Thursday, February 28, 2019
LATE BREAKING NEWS -- PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS LEFT HANOI EARLY. With no advancement of the North Korea deal. With no signing ceremony. But, with a lot of new-found admirers. • • • TRUMP HAS REAGAN'S INSTINCT FOR THE POSSIBLE -- THE RESEMBLANCE TO THE HANOI SUMMIT IS EERIE. The only other US President in living memory to walk out on another world leader (not that Kim Jon-un is a bonafide world leader, but he sure would like to be) was President Reagan -- when he walked out of the Reykjavik Summit with Soviet Secretary General Mikhael Gorbachev. On October 11, 1986, halfway between Moscow and Washington, the leaders of the world’s two superpowers met at the stark and picturesque Hofdi House in Reykjavik, Iceland. Secretary General Mikhail Gorbachev had proposed the meeting to President Ronald Reagan less than thirty days before. The expectations for the summit at Reykjavik were low. Reagan and Gorbachev had established a personal relationship just one year before at their Geneva Summit. In Geneva they attempted to reach agreement on bilateral nuclear arms reductions. Since then, their negotiators had reached an impasse. Both leaders hoped a face to face meeting at Reykjavik might revive the negotiations. The talks between Reagan and Gorbachev at Reykjavik proceeded at a breakneck pace. Gorbachev agreed that human rights issues were a legitimate topic of discussion, something no previous Soviet leader had ever agreed to. A proposal to eliminate all new strategic missiles grew into a discussion, for the first time in history, of the real possibility of eliminating nuclear weapons forever. Aides to both leaders were shocked by the pace of the discussions. A summit that began with low expectations had blossomed into one of the most dramatic and potentially productive summits of all time. At one point Reagan even described to Gorbachev how both men might return to Reykjavik in ten years, aged and retired leaders, to personally witness the dismantling of the world’s last remaining nuclear warhead. But one point of contention remained. Reagan was committed to see his Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) to completion. Gorbachev, fearing an imbalance of power, was equally determined to make sure SDI would never be implemented. Reagan offered assurances to Gorbachev that the SDI that he had championed and funded despite widespread criticism at home, was being developed not to gain an advantage, but to offer safety against accidents or outlaw nations. Reagan offered many times to share this technology with the Soviets, which Gorbachev refused to believe. Toward the end of the long and stressful final negotiations Gorbachev would accept continued development of SDI as long as testing was confined to the laboratory for the next ten years. Reagan would not agree. He could not and would not allow the division of his two-part strategy of the simultaneous elimination of nuclear weapons with the creation of a missile defense shield. After the negotiations broke down without a final agreement, Reagan wrote that he left the meeting knowing how close they had come to achieving his long goal of eliminating the threat of nuclear destruction, and that this was the angriest moment of his career. Despite failing to achieve either man’s ultimate goal, Reykjavik will be recorded as one of the most important summits in history. A year after Reykjavik the US and Soviet Union signed the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), for the first time eliminating an entire class of nuclear weapons. The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) was signed a few years later during President H.W Bush’s term. None of this progress would have been possible without the courage of President Reagan to look beyond past and current hostilities, determined to forge a new and lasting relationship, that would soon provide greater security for people around the world. • • • THE TRUMP-KIM HANOI SUMMIT COLLAPSES. The Guardian, leftist but perhaps not a completely lapdog media outlet for the US ProgDems, said this Thursday morning : "The second summit between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un ended in failure on Thursday with the two sides far apart on the central issues of disarmament and sanctions relief. The abrupt end to the Hanoi meeting, which was cut short by several hours, was a setback from both leaders who had made long journeys -- Kim by rail and Trump by air -- in the expectation that a deal was within reach. There are no plans for a third summit, but the US has expressed willingness to continue talks at a lower level. The collapse of the two leaders’ talks came suddenly. Late on Wednesday night the White House circulated detailed plans for negotiating sessions, a working lunch and a signing ceremony for a joint agreement. When the two leaders reconvened on Thursday morning, however, they appeared sombre and cautious about whether a deal was possible. A few hours later, the summit was called off. The signing ceremony was cancelled and the official lunch left uneaten. Table settings and name cards went unused in the empty dining hall of the Metropole Hotel, the summit venue, as the leaders made their way back to their own hotels. In his version of events, Trump said the deal had broken down because Kim wanted complete sanctions relief for dismantling the main nuclear complex at Yongbyon, but the US wanted other nuclear facilities, including covert sites, disabled as well." • The Guardian reported early, and this has been corroborated by US media including CNBC, that : " 'It was about the sanctions basically,' Trump said at a press conference in Hanoi. 'They wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety and we couldn’t do that...Sometimes you have to walk, and this was just one of those times....There is a gap. We have to have sanctions and he wants to denuke. But he wants to just do areas that are less important than the areas that we want.' North Korea disputed Trump’s version of events. At an abruptly scheduled midnight press conference in Hanoi, the North Korean foreign minister, Ri Yong Ho, said Pyongyang had only demanded partial sanctions relief in return for closing Yongbyon. He said the US had wasted an opportunity that 'may not come again' and Pyongyang’s position would not change even if the US seeks further talks." • President Trump, according tothe Guardian, made clear that the status quo will continue, with North Korea continuing to suspend nuclear and missile tests, while the US will not take part in joint military exercises with South Korea, which the US President is opposed to anyway. 'I gave that up quite a while ago because it costs us $100 million to do it. I hated to see it. I thought it was unfair,' Trump said, adding that South Korea should shoulder more of the costs. 'Exercising is fun and it’s nice they play their war games. I’m not saying its not necessary. On some levels it is. On other levels it’s not.' " • President Trump, says the Guardian, "remained protective of the North Korean leader and the relationship between the two men. 'We spent all day with Kim Jong-un. He’s quite a guy and quite a character. And our relationship is very strong.' He even defended Kim over the death of the US student Otto Warmbier, who was sent home from North Korea seriously ill in June 2017. 'He says he didn’t know about it and I will take him at his word,' he said. • The Guardian reported that President Trump "gave the most detailed public account to date of the central disagreements that have dogged the negotiations. He confirmed that the US side had confronted Pyongyang with US intelligence about covert nuclear facilities outside Yongbyon and demanded they be put on the negotiating table. 'We know the country very well, every inch of that country,' he said, adding that Yongbyon, 'while very big, wasn’t enough. We had to have more than that, because there were other things that we haven’t talked about, that we found, that we found a long time ago, but people didn’t know about,' he went on, making clear that one of the sites he was talking about was a second covert uranium enrichment program. 'We brought many points up that I think they were surprised that we knew.' He said relaxing all sanctions in return for Yongbyon would been meant giving up leverage 'that has taken so long to build.' ” • US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, as quoted by the Gurardian, said the breakdown of talks was partly caused by differences over the sequences of nuclear disarmament and sanctions relief. The US wanted North Korea to put its current arsenal, thought to consist of several dozen warheads, some mounted on missiles, on the negotiating table as well, he said. Pompeo said nuclear negotiations would resume quickly, although no new meetings have yet been scheduled. Trump flew out of Hanoi in the late afternoon, while Kim stayed in the city for talks with the Vietnamese leadership and will make the 70-hour car and train journey back to Pyongyang at the weekend. It was unclear whether he would stop in Beijing to meet the Chinese president, Xi Jinping. • President Trump said he would call his regional allies, the Japanese prime minister, Shinzo Abe, and the South Korean president, Moon Jae-in, as soon as he boarded Air Force One. The breakdown of the summit is a political disaster for Moon, who had been counting on progress that would lift international sanctions restricting trade and investment between North and South Korea. A South Korean diplomat said Seoul was stunned by the result : “It was shock. We are trying to figure out what happened. We need to watch what happened behind the scenes.” • • • THE NORTH KOREAN PRESS CONFERENCE AND THE PRESIDENT'S REMARKS. Fox News reported on Thursday that : "North Korea on Thursday afternoon disputed President Trump’s account of why the highly-publicized summit between Trump and Kim Jong-un collapsed. In a very rare press conference, Ri Yong Ho, the country's foreign minister, said his nation demanded only partial sanctions relief in exchange for closing the country's main nuclear complex and that discussions fell apart after the United States demanded further disarmament steps. Ho’s comments in Hanoi contradicted the explanation by Trump, who hours earlier told reporters that North Korea had demanded a full removal of sanctions in exchange for shuttering the Yongbyon nuclear facility....Speaking before he left Hanoi, Trump told reporters he had asked Kim to do more regarding his intentions to denuclearize, and 'he was unprepared to do that. Sometimes you have to walk,' Trump said at a solo press conference following the summit." • Both President Trump and Secretary Pompeo said said negotiations fell through after North Korea demanded a full removal of US-led international sanctions in exchange for closing the North's Yongbyon nuclear facility. The President and Secretary of Pompeo told reporters that the United States wasn't willing to make a deal without North Korea committing to giving up its secretive nuclear facilities outside Yongbyon, as well as its missile and warheads program. President Trump said : “It was about the sanctions. “Basically, they wanted the sanctions lifted in their entirety, and we couldn’t do that. They were willing to de-nuke a large portion of the areas that we wanted, but we couldn’t give up all of the sanctions for that. I'd much rather do it right than do it fast," Trump added, echoing his remarks from earlier in the day when he insisted that "speed" was not important. "We're in position to do something very special." • • • DEMOCRATS APPLAUD PRESIDENT TRUMP. Several prominent Democrats offered rare praise for President Trump on Thursday after he walked away from negotiations with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un. The President cut short the highly anticipated summit in Vietnam, unwilling to meet Kim's Jong Un's demand of lifting all sanctions without first securing a meaningful commitment on denuclearization. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi offered measured approval for President Trump's handling of the summit : "I’m glad that the President walked away from that," Pelosi said Thursday during a press conference. "The prospects seemed dim." