I said in my last blog post though, we are allied against the enemy-the Neocons. We both believe in limiting the power of the state. We both believe in peace. We just disagree on the way to keep it.
Nonetheless, he is the best candidate I've seen. I am proud that I voted for him and would do it again and again. I consider the Constitution Party and Libertarian Party my allies and would vote for one if I like them.
Go New York!
Ron Paul did pretty good here. I thought we would get 3% of the vote.
McCain seems to be doing a pretty good job. Good luck to him, he'll need it. I know I never uploaded the Rudy video, but I'll be tearing into both nominees and I'll upload quite a few.
We did pick up a few delegates. Even if we only have a handfull, they'll surely be the most passionate!
McCain seems to be doing a pretty good job. Good luck to him, he'll need it. I know I never uploaded the Rudy video, but I'll be tearing into both nominees and I'll upload quite a few.
We did pick up a few delegates. Even if we only have a handfull, they'll surely be the most passionate!
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
FU Frank---I, the Traditional Conservative, Voted for Ron Paul, the Classical Liberal
Got back not too long ago. I also saw Frank Luntz say on Fox that he didn't want to admit that he ate in a Denny's. Never been to one, but do I ever want to go! So take that you elitist snob. Some of us really do like pancakes and sausage.
Anyway, like I said, it's over for me. Had a hard time finding the Republican row. I also got ticked off by the people running the election. No, they didn't give me a hard time. They just don't listen. I told them how to pronounce my name and how to spell it. First they misspell it, then they mispronounce it. They also asked me if I was a Republican a few times. I'm hoping they forgot and it isn't some sort of security check QUICK WHAT'S YOUR MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME?
Now I can contemplate which party I'm going to switch to. Maybe I'll be more traditional and switch to a third party. Maybe I'll write down "Monarchist." If Ron actually does win, I'll stay with the RP (Ron Paul...RP...Republican Party...RP?!).
You know the world is messed up when a traditional Conservative (Monarchist/Altar and Throne) greatly supports a Classical Liberal (Pro-Constitution). We do have a common enemy and may be allies for a long time. Down with the Neo-Jacobin Neocons! Vive le Christ-Roi! Vive Louis XX! Long live Ron Paul!
P.S. Giuliani was still on the ballot. Who wants to bet a lot of dopes are going to vote for him?
Anyway, like I said, it's over for me. Had a hard time finding the Republican row. I also got ticked off by the people running the election. No, they didn't give me a hard time. They just don't listen. I told them how to pronounce my name and how to spell it. First they misspell it, then they mispronounce it. They also asked me if I was a Republican a few times. I'm hoping they forgot and it isn't some sort of security check QUICK WHAT'S YOUR MOTHER'S MAIDEN NAME?
Now I can contemplate which party I'm going to switch to. Maybe I'll be more traditional and switch to a third party. Maybe I'll write down "Monarchist." If Ron actually does win, I'll stay with the RP (Ron Paul...RP...Republican Party...RP?!).
You know the world is messed up when a traditional Conservative (Monarchist/Altar and Throne) greatly supports a Classical Liberal (Pro-Constitution). We do have a common enemy and may be allies for a long time. Down with the Neo-Jacobin Neocons! Vive le Christ-Roi! Vive Louis XX! Long live Ron Paul!
P.S. Giuliani was still on the ballot. Who wants to bet a lot of dopes are going to vote for him?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)