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tweeted that any deal with Pyongyang that "fell short of complete denuclearization would have only made North Korea stronger & the world less safe." • • • THE REAL QUESTION IS 'WHAT ABOUT CHINA.' Fox News reported on Thursday : "President Trump may have hit a roadblock when North Korea's Kim Jong Un refused to meet his demands at Thursday's Hanoi summit, but Trump’s decision to walk away could serve to rattle China’s Xi Jinping. Gordon Chang, an expert on the region and author of 'The Coming Collapse of China,' argued that what on the surface looked like a diplomatic stalemate could in fact be a diplomatic coup for Trump when it comes to North Korea's neighbor. 'I think this is a moment of reassessment for China,' Chang said....Chang told Fox News that Trump also showed Beijing that he is not afraid to walk away from a bad deal amid trade talks and, in doing so, put added pressure on Xi, whose popularity appears to be waning due to the country’s economic stagnation. Chang said Xi has found himself in a 'no win' situation : either he agrees to abandon the country’s 'selfish' model or he continues to watch the economy suffer. Trump recently postponed increasing tariffs on $200 billion in Chinese goods that would have been effective March 2. He has not given a new date for higher tariffs if negotiations falter. The main sticking point for the US centers on ending cyber theft of commercial secrets, limiting state support for Chinese companies, and ending the forced transfer of technology. Chang said the Trump administration was wise to pass on an invitation from China to visit after the Hanoi summit. 'I think China has to reassess their approach to trade talks,' Chang said." • • • DEAR READERS, two countries must be seriously reviewing what happened in Hanoi -- China and North Korea. • Reuters filed an article on Thursday about the US-China trade negotiations. The first sentence of the Reuters article was this : "US President Donald Trump on Thursday warned he could walk away from a trade deal with China if it were not good enough, even as his economic advisors touted 'fantastic' progress towards an agreement to end a dispute with the Asian country." • In light of President Trump's walk away from the North Korean negotiations, China must wonder if the President is reconsidering the $200 billion higher tariffs on US imports of Chinese goods, even if it meant some unsettling in financial markets, manufacturing supply chains and US farm exports. • Reuters reported that President Trump said in Hanoi after cutting short the summit and foregoing lunch and the photo-op signing ceremony : "I am always prepared to walk. I'm never afraid to walk from a deal. And I would do that with China, too, if it didn’t work out." • The US had been poised to hike tariffs on some $200 billion in Chinese imports to 25% from 10% on March 1 if no deal was reached by then. But, last Sunday, President Trump announced that he would delay the hike in duties due to progress in negotiations with Chinese officials last week. Since then, Trump administration officials have offered few details on the discussions. However, White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told CNBC on Thursday that : "The progress last week was fantastic," noting that US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer read Chinese officials "the riot act" in talks last week. "We are heading towards a remarkable, historic deal," he added. • Kevin Hassett, chairman of the White House's Council of Economic Advisors, was also upbeat, telling Fox Business Network that Lighthizer and Chinese Vice Premier Liu He drafted "sketches of an agreement on intellectual property theft and trade...that really makes sense for both parties. If you look at the paperwork we’ve got and the line-by-lines that people have sketched out, it’s just about as favorable as you could hope for," Hassett said, adding that final details would need to be approved by Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at a meeting at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida." • However, Reuters reported that Robert Lighthizer, President Trump's chief trade negotiator, on Wednesday was more cautious when he testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, saying much more work needed to be done to nail down an agreement and it was too soon to predict the outcome of talks. He also said the United States would need to maintain the threat of tariffs on Chinese imports for years, even if the two countries strike a deal, a gloomy prospect for companies seeking to end trade war uncertainty. Lighthizer had said the United States is seeking an agreement that prohibits China from competitively devaluing its currency as part of trade talks, following past manipulations of the yuan. Adding more details, Kudlow said China would need to report any intervention in the foreign exchange market : "The documents are very clear: I mean, even things like the currency deal...got no manipulation; they've got to report any interventions in the market. That's part of it." Kudlow spoke after the United States won a World Trade Organisation ruling that China's domestic price supports for wheat and rice were excessive and violated WTO obligations. Trump administration officials have frequently criticized the Geneva-based WTO for its inability to rein in China's trade practices and non-market economic policies." • So, China, with an economy not as robust as it once was and President Xi paying the favorability price for that, must be trying to decide the best path forward in the new age of "Trump, the Tough Negotiator." • AND, what about Kim Jong-un and his insider advisors. They appear to have miscalculated badly, believing that they could hide their uranium enrichment program and hide the total count of their nuclear-warhead-capable missiles. They must wonder what to do next to save face and get their only friend -- President Trump -- back to the table. • But, a funny thing happened on Kim's way to bamboozling yet one more American President to reduce sanctions for zero in return -- his name is Donald Trump. The President stuck to his negotiating objectives, holding out for substantive progress on denuclearization before giving up anything. • Kim came to Hanoi with the same old demands -- substantive sanctions relief without any substantive steps toward denuclearization. North Korean negotiators believed they could get something from Trump if they could just get him to the table. They didn’t believe US negotiators who told them the President wouldn’t compromise on the sanctions-as-pressure campaign. • So, the world is asking 'What's next.' Both sides will go home, assess what happened, and decide where to go from here. Since both nations have invested substantially in the negotiating process, it would make no sense for North Korea to throw that away and go back to issuing fruitless threats. It be also be very unwise for North Korea to resume taking provocative acts. Not only would that undermine the goodwill Kim has built up with President Trump and the world, it would actually make the US look wise for not trusting Kim’s professions of good intentions and improved behavior. And, it would be a real blow to Kim Jong-un's ego to watch his new-found image be ripped apart. • Has Kim learned a hard lesson that will stand him in good stead for the future. Kim now knows he has a serious negotiating partner who will not be duped. He will have to consider how to negotiate seriously in the future. • As for President Trump -- his message to Kim reverberated with China -- but it also must be on the discussion list in Teheran and Damascus and Moscow, and in Afghanistan. • Donald Trump is not the hayseed his critics think he is. He is not Obama -- he won’t cut a deal just so he can say he cut a deal. So, Hanoi's abrupt end is something for the would-be Trump beaters to consider carefully. And, the Insane Democrats would do well to consider the Hanoi message, too.
Wednesday, February 27, 2019
While President Trump Is in Hanoi Trying to Save Asia from Nuclear War, Insane Democrat Socialists Belittle and Lie to America
THE PRESIDENT IS IN VIETNAM TRYING TO ESTABLISH PEACE IN ASIA WHILE US DEMOCRATS CONTINUE THEIR Insane PATH TO SOCIALISM. Everyone should be applauding President Trump for achieving what no other US President has -- bringing a North Korean leader out of his bunker in Pyongyang and into accepting that he can talk to the world -- or at least to the United States under Donald Trump. • • • PRESIDENT TRUMP ARRIVES IN HANOI. It would be say for some of us who were young adults when the Vietnam war raged to be disappointed that the President chose Hanoi for the second North Korean summit. But, it seems to be a place where Kin Jong-un is comfortable, so let's let memories of wartime anger slide. • • • BUT HOUSE DEMOCRATS TRY TO NEGATE TRUMP-KIM SUMMIT WITH COHEN TESTIMONY. Donald Trump Jr. Told Tucker Carlson on Tuesday evening : "For the Democrats to try to counter-program that kind of progress, to try to perhaps somehow distract him with this nonsense by a convicted felon who’s been lying to those same committees? It just goes to show you how much those Democrats really disdain Trump, but also America." But, the Democrat HOUSE leadership scheduled former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's testimony on the same day as the start of the Trump-Kim summit in Vietnam -- that is not a coincidence. Sean Hannity says the Democrats want President Trump to fail with North Korea, calling their hatred of President Trump "psychotic." • However, President Trump and Kim Jong-un shook hands before their first meeting on Wednesday, and the President said : “It’s an honor to be with Chairman Kim. I thought the first summit was a great success and I think this one, hopefully, will be equal or greater than the first." The president told Kim that he believes North Korea "has tremendous economic potential, unbelievable, unlimited. I look forward to watching it happen and to helping it to happen and we will help it to happen," he added. Kim echoed Trump's sentiment : "Those 261 days [since we met in Singapore] were the days during which a lot of painstaking efforts were necessary and a lot of patience was needed. As I see you here today...that gives us a hope that we will be successful this time..." Kim said, according to his personal translator, to which Trump replied, "That’s nice, that’s really nice, thank you." • Fox News reported that : "President Trump landed Tuesday in Vietnam for his crucial summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un -- the President's second meeting as part of a bold push to rein in Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions. 'Looking forward to a very productive Summit,' Trump tweeted on Monday before boarding Air Force One. Trump landed in Hanoi hours after Kim arrived by armored train. The summit will take place later this week. Officials in Hanoi told The Associated Press that they only had about 10 days to prepare, but promised airtight security for the two leaders. But the chaotic preparations included the White House press corps being shifted to a new hotel before Kim arrived. Kim subsequently toured parts of Hanoi, where locals stood behind barriers to catch a glimpse of the leader of the hermit kingdom." Fox News says that while President Trump has repeatedly hailed his meeting with Kim in Singapore last June as a success, "there were few concrete outcomes from the summit. North Korea initially turned over 55 boxes of presumed remains of US soldiers killed in the Korean War as part of the agreement from the summit, although it has not yet followed through with returning additional remains. North Korea also pledged to work 'toward' complete denuclearization, something critics say the communist regime has not adequately honored either." • Secretary of State Mike Pompeo this month said that he was hoping for a “substantive step forward” but cautioned that “it may not happen, but I hope that it will. President Trump has also said this is going to take time. There may have to be another summit. We may not get everything done this week." Pompeo said he hoped to put a "road map" in place, but would not discuss the possibility of declaring a formal end to the Korean War or pulling some American troops from South Korea, in keeping with his position of not publicly discussing issues that could arise during the negotiations. • But, Fox News stated that the White House, State Department, Defense Department, Treasury Department and Energy Department are concerned about where Special Envoy to North Korea Stephen Biegun is moving with negotiations -- and that he is "getting too far over his skis." One particular concern is that denuclearization, seen by many officials as non-negotiable, has now become a negotiating item. There is a belief among many officials that "we don't want to make a deal just to make a deal," and that "we don't want to give away something for nothing." • • • HANOI -- "HUMAN RIGHTS HELL." That's how Newsmax calls it : "Whatever emerges from the summit this week between President Donald Trump and North Korean strongman Kim Jong-un, it is highly unlikely that the international spotlight on host nation Vietnam is going to change with it having one of the world’s most abysmal records on human rights. A 2019 annual report, 'Human Rights Watch' concludes that Vietnam’s appalling human rights record actually 'worsened in 2018 as the government imprisoned dissidents for longer prison terms, sanctioned thugs to attack rights defenders, and passed draconian laws that further threaten freedom of expression.' In what could easily be an historical assessment of Russia under Stalin or a contemporaneous review of Kim’s North Korea, the report points out that 'the Communist Party of Vietnam monopolizes power through the government, controls all major political and social organizations, and punishes people who dare to criticize or challenge its rule. Human Rights Watch notes there is no independent media and the government 'controls TV, radio, newspapers, and other publications.' There are no labor unions, or political organizations and, according to the report, 'police subject dissidents to lengthy and bullying interrogations, and detain them incommunicado for months without access to family members or legal counsel.' An independent judiciary is non-existent in Vietnam. The courts are, Human Rights Watch points out, 'Communist Party-controlled' and 'receive instructions on how to rule in criminal cases.' The same courts 'have issued increasingly harsh prison sentences for activists convicted on bogus national security charges.' As a recent example, 'Watch' cites the trial last year of twelve people for 'conducting propaganda against the state.' Sentences ranged from 4 to 12 years. Where bloggers have used the internet to advance freedom and challenge autocratic leaders in Egypt and Tunisia during the Arab Spring, they don’t get a chance to start in Vietnam. Bloggers, Human Rights Watch points out, 'face frequent physical assaults by officials or government connected thugs, who are not punished for these attacks. In June and July of 2018 in Lam Dong province, unidentified men threw rocks and a handmade incendiary device into the house of a labor activist and former political prisoner, Do Thi Minh Hanh. In August, security agents brutally beat rights activists Pham Doan Trang, Nguyen Tin, and Nguyen Dang Cao Dai after a raid on a concert in Ho Chi Minh City.' Perhaps aware of the role the Internet has played in political upheaval elsewhere, the National Assembly of Vietnam passed a law which went into effect last month requiring service providers to take down offending material within 24 hours of receiving a request from the Minister of Public Security or the Ministry of Information and Communications. 'Internet companies also are required to store data locally, verify user information, and disclose user data to authorities on demand without a court order,' concludes Human Rights Watch, underscoring that all 'threaten the right to privacy and could facilitate further suppression of online dissent or activism.' " • That is the assessment of John Gizzi, chief political columnist and White House correspondent for Newsmax. • • • INSANE DEMOCRATS ARE TOO BUSY TRYING TO TURN THE US INTO ANOTHER VIETNAM TO PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO THE SUMMIT. And, they don't want to hear it when good news comes out of President Trump's Herculean effort with Kim Jong-un. • Canada Free Press labels the Democrat march to socialism "Selling Mass Delusion..Again." CFP reminds us that Lenin, the great Socialist, said “A lie told often enough becomes the truth." The CFP puts all out there for us : "Our nation has been under assault, morally, spiritually, fiscally, politically, educationally, and culturally for several generations. We have been fed deceit, ignorance and delusion for decades. The political party that tore the nation apart 150 years ago, fighting to preserve slavery is now determined to enslave the entire country in a system of total dependence under the guise of ‘social justice’. All we have to do is give these purveyors of lies a little bit of our liberty. They call it Democratic Socialism....Bernie Sanders, along with a slew of other brainless bohemians that identify as Democrats, is running for President in 2020. Bernie and the rest of the socialist miscreants want to transform America into a socialist utopia. Recently, Crazy Bernie appeared on the Young Turks, often called the Young Turds, and laid out the Democrat socialist plan for America. The plan includes medicare for all, the Green New Deal, higher taxes, and more communist labor unions for the poor working proletariats to support. First, Bernie and the Democrat socialists want to impose government controlled healthcare, where a government bureaucrat decides who gets proper medial care and, as Barry [aka President Obama] said, who will just have to take a pain pill. And second, they want to do away with all forms of energy except what clueless bohemians call renewable energy. That means no more trains, planes, automobiles, trucks, heating oil or electricity because those things rely primarily on what they call non renewable energy. Under their form of government, everyone will have to live in government housing and travel on government provided mass transportation; that is except the socialist ruling class." • If that all sounds like "Animal Farm" -- that's because it is. Read George Orwell's Animal Farm -- at least once a year. Get a children's version of it to read with your kids. There is no better explanation of what the Insane Democrats are aiming for. • And, just like the pigs in Animal Farm, the Insane Democrat Socialists live well -- CFP says "Big-talking, yackety-yack Socialist Democrat Capitalist Pigs all live on Easy Street." • Canadian Free Press's Judi McLeod wrote on February 22 : "Socialist Democratic Capitalist Pigs Living High On The Hog Before Socialist Democratic hypocrites go out on the attack against whom they regard as ‘capitalist pigs,’ they become capitalist pigs themselves. All Socialist Democrats define ‘capitalist pigs’ as right of centre millionaires and billionaires, claiming there is no such thing as a well-heeled Socialist Democrat Capitalist Pig. Beto O’Rourke? He’s just an Irish dude who swiped a Spanish-sounding name for himself and like John Kerry before him, only got rich through his Daddy-blessed spouse. Hillary Clinton? Foreigners, Hollywood and Harvey Weinstein kept the cash flow going in her campaigns and the dead-but-still-walking, cash infused Clinton Foundation. All Socialist Democratic Capitalist Pigs follow the same behaviour patterns. They climb onto the highest moral ground from which they lecture down to the masses. When it comes to getting rich in public office, they all seem to have their own #MeToo kind of guarantees. The top three Socialist Democratic Capitalist Pigs are the Obamas, Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Wish this column could pronounce AOC’s surname name the way Rush Limbaugh does, but only the hilarious el Rushbo can do that." • McLeod says : "Many see Socialist Democrat Bernie Sanders as a doddering old man with a dying red rose pinned to his lapel. Make that a doddering old man with money to burn : 'Lifestyles of the rich and socialist : Bernie Sanders has 3 houses, makes millions (according to Fox News, Feb. 21, 2019). Bernie Sanders capitalizes on name recognition, raises $6 million in first day of presidential campaign." • McLeod moves on to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez : "And then there’s the Alexandria-come-lately AOC. Since her 3-month-old Midterm election, there’s always been an AOC. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez scolded media outlets for reporting that she lives in a luxury high-rise building in Washington, DC, around the time she and other high-profile Democrats appeared on a hit list compiled by a Maryland man arrested for allegedly planning a mass terror attack.(NY Post, Feb. 21, 2019). 'Journalists are sharing stories about where I live the same day it’s shared that myself + others were targeted by a mass shooter,' the New York Democrat tweeted late Wednesday. 'All this paired w/ amplifying unvetted conspiracy theories. It’s reckless, irresponsible & puts people directly in danger. This isn’t a game.' A number of outlets reported in the past week that the freshman lawmaker, whose congressional salary is $174,000, lives in a tony section of the capital in a building where rents range from $2,000 for a studio apartment to more than $5,000 for a three-bedroom. While most of them did not give an address, they did provide identifying information and photographs about which stores were in the neighborhood and the amenities offered by her complex, which is under construction. The articles pointed out Ocasio-Cortez’s platform as a champion of the poor and took her to task for living in an upscale building that they claimed didn’t offer affordable housing. The building developer told The Post that they participate in the District of Columbia’s housing voucher program and have low-income people living there. Asked to provide a specific number, the developer said : 'We cannot disclose any more specific details about our residents.' Ocasio-Cortez’s office pushed back against the notion that it was hypocritical for the congresswoman to live in upscale digs. A spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon that her office also uses a car with an 'internal combustion engine that runs on fossil fuels,' even though she thinks their use should be eliminated. While she’s out blazing trails on cow farting, maybe the dog-running media wants the underdog masses to think green instead of red." • • • "BILL MAHER ILLUSTRATES NEW BATTLE LINES BETWEEN RICH, WHITE PROGRESSIVES AND THE WORKING CLASS." In another high-on-the-hog Socialist attack on normal Americans, HBO non-comedian Bill Maher provided a monologue that was as unfunny as it was informative. • In a Daily Caller opinion piece, Mark Meckler, the president of Citizens for Self-Governance, wrote : "Comedian Bill Maher’s surprisingly classist monologue on the Friday edition of his HBO show 'Real Time' wasn’t funny, but it was revealing. He unintentionally showcased his blue-state contempt for the poor and revealed the new political battle lines: white Progressives versus the white working class. Maher said in the monologue that America suffers from 'spatial geographic inequality,' which was a multisyllabic way to say that all the smart, rich people live in just a few East and West Coast cities. Far from being a rallying cry for more economic equality -- maybe what you would expect coming from liberals who constantly talk about such issues -- Maher sunk his teeth into this economic disparity and revelled in it. First, he mocked their buying power. 'Maybe that has something to do with why Trump voters are obsessed with ‘owning the libs,’ he said. 'Because the libs own everything else.' He bragged that he and his 'blue state' friends were having a 'prosperity party,' while the rest of the nation wears cheap clothing and eat inexpensive food. Mississippi is so poor, he said, liberals should buy it and 'recolonize' that state. He said that in Wyoming, people dress in non-designer clothes, opting instead for Target. He said red-state residents don’t eat well, either. 'We have chef Wolfgang Puck, they have Chef Boyardee,' he said." • Disgusting?? To use yesterday's word -- OUTRAGE !! Americans don't usually brag about how much money they have. However, Meckler says : "This economic disparity is considered fair game in today’s politics. Reihan Salam wrote about this phenomenon : 'It is almost as though we’re living through a strange sort of ethnogenesis, in which those who see themselves as (for lack of a better term) upper-whites are doing everything they can to disaffiliate themselves from those they’ve deemed lower-whites.' " • Bill Maher tried to brush off his stereotyped attack on ordinary Americans by saying he was trying to shame Jeff Bezos into putting a second Amazon headquarters in an economically depressed place that really needs it. Meckler quoted Maher : " 'Bezos, you’re worth $130 billion,' he said. 'Take one for the team!...help a dying [place] come back to life.' These new jobs bring people from the 'outside.' Maher said that as an added benefit, Nebraska residents will realize homosexuals and minorities won’t murder them. (The implication, of course, is that middle Americans are xenophobic rubes.) Though his guests are probably be the type of people who pride themselves on progressive attitudes toward class, they laughed, nodded, and applauded him the entire time. Rick Wilson, a Republican strategist responsible for Evan McMullin’s presidential campaign, seemed delighted. Donna Brazile looked downright moved by Maher’s words. Claire McCaskill and Bernard-Henri Lévy slow clapped their appreciation. One can almost imagine this clip being used in a high school Sunday school class to decry peer pressure. Salam described this mockery of certain segments of society as a psychological 'way of establishing solidarity : All of us in this space get it, and we have nothing but disdain for those who do not.' And that’s exactly the vibe that these laughing pundits emanate. We’re in on the joke, and it’s really funny." • Mark Meckler says that Maher has "firmly established the new battle line in American politics. White Progressives will double down on their hatred of working-class whites. Hopefully, some liberals will finally have the guts to stand up to this bigotry." • American Thinker's Sally Zelikovsky wrote an excellent rebuttal to Maher. Here is Zelikivsky's forceful conclusion : "Yes, there are people in the rural areas of even your blue states, who work in prisons and slaughter houses. They should be applauded, not ridiculed and denigrated. They keep us safe and feed us. They keep you safe and feed you. When the SHTF, Bill -- whether an EMP, a natural disaster, an epidemic or you don’t win an Emmy and go wah wah wah all the way home (please, don’t come back to New Jersey; stay in La La Land) -- how are you going to survive? The people you make fun of? They know how to grow crops and raise animals. They know how to make a fire, how electricity works, how to plumb. They can build a house, make a table, craft a wagon. Without the very people you mock, you would starve or freeze to death. 'Who' you wear, what you drive, where you eat, and how much you think of yourself isn’t as important to the people you despise, as it is to you and your pals. You have become the very aloof, self-absorbed kind of aristocrats, who care more about their food, drink, dress and baubles than the miserable masses they claim to want to uplift. Yet, your kind denies them the very jobs and opportunities for prosperity from which you yourselves have benefited. One wonders, when you re-colonize the red zones, will you lop off the heads of those of us who resist? A small word of advice from one of little brain. You shouldn’t underestimate the people you try to re-colonize. We have backbone. We have grit. We are tenacious. We are the kind of people who will fight for our rights, our freedoms, our individuality, our families, our religion, and our culture. And most of all, our country. We will never give up. We will never give in. Keep smoking all that weed, Bill. One thing about stoners is once they stop munching and start talking, they truly believe they are brilliantly pontificating on a topic, when in fact they just sound really dumb. (And I’m not sure you really want schools to start teaching science in school again, Bill, because then all of these really screwed up, anxiety-ridden millennials will find out — shhh! — there really are only two genders.)." Read the entire article at < https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/02/now_we_know_the_ruling_class_hates_us.html#ixzz5gjvttTzx >. • • • WHAT ABOUT THIS UBER-RACIST COMMENT FROM A MARYLAND DEMOCRAT? The Daily Caller's Henry Rodgers reported on Tuesday that : "A Maryland Democratic lawmaker apologized to the state’s Legislative Black Caucus Monday after calling a district in Prince George’s County a “n***** district.” Delegate Mary Ann Lisanti, who is white, was approached by the caucus regarding her alleged remarks Monday night, after news broke that Lisanti had said the racial slur at a cigar bar in Annapolis, Maryland, while speaking to a colleague, who was also white, after work late one night. The Legislative Black Caucus of Maryland chair, Delegate Darryl Barnes, said Lisanti apologized multiple times but also added he thinks anyone who uses the word is 'a reflection of what’s in their heart,' the Washington Post reported. 'She apologized several times,' Barnes, a Democrat, said. 'She recognizes how she has hurt so many within the caucus, and she hoped to repent from this. She said that she doesn’t remember fully what happened, but she recognizes what happened. 'I do think that someone who uses the word, it’s a reflection of what’s in their heart,' Barnes said. Lisanti was reportedly questioned about the use of the racial slur in early February. She denied ever using the word but also said she did not remember much of that night. Lisanti also said she is sure she has used the racial slur before in her life. I don’t recall that....I don’t recall much of that evening,' Lisanti said to the Washington Post. She was also asked if she had ever used the racial slur before. 'I’m sure I have....I’m sure everyone has used it. I’ve used the f-word. I used the Lord’s name in vain,' she said. Maryland Democratic House Speaker Michael E. Busch condemned the comments, saying Lisanti should 'face the consequences of her behavior' and that 'there is no place in the House of Delegates for any racial slurs -- or slurs of any kind in society in general.' Barnes said it is possible the Black Caucus gives other recommendations to House leadership about Lisanti’s position in the state House." • Don't wait to see Lester Holt cover this Insane Democrat on NBC Nightly News -- he's too busy spewing Fake news about President Trump. • • • DEAR READERS, I can't speak for the rest of you, but I have NEVER in my life used that word -- or the f*** word. My mother taught us to be Christian, to be polite, to treat everyone as equals, not to use racial or any other kinds of slurs, and always to treat Black people with respect. But, hey, she was just one of those Americans who wore "cheap clothing" and ate "inexpensive food." She did that so her children could eat better food, wear better clothes, get an education, and grow up to be proud Americans contributing to their community and country. Bill Maher wouldn't understand that.
Tuesday, February 26, 2019
Democrat Insanity -- Deep State Criminality, Socialism, Infanticide, Meddling in Iran -- Does Not Stop President Trump's Agenda or His Rising Polls
THE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST LEFT CANNOT UNDERSTAND PRESIDENT TRUMP. Or, they will not understand him. They are allergic to his America-first ideas, to his love affair with mainstream America, and to his success. It is that last on -- his SUCCESS -- that makes the ProgDems really choke. First, after three years of political and legal hounding of the President, his family, his friends and his advisors, and after three years of the most biased and unhinged and untruthful reporting ever seen in America that has sought to ostracise and chase him from office, President Trump is still standing and successfully doing his job. The Senate Intelligence Committee, after reviewing more than 300,000 documents has, on a bipartisan basis, said there was NO EVIDENCE of collusion. But, NBC, when it reported this, still chose to emphasize that members of the Trump campaign actually met with or talked to numerous Russians during the campaign -- so what !! There is nothing remotely illegal about talking to or meeting with foreign nationals. But, NBC’s article looks forward to some accusations of wrongdoing -- although not of illegality -- emerging like the ghosts of Christmas Past, Present, and Future -- in the Senate Committee’s final report. • American Thinker's E. Jeffrey Ludwig wrote on Monday : "In truth, these incessant accusations are a betrayal of every standard of journalistic ethics. In the Preamble of the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, it is stated, 'An ethical journalist acts with integrity.' Integrity involves a judicious attempt to assess the facts and not draw conclusions that are more hyperbole than they are circumspect. If one then goes on to read the listed planks of the Code of Ethics, one will see that coverage by major leftwing media print and TV outlets are failing to apply each and every item. When do you see or hear opinion pieces on major leftwing outlets that even begin to discuss or adjudicate between competing narratives?" • Ludwig hits the American media and its protectors square on : "But, despite their violations of the Journalist Code of Ethics and, even worse, their ignorant contempt for the Ten Commandments, our foul Fourth Estate is being encouraged by the sinister cabal that has led our Justice Department, and by the traitorous, hateful rhetoric of the Democratic Party which has, striven to undermine the unity of our country. It is incredible to this writer that Andrew McCabe can go on national TV and calmly claim -- seemingly without regret -- that he participated in discussions about leading an effort to remove from office a duly elected President of the United States, and not be arrested and/or immediately be interrogated at length by federal law enforcement. Those conversations are unlawful since the Justice Department has no legal authority to participate in, let alone initiate, a takeout of the President. Despite the fact that a real assassination with a real knife was not used, those conversations in the American Department of Injustice are a replay of the conspiracy against Julius Caesar depicted in Shakespeare’s play by that name. When Caesar at the moment when his close associate Brutus stabs and kills him cries out 'Et tu Brute?!' he is uttering a cry of betrayal that has stood through the centuries. This phrase expresses the utter psychological torment of the victim of egregious betrayal. Our entire country, as if one person, should be crying out 'Et tu Brute?!' But no. There are only polite discussions of the pros and cons of McCabe’s revelations, and the royalties for his book keeping pouring in. And we are the stinking bit players or props in this pathetic scenario." • The Progressive Democrat socialists lined up against President Trump include Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Adam Schiff, Maxine Walters, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Dick Durbin, Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren. Any, they are so determined about driving him out of office that if the Fake and corrupt Russian collusion fails, and it will, they will aim for obstruction of justice. If that fails, they are seeking his tax returns to try to oust him for tax evasion. They have already tried the 25th Amendment as the tool to get him out of office for mental health issues. If that fails, what about for violating the emoluments clause by allowing his hotels to operate under separate management while he is in office -- Fake in the extreme. Their belittling and smearing of President Trump goes on daily. They refuse to call him Mr. President. They never once express the slightest gratitude for any of his often exemplary executive decisions -- required because they refuse to cooperate in any way with the Republicans in Congress to move forward his agenda, including protecting the southern border, which is really America's agenda because America elected him -- or his legislative initiatives, or his nominees to federal courts or administration positions. They never compliment any members of the first family, and go out of their way to be nasty and catty with the charming and gracious Melania Trump. They refuse to join the President in his calls for greater national unity -- and in fact, Speaker Pelosi did her best to spit on his February 5 State of the Union address. • • • AND YET, AND YET...PRESIDENT TRUMP'S POPULARITY AND CONSERVATISM RISING. Americans do not see their President or his supporters as racist, sexist, homophobic, anti-Moslem, or xenophobic. In fact, according to the latest Gallup survey found remarkable conservative strength all across the country. Their latest survey shows that liberals outnumber conservatives in only 6 states and that there are 25 states where conservatives are polling above their national average. • The Washington Examiner reported the Gallup survey results : "The number of states where liberals outnumber conservatives has dropped more than 30%, with just 6 now in that category : Massachusetts, Hawaii, Vermont, Washington, New York, and New Hampshire. According to the latest Gallup survey, in every other state but California, where conservatives and liberals split 29% to 29%, conservatives lead. Nationally, those who identify themselves conservative hold a nine-point lead. 'The residents of most US states are more likely to identify as conservative than as liberal in their political ideology. In 25 states, the conservative advantage is significantly greater than the national average, including 19 ‘highly conservative’ states in which conservatives outnumber liberals by at least 20 percentage points,' said Gallup." The Washington Examiner stated : "Translating those numbers into political power is a different matter. The right's problem is that big states are mostly less conservative or about average. Even Texas is about 50-50 conservative vs. moderate/liberal. In a national election, that matters and Trump's razor thin victory in several large midwestern states in 2016 negated some of that Democratic advantage. Can he do it again? He certainly has a shot given that Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are all still very competitive for the right. This map is also a warning to Democrats. If they insist on pushing Medicare for all, the Green New Deal, and reparations for slavery, they will probably get buried in 2020. If Ocasio-Cortez and the radicals continue to gain strength and influence in the Democratic party, it will lead to a Republican rout." • BUT, THE PROGDEMS CONTINUE TO PLOT PRESIDENT TRUMP'S OVERTHROW. One example -- BizPac Review reported on Sunday that former Obama aide Joshua Geltzer whas written a CNN op-ed essentially calling for a civil war in 2020 -- in the unlikely event that President Trump loses the 2020 election but “refuses to accept defeat.” Geltzer says these four groups must conspire to bring down Donald Trump in 2020 (because obviously the Deep State failed in 2016) : the US military, Congress, the Electoral College, and all state governors. That sounds a lot more like what the Democrats are trying to pull off now, but Geltzer says the US military must remove Trump from office in the unlikely scenario that : Trump loses the 2020 election AND He refuses to leave peacefully. I guess we need to see this fantasy through the Obama rogue Deep State glasses, and also remember that Joshua Geltzer was the director of counterterrorism at the National Security Council during Barack Obama’s last two years in office. Geltzer even goes so far as to suggest that it’s worth asking the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as they testify before Congress in coming months, to affirm that they understand that and would act consistently with it.” Geltzer argues that President Trump has laid the groundwork to contest the results of the 2020 election by revealing Democrat efforts to allow illegal immigrants to vote and spotlighting the media’s proven anti-conservative bias : “Trump’s unrelenting assaults on the media and intelligence community, augmented by his baseless insistence on widespread voter fraud, have laid the groundwork for him to contest the election results in worrisome ways by undermining two institutions Americans would count on to validate those results.” BUT, where is the voter fraud? In states where Republicans won congressional seats on Election Day 2018, only to have them stolen by fraudulent recounts and ballot harvesting by Democrat operatives days after the polls closed. And, San Francisco -- a Democrat stronghold, has officially become the first city in California to allow non-citizens to vote in a local election. This is just the beginning. • Another example -- American Thinker's Brian Joondeph wrote on Saturday that big media showed no outrage "over the Obama administration spying on its political opponent's presidential campaign, then, when caught, using unverified opposition research to obtain a FISA warrant to cover its misdeeds. Followed by finagling a special counsel appointment to put the blanket of investigational secrecy over its illegal and treasonous activities. No outrage." BUT, when the Jussie Smollett hoax broke, "the ProgDem lapdog media and their handlers fell "hook, line, and sinker, without scrutiny, investigation, or hesitation. When it turned out to be not only a hoax, but also a preplanned and rehearsed drama, much like Smollett's former TV show Empire, the media felt let down, but not outraged. Now that Smollett has been arrested for his hoax, the media will slither away from this story as fast as they can. What little indignation they have is directed toward 'the celebrity press and among activists and among Twitter people,' as explained by CNN's own activist and Twitter person, Brian Stelter. Oh no, it wasn't us real journalists here at CNN and other major media outlets peddling the false Jussie Smollett story endlessly, and of course blaming President Trump; it was everyone else. Nice try, but that won't sell, since there is plenty of evidence, as Twitchy chronicled, of big media rushing to judgment.' " • Yet another example -- This week's outrage is from CNN itself over the fact that the network hired someone who worked in the Trump administration, with the apparent problem, says CNN, being that hiring longtime Republican Sarah Isgur Flores, who most recently served in the Justice Department as Jeff Sessions' spokesman, to be a political editor in the Washington bureau is an ethical breach. • What about these "ethical breaches"? CNN senior vice president of newsgathering, Virginia Moseley, is married to Thomas R. Nides, who was a deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration. ABC News reporter Matthew Jaffe is married to former Obama deputy press secretary Katie Hogan. Obama national security advisor, Susan "Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video" Rice, is married to former ABC News executive producer Ian Cameron. David Rhodes was president of CBS News during the Obama administration at the same time that his brother Ben served as a deputy national security advisor to President Obama. Ben Sherwood was president of ABC News while his wife Karen was deputy secretary of energy in the Obama regime. Claire Shipman, the senior national correspondent for ABC's Good Morning America, is married to Jay Carney, Obama's former White House press secretary. Obama director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, neck deep in spy-gate, is an official CNN correspondent whom CNN host Chris Cuomo welcomed to the "family." Laura Jarrett, the daughter of Obama's most insider of all insiders, Valerie Jarrett, is a CNN correspondent. George Stephanopoulos, co-anchor of ABC's Good Morning America, was a senior Clinton White House advisor and member of the famous Clinton War Room. • Outrage?? Let's start with the outrageous journalistic nepotism in the Democrat Party-CNN relationship. Then, let's express our outrage at the corrupt and criminal conspiracy in the Obama Deep State FBI adn DOJ to destroy President Trump by entrapping his innocent advisors in "process" crimse easily concocted by manouvering them to say under oath things they probably had never considered in earlier statements to the FBI -- sometimes procured under false pretenses. • And, while we're at it, let's express our outrage at the Obama Iran nuclear deal, with all its lies to the American people and Congress, its hidden cash payments to Iran, a lifting of economic sanctions on Iran, and its attempted abandonment of America's only real ally in the Middle East, Israel. • President Obama had help in sidling up to Iran -- Secretary of State John Kerry was the lead negotiator in what President Trump appropriately calls the worst deal ever made. Kerry was, like the rest of the Obama team, so smitten with his partner in the deal negotiations, Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif that Kerry has been secretly meeting with Zarif and other Iranian officials after leaving the Department of State to try to salvage Iran’s nuclear weapons program, even after President Trump canceled US participation in the deal and re-imposed sanctions. Kerry’s shadow diplomacy was revealed last year, and it has been reported that Kerry told Zarif not to negotiate with President Trump but to wait until 2020 when the Democrats would be back in the White House. This is John Kerry’s peace partner -- Zarif, was caught on tape in May of last year chanting “Death to America! Death to Israel!” during a holy sermon by Iranian leader Ayatollah Khamenei. Zarif is seen clearly in the video sitting in front chanting “Death to America!” during the holy sermon about the nuclear deal. < pic.twitter.com/FcU6vY9VAY >. • Gateway Pundit states that : "Although Zarif is regarded by many Westerners as a ‘moderate,’ Iranian analyst Nanafsheh Zand says evidence to the contrary : "Zarif’s veneer however is reserved only for allies such as John Kerry and Frederica Mogherini to name a couple. A majority of Iranians actually regard him as an ambitious ‘captain’ of the regime that has peddled big lies, the world over and threatened one and all, in order to stay in power. The mantra of the Kerrys and Mogherinis is, for all intents and purposes, forget what the Iranian people want and allow the Khomeinist regime to run rampant around the glob....As if the Iranian people asked the international jet-set politicos who make huge messes in their wake in their own countries, to get involved. Iranians have stood up to this regime decade after decade, making it crystal clear through relentless and courageous protests, that they want nothing more than to be (and can be) the architects of a progressive Iran." • Reuters' Parisa Hafezi posted a report on Monday from Dubai : "Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the urbane, US-educated architect of its 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, announced his resignation unexpectedly on Monday on Instagram. 'Many thanks for the generosity of the dear and brave people of Iran and its authorities over the past 67 months. I sincerely apologize for the inability to continue serving and for all the shortcomings during my service. Be happy and worthy,' he wrote on his Instagram page jzarif_ir. He gave no specific reasons for his decision....A spokesman for the Iranian mission to the United Nations, Alireza Miryousefi, confirmed the announcement of the resignation. However there was no immediate word on whether President Hassan Rouhani would accept it. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency said 'some sources have confirmed Zarif’s resignation.' Born in 1960, Zarif lived in the United States from the age of 17 as a student in San Francisco and Denver, and subsequently as a diplomat to the United Nations in New York, where he served as Iranian ambassador from 2002 to 2007. He was appointed minister of foreign affairs in August 2013 after Rouhani won the presidency in a landslide on a promise to open up Iran to the outside world. Since taking charge of Iran’s nuclear talks with major powers in late 2013, Zarif has been summoned to the parliament several times by hardline lawmakers to explain about the negotiations. In February 2014 he caused an uproar with public comments condemning the Holocaust and was subsequently summoned to parliament. Holocaust denial has been a staple of public speeches in Iran for decades. Some hardliners even threatened Zarif with bodily harm after the nuclear deal was signed. Iran’s top authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, guardedly backed the deal." • Secretary of State Pompeo said : “He (Zarif) and Hassan Rouhani are just front men for a corrupt religious mafia. Our policy is unchanged -- the regime must behave like a normal country and respect its people.” • • • DEMOCRAT SENATORS REFUSE TO STOP KILLING ALREADY-BORN BABIES. Outrage??? This is the last straw. In horrible news, BlabberBuzz and LifeNews published a report on Monday that covered the sad fact that "Senate Democrats today blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a bill that would stop infanticide and provide medical care and treatment for babies who are born alive after botched abortions." LifeNews said : "The vote to stop the Democrat filibuster needed 60 votes but Democrats stopped the chamber from getting enough. The Senate voted 53-44 against ending the filibuster and allowing a debate and vote on the bill itself. Every Republican present voted to end the filibuster, along with Democrats Joe Manchin, Bob Casey and Doug Jones, while all other Democrats voted against the bill. Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who supports abortion, did not vote -- hurting the effort to collect the 60 votes necessary. Every Democrat Senator running for President -- Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand and Bernie Sanders -- voted to block the anti-infanticide bill. Druing the debate, several Democrats misled the Senate about the bill and falsely claimed the measure would ban abortions or ban late-term abortions. They made the usual pro-abortion claims that pro-life lawmakers hate women or somehow abortion is women’s health." New Hampshire Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen said on the Senate floor : "This bill is just another line of attack in the ongoing war on women’s health." • Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, according to LifeNews, grew increasingly frustrated as the debate went on about the false claims abortion advocates made about the anti-infanticide legislation : “I know a lot of opponents of this bill sincerely believe the talking points that they read from their staffs. We’ve heard speech after speech after speech that have nothing to do with what’s actually in this bill. I urge my colleagues to picture a baby that’s already been born, that’s outside the womb gasping for air. That’s the only thing that today’s vote is actually about. We’re talking about babies that have already been born. Nothing in this bill touches abortion access.” • Leading pro-life Senators were shocked by the vote. South Dakota Senator Mike Rounds said : “At a bare minimum, every one of us should be able to agree that infanticide, or the killing of a baby after it has been born alive, is unacceptable. This is a separate issue from abortion, which is abhorrent in itself." Senator Steve Daines of Montana added : “We are not here to debate abortion. That is not what this bill is about...We are here today to decide whether or not it should be legal in the US to kill or neglect an infant who has been born alive after a botched abortion.” Senator Joni Ernst agreed : “All my colleagues across the aisle are saying this about abortion, this is about a mother’s health care. That’s absolutely incorrect. We are talking about a human life. What this bill does is address the health care of a baby that is born alive after a botched abortion. We’re not talking about abortion, folks. We’re talking about the life of a child that is born." • Leading pro-life groups condemned the 44 Democrats who blocked the anti-infanticide bill. Carol Tobias, president of National Right to Life, in an email to LifeNews wrote : “Today we saw the extremism of the abortion industry’s agenda on full display. The 44 members of the United States Senate who voted against this bill now need to explain to their constituents why they believe abortion is such an absolute ‘right’ that it protects what amounts to infanticide : willfully withholding life-saving care from a born-alive infant. Thanks to the governors of New York and Virginia, and 44 pro-abortion Democrat Senators, the extreme pro-abortion agenda has been laid bare for all to see. They believe it should be legal to kill unborn babies, for absolutely any reason, at any time up to and including the moment of their birth, and even in the moments after they are born.” Students for Life of America President Kristan Hawkins called Senator Ben Sasse’s Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act “the bare minimum standard for valuing infant life, as everyone should be able to look at a baby born during an abortion and understand that a humane response is required. The tragedy today is that even though a majority of Senators voted to protect infants born alive during an abortion, the ‘new math’ of the Congress means this is still a loss, as even with 53 in favor to 44 against the 60 vote supermajority was not reached. Those Senators who voted against this bill that obviously protects human beings will have a lot to answer for when they face the voters.” Jeanne Mancini, President of March for Life, added : “Senators who could not bring themselves to vote to pass the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act should reconsider whether or not they have what it takes to serve. Senator Sasse’s common sense bill would merely require doctors assist a newborn struggling to survive after a failed attempt on her life. Anyone who lacks the basic level of human compassion needed to vote in favor of this should quickly find another job. We look forward to a vote in the House of Representatives so that Chamber can get on record as well.” LiveAction President Lila Rose told LifeNews : “A new Marist poll shows 80% of Americans want to limit abortion to the first three months of pregnancy, but Democrats can’t even find consensus to limit abortion after a child is born. • According to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), nationwide, between 2003 and 2014 at least 143 babies died after being born alive during botched abortions -- and the CDC states this could be an underestimation. In 2018, 16 infants in Florida alone were born alive after surviving abortion attempts. Senators who voted no on the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act should be ashamed of themselves. Shockingly, infanticide in the context of abortion is not illegal in the US. There is no existing federal law that prohibits the denial of medical care to infants born alive after abortion attempts. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have appropriately required that infants delivered alive during attempted abortion procedures be given appropriate medical care and penalized those who neglected to save them.” • “The extremism of the Democrats can no longer be ignored or debated,” Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life said. “As Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor today, this bill merely recognizes that a newborn baby is a newborn baby, no matter what the circumstances were of his or her birth. For the Democrats, a newborn slated for extermination before birth is fair game even after birth. This is infanticide. The only thing Americans can do to protect these most vulnerable babies is to vote out of office those who fail to protect them.” • This is the second time Senate Democrats have blocked the bill to stop infanticide -- although a similar 2002 bill, called the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act, was passed unanimously by the Senate in 2002 and signed by then-President George W. Bush. As LifeNews reported, pro-abortion Senator Patty Murray blocked a vote on a bill from pro-life Republican Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska that would stop infanticide nationwide. And in the House, Democrats have blocked a request by Republicans to vote on a bill that would stop infanticide a total of six times. Earlier this month. Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse had wanted to vote on a bill to protect babies born alive after failed abortions, in a Senate vote that would have come days after New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed into law new legislation that allows abortions up to birth and after Virginia Governor Ralph Northam backed infanticide during a radio interview -- saying that he’s perfectly content if doctors and parents discuss letting disabled babies die after birth. Sasse asked the Senate for unanimous consent to vote on legislation that would offer them appropriate Medical Care and treatment. BUT, speaking on behalf of pro-abortion Senate Democrats, pro-abortion Senator Patty Murray, a Democrat from Washington State, stood up and objected to the vote. She claimed the vote wasn’t necessary and objected to the vote. • • • DEAR READERS, the blocking of a vote on a bill to stop infanticide comes as national polling shows Americans -- including people who are “pro-choice” on abortion -- oppose abortion up to birth and infanticide. The Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act would have required that "any health care practitioner present" at the time of a birth "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care, and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as a reasonably diligent and conscientious health care practitioner would render to any other child born alive at the same gestational age." • President Trump tweeted after the vote : "Senate Democrats just voted against legislation to prevent the killing of newborn infant children. The Democrat position on abortion is now so extreme that they don’t mind executing babies AFTER birth....This will be remembered as one of the most shocking votes in the history of Congress. If there is one thing we should all agree on, it’s protecting the lives of innocent babies." • The bill, which exempted the mother involved in the birth from prosecution, also would have required practitioners to "ensure that the child born alive is immediately transported and admitted to a hospital." It prescribed a possible term of imprisonment of up to five years for violations, not including penalties for first-degree murder that could have applied. • After she blocked the initial vote, Senator Murray told EWTN reporter Jason Calvi that providing medical care for babies who are born alive is between a woman and her doctor. Murray continued her false claims that the bill somehow has to do with abortion. All the bill does is ensure that babies who are purposely induced or survive abortions are provided appropriate medical care and treatment. She was unpersuaded by that information. • The disgust I feel at this Progressive Democrat vote for infanticide makes words difficult to find. America is face-to-face with horror, murder, criminality wearing a mask of women's health care, evil in the Biblical sense of the word. Progressive Democrat EVIL. • A friend wrote to me this morning about sexual child abuse : "It is so hard to make any sense of a Priest who takes vows to God and then breaks them in a most horrific way. I don't think they'll be forgiven. They used God to prey on young boys. I think that is the worst sin a person of God could commit." My answer was : "Priests -- yes, we all agree -- but condemning anybody to Hell without a chance of redemption through true repentance and good work to correct the sin is not really what Christ taught us...EXCEPT He was very hard on those who mistreated children...so, maybe you are exactly right...this all feels to me like an extreme case of Satan trying to bring down the Christian Church and all those who believe in God. The Democrat insanity over infanticide-abortion feels very similar to me on another level...are they Satan's instruments??" • President Trump is doing his best to prevent infanticide. His administration has finalized an administrative rule to revise the regulations governing the Title X family planning program and to restrict taxpayer dollars for groups such as Planned Parenthood that provide abortion referrals. This new rule means the defunding of the Planned Parenthood abortion business by as much as $60 million in Title X funds annually. The rule, first proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services last year, would ban organizations from providing abortions if they are performed in the same facilities as other services financed by federal funds. It would also block funding for organizations that refer women to another provider for the procedure. • What each of us can do is contact our Senators immediately and tell them what we thought of their votes on the Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act. And pray that these babies will somehow be saved.
Monday, February 25, 2019
President Trump and Pope Francis -- Paying Heed to the Silent, Choked Cry of Aborted Babies and Sexually Abused Children
THE TIMES THEY ARE A'CHANGING. At least when it comes to the question of abortion -- and perhaps on the Catholic Church's fight against sexual child abuse. . • • • NOTRE DAME IS LEADING THE WAY ON ABORTION. Last week, Father John I. Jenkins, president of the University of Notre Dame, released a statement expressing their disdain for the Reproductive Health Act ("RHA"), just signed into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo. Father Jenkins's statement is titled "Who is Next?," a rhetorical question for abortion advocates asking : if medical care is not required for babies surviving abortion in New York, what group is next to be denied medical care? That is a facet of the new wave of Democrat state abortion-infanticide laws that has not before been raised. • American Thinker's William Dodd reacted to Father Jenkins statement : "The commentary from Father Jenkins is surprising from several perspectives. The influential Notre Dame platform has in recent decades been used by Jenkins and other university officials to advocate mostly liberal views on social matters -- views that have in some cases conflicted with traditional Catholic teachings. In this article, Father presents a surprisingly conservative perspective. Coming from him, it has diluted credibility. After all, it was Father Jenkins who in 2009 invited President Obama, the most pro-abortion President in our country's history, to be his and Father Hesburgh's honored guest and speaker at the university's graduation ceremony. Obama's speech from that platform gave the impression to the world that Catholic Notre Dame may consider abortion a subject for debate or dialogue rather than a doctrinal matter. But another president of Notre Dame must bear even more responsibility for the current headlong drive by Democratic politicians and state legislatures for up-to-term and 'who's next' abortion legislation. Father Theodore Hesburgh became president of Notre Dame in 1955. Six years later, he joined the board of the ultra-liberal Rockefeller Foundation. In doing so, Hesburgh was surreptitiously endorsing his acceptance of abortion. The foundation had always been known for providing worldwide funding for population control, eugenics, abortion, and contraception. Hesburgh served as chairman of the Board of the foundation from 1977 until retiring in 1982. In 1984, Father Hesburgh invited Governor Mario Cuomo of New York to speak at Notre Dame on the difficulties that elected Catholic politicians have in reconciling the obligations of their faith regarding abortion with their obligations to their constituencies. On September 13, 1984, Cuomo delivered 'Religious Belief and Public Morality : A Catholic Governor's Perspective' at Notre Dame's Washington Hall. Some saw the Cuomo speech as an orchestrated Hesburgh-Cuomo rebuttal to comments made by Archbishop John O'Connor, the new archbishop of New York and a staunch defender of unborn life. Earlier in 1984 O'Connor, on a televised news conference, had stated that he did not believe that a Catholic in good conscience could vote for a political candidate who approves of abortion. He further stated that he would not rule out excommunicating Governor Cuomo for his support of abortion rights. Cuomo's speech at Notre Dame stifled the debate. It was a brilliant move, a well staged home run for the abortion cause. With delivery from the platform of one of the Church's most influential universities and tacit approval by the renowned Father Hesburgh, the speech received extensive media coverage. 'Father Ted' likely knew that it would be a watershed event, and it was. In effect, without Church authority, the speech 'sanctioned' the Catholic body politic's relaxation of its opposition to abortion. Archbishop O'Connor and the conservative wing of the Church had lost the public debate with the governor. Liberal Catholic politicians silently leaped for joy. Their consciences had been unburdened." • William Dodd notes in his article that the speech "had immediate effects" -- it relieved US Catholic politicians of any obligation to mention their faith's view on the immorality of abortion in public discourse, either "on the stump" or after being elected, and it freed US Catholic politicians of any obligation to object to legislation that would in any way limit state or federal funding of abortion. AND, says Dodd, it freed Catholic voters of any conscience-based reluctance to vote for politicians of any faith who sought to expand abortion." • • • MARIO CUOMO AND ANDREW CUOMO. If Governor Mario Cuomo's 1984 speech had such an important impact, causing the Catholic Church hierarchy to pull back on public criticisms of politicians, even Catholic ones, who sought to expand abortion, then its effect seems to have run its course. While Catholic legislators in the past were convinced that advocating the most aggressive kinds of abortion legislation because it won elections and it brought pro-feminist women voters into the fold of Progressive Democrat politics -- think the "pro-abortion litmus test" and Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Dick Durbin, Patrick Leahy, Bob Menendez -- that being pro-abortion would insure their survival for decades to come, it is no longer a given. The public response to the passage of the New York RHA from some quarters has been disgust, from others shock and surprise. Yes, says William Dodd, Surprise : "The seed for this horrendous legislation was sown decades ago. We know its lineage. Its grandfather's name is Mario, and its father's name is Andrew. It has uncles named John D., Theodore, Barack, and John I. and has countless cousins in the party of Democrats. Public reception of the RHA has been less than favorable -- so much so that the act itself may help bring an end to our country's deviant reliance on abortion to solve social problems and to celebrations of its enabling laws. Like the laws passed following the Dred Scott decision doubling down on slavery, pro-abortion legislation of the past four decades may someday be found to be the worst ever written in our country's history." • What one NY Governor Cuomo -- Mario -- created, another NY Governor Cuomo -- Mario's son Andrew -- has driven to its negative political extremity. • • • "IF YOU WANT PEACE, PREPARE FOR WAR." That is how the Canadian Free Press's Fredy Lowe addressed the abortion issue in early February. In a no-holds-barred essay, Lowe wrote : "Woe unto them who call evil good and good evil...One of the more memorable statements made by the person who was erroneously given the title of POTUS, has now been declared true, when he once boldly admonished us saying, 'We are no longer a Christian nation.' Only in a non-Christian nation can the Catholic Church, or any Christian church for that matter, stand by and berate young teenaged boys for wearing a MAGA hat at a right-to-life rally, and nearly in the same breath, not consider the excommunication of a governor or the legislators who rejoice in their newly found right of ‘elimination’ of a newborn baby. '...Before I formed you in the womb I knew you...' The prophet Isaiah warned us, 'Woe unto them who call evil good and good evil...' There is little need to sugarcoat these truths for we, as a society, are about to experience the woe that comes with distress and sorrow which is assured onto a nation that has so willingly embraced evil." • I suppose we now have to admit that Progressives, and their Democrat Party operatives, do not believe in God. Lowe states : "They, in fact, despise and mock a person, or all religious institutions that know, love and accept The Lord Jesus Christ as their Savior. They entertained removing the line, 'So help me God,' from the oath taken in front of a key House committee, whereas their non-belief in God is now at the forefront of the evil that has engulfed our once honorable nation. Their long-term-goal has been an entirely godless society, which they now seem to have fully accomplished by not only their words, but by their deeds. They are now right-in-your-face unashamed of murdering infants out of convenience, making it more difficult for them to continue hiding behind the term fetus, as they desire approval for a discussion-to-eliminate, which is their code word for killing a newly born baby, even after the child has physically been born into the world, but soon to be dead, for they have legally deemed it so." • CFP and Lowe have harsh words for Cardinal Dolan of New York, who "agreed with the baby-killing-monster governor Andrew Cuomo" by refusing to take a stand against his new radical law making infanticide legal : "One might think that it would have been difficult for Cardinal Dolan to attend Mass at St. Patrick’s Cathedral this past Sunday hearing the words of Jeremiah in the First Reading, '...Before I formed you in the womb I knew you...' But, sadly, it was no more difficult for the hypocritical church leader...than it was for the doctors or nurses in his congregation, who willingly do the dastardly-deed of killing infants as part of their livelihood -- they simply admonish themselves saying, it’s part of our job. Woe onto them who call evil good." • • • PRESIDENT TRUMP DEFENDS BABIES. President Trump was very clear in his State of the Union address on February 5 : "Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother's womb moments before birth. These are living, feeling, beautiful, babies who will never get the chance to share their love and dreams with the world. And then, we had the case of the Governor of Virginia where he stated he would execute a baby after birth. To defend the dignity of every person, I am asking Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in the mother's womb. Let us work together to build a culture that cherishes innocent life. And let us reaffirm a fundamental truth: all children -- born and unborn -- are made in the holy image of God." We should pray for our President Trump and for the cause of eliminating infanticide labeled ad abortion. It is true, as Fredy Lowe says: "If you truly want peace, first admit to yourself that we are already at war. And, so we say once more, Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum." • • • WHERE ARE THE PROTESTANT CHURCHES ON THE INFANTICIDE-CUM-ABORTION ISSUE? I keep reporting about the Catholic Church's reactions to abortion, and to the latest infanticide-as-abortion laws because there is scarcely a Protestant reaction to report. Google the issue, and you will see that American Protestant Churches are for the most part silent. A 2018 study by the Pew Research Center on Religion and Public Life concluded : "Though abortion is a divisive issue, more than half of US adults take a non-absolutist position, saying that in most -- but not all -- cases, abortion should be legal (34%) or illegal (22%). Fewer take the position that in all cases abortion should be either legal (25%) or illegal (15%)." The only religious group registering a majority (61%) who think abortion should be illegal in all or most cases was white evangelical Protestants. By contrast, 74% of religiously unaffiliated Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, as do two-thirds of white mainline Protestants (67%)." • Even American Catholics are somewhat pro-abortion -- 51% say abortion should be legal in all or most cases while 42% say it should be illegal. The National Catholic Reporter wrote last week : "While politics yielded a Supreme Court that might well overturn Roe v. Wade in the not-too-distant future, the needle hasn't moved much in terms of the general culture. The figures have not changed a great deal over the decades. Extremes all along have determined the terms of debate. The broad middle, which would have a largely moderating influence, remains mostly unheard and irrelevant. Perhaps passage of the New York law will foster a backlash, as some have predicted. More likely, should Roe be overturned, is that the extremes will then have dozens of states over which to continue a fight that appears to have no satisfactory end." • • • THE LIBERAL CATHOLIC VOICE IN THE ABORTION ISSUE. The National Catholic Reporter, in its February 18 editorial, wrote : "As the 2020 presidential campaign season begins to roll out and abortion remains singular in its ability to divide the electorate and swamp all other political issues, a bit of not-too-distant papal history may be instructive. In 2001, in a public Mass in Rome marking the end of the Church's jubilee year, Pope John Paul II, since sainted, distributed Communion to Rome's mayor, Francesco Rutelli, a high-profile Catholic and politician who earlier had led his party's campaign for liberalized abortion laws. That fact was noted by conservative Vatican writer Sandro Magister weighing in during the flap over the presidential candidacy of John Kerry, a Catholic, in 2004. Magister at the time was commenting on a note by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger [later to become Pope Benedict XVI] on the subject of abortion, politicians and Communion, as well as discussion among US bishops about whether the then-Senator should be refused Communion because of his permissive views on abortion. Though Magister concluded that Ratzinger's directive would have come down on the side of refusing Communion -- the US bishops voted to leave it up to individual bishops -- he made special note of the fact that 'the rigorism of Ratzinger and the Holy See have for years lived side by side, in Italy and the rest of Europe, with a more flexible praxis, even at the highest levels of the Church.' He recalled, specifically, the incident in which Rutelli received Communion from John Paul II. Further, Magister noted : 'In Italy during the 1970's, other left-wing politicians even more closely connected than Rutelli with the Catholic sector, such as Piero Pratesi and Raniero La Valle, had given strong support to the introduction of the abortion law. But they were never denied communion. It was never even discussed.' Two years after that public Mass, John Paul II, in a private Mass in the Pope's apartment, distributed Communion to then-Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom. Blair at the time was both a pro-choice politician and an Anglican. Perhaps John Paul was making a point for tolerance for political realities as well as for daring ecumenism. Whatever the case, John Paul's example might provide a good model for US bishops as some of those more inclined to be culture warriors seem eager to pick fights with politicians. There are also rumblings of threats to excommunicate New York Governor Andrew Cuomo for signing (and rather distastefully celebrating) the state's recent liberalized abortion law, which drops restriction to abortions after 24 weeks if the woman's life or health is at risk. To his credit, New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who rightly points out the violence of late-term abortions in opposing the state law, also quickly stated that excommunication should not be used as a weapon or out of frustration." • New York is not the first to liberalize its abortion laws, and it is expected that others will follow with the growing possibility that the Supreme Court would reverse Roe v. Wade. At the same time, says National Catholic Reporter : "If the bishops were to honestly assess what they've accomplished after more than 40 years of single-minded, single-issue politics, they might reconsider. Given that they've had more than four decades to persuade both Catholics and the wider culture of the wisdom of church teaching, any reasonable measure would term the effort a monumental failure....In the Catholic world, the primary debate is not over church teaching, though there are moralists and legalists and certainly women within the tradition but outside the power structure who raise demanding questions. The more immediate debate is over tactics in the real world. How best to raise the seriousness of the issue? To combat the need for it? To combat laws that allow it without limit? To persuade others -- Catholics included, if the surveys are to be believed -- to a point of view? The bishops, unfortunately, have helped fuel one of the extremes. They've had 46 years with endless bulletin inserts, Washington rallies, threats against politicians, the harshest words for women who would even consider abortion, and political alliances that have jeopardized other compelling portions of the Church's social teaching. All to accommodate this single issue....They've succeeded, instead, in hardening opinions and positions. In more recent years, they have set themselves up to be roundly criticized as hypocritical. They are members of a culture complicit in rationalizing the cover-up of what some have accurately called the 'soul murder' of abused children while railing against the assault of children in the womb. They deemed it the expedient way to handle that problem. The bishops may get to cheer the overthrow of Roe, but they will have done little to thwart the forces that gloat over having been able to successfully minimize the seriousness of abortion. The hierarchy's tactics in the public square never allowed the unconvinced to consider deeper truths about life and the need to protect it. Technology has certainly allowed us to understand fetal development in a more intimate way and with stunning clarity. That itself has convinced some to moderate their views. But countervailing advances in science increasingly allow much earlier detection of pregnancy and much easier access to pharmaceutical abortion performed in private. If respect for life in all of its phases is the ultimate good, some political wins or victory at the Supreme Court will likely fall far short of that end. Maybe John Paul had a bigger picture in mind." • • • WHAT ABOUT THE CHURCH'S SEXUAL ABUSE CRISIS? The Washington Times published an opinion piece by R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. last week. Tyrrell writes : "Pope Francis is increasingly showing his hand. He came into the papacy promising to clean up the church, especially on matters of sexual abuse. In doing so, he raised hopes among the laity, especially in America and Latin America. He said all the right things or at least many of the right things. He traveled the world. Now it is increasingly obvious that he means none of it. Pope Francis comes from Argentina. Yet, the more I see of him he looks and sounds like a fat alderman from Chicago. He is slippery, evasive, and I think we all know where he is going to go. He is heading to the comfortable left, ever to the left. What he really thinks about anything I cannot say, but look at the issues that he claims move him....Now we have arrived this week at the Pope’s 'abuse summit.' That is to say, his sexual abuse summit. For months it looked like it would not come off at all, but we now have it. Is the Pope going to move against child molesters within the church in a serious way? Well, he has finally defrocked Theodore McCarrick, the disgraced cardinal from Washington, DC, but that should have been done long ago, and as George Neumayr reported over the weekend he did it after promoting Cardinal Kevin Farrell, one of McCarrick’s cronies. Cardinal Farrell will now be 'responsible for administering the Vatican after a Pope dies or resigns and before a new one is elected,' according to the online news site Crux. That is not a very reassuring promotion." • Yet, the Abuse Summit did produce some key results. • The Catholic News Agency (CNA) noted that : "A Vatican spokesman said Sunday that concrete follow-up to this week’s abuse summit will include a new law on child protection for Vatican City State and a document from Pope Francis. At the conclusion of the Vatican’s sex abuse and child protection summit February 24, conference moderator Father Federico Lombardi, SJ, announced that Pope Francis will soon issue a motu proprio 'on the protection of minors and vulnerable persons.' Vatican City State will also receive its own new child protection law and the Vicariate of Vatican City will receive new child protection guidelines in the coming weeks. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) will publish a 'vademecum,' or handbook, with the tasks and obligations of bishops, Lombardi said. Archbishop Charles Scicluna, adjunct secretary of the CDF and a leading figure in the abuse conference, said February 24 that while changes in law are good, the most important thing is 'a change of heart' and conversion, 'to be more like the Good Shepherd, taking care of the little ones and the most vulnerable.' Another measure slated to take place over the next months is the creation of task forces specifically to help local Churches in need of help to solve problems and develop initiatives in their bishops’ conferences and dioceses. Father Hans Zollner, SJ, summit organizer, said the reason behind the task force idea is that some countries the Church, and society overall, lack trained personnel and need outside assistance. The task forces would help bishops’ conferences and dioceses that have requested help on things like writing guidelines and education about abuse. 'This is something that in the mid- and long-term will [bear] fruit,' Zollner commented. At the final press conference of the abuse summit, organizers re-emphasized the plan for a follow-up meeting to take place between summit leaders and top people in the Roman Curia first thing Monday morning. The February 25 meeting will be the first of a serious of follow-ups to discuss what should come next, Lombardi said. Zollner said they have tried to bring out some concrete outcomes from the week’s encounter, but that they will 'need to be fleshed out.' He also said there are a number of other points and suggestions which came out of the bishops’ working groups, and which organizers will be discussing. Implementation of any concrete measures will have to take place at the local level, Cardinal Oswald Gracias of Bombay said. Gracias and Scicluna both agreed that one point worth looking into in the follow-up is the amendment of the 'pontifical secret,' a policy of confidentiality in the Church, regarding cases of sexual abuse of minors. Scicluna praised the four-day meeting with heads of bishops’ conferences, Eastern Catholic Churches, and religious communities, saying that while the Church has acknowledged for decades the seriousness of the crime of abuse of minors by clergy, this was the first time he had seen an equally clear acknowledgment of the gravity of cover-up." • The Catholic News Agency also reported on the Pope's closing speech to the conference attendees. Pope Francis Saturday led the 190 presidents of the world’s bishops’ conferences in a penitential liturgy and examination of conscience on their failures in handling abuse within the Catholic Church : “For three days we have spoken to each other and listened to voices of victim survivors about the crimes that children and young people have suffered in our Church. We have asked each other : how can we act responsibly and what steps do we now need to take? But so that we can go into the future with new courage, we must say, like the prodigal son : ‘Father, I have sinned.’....We need to examine where concrete actions are needed for the local Churches, for the members of our Episcopal Conferences, for ourselves. This will require that we look honestly at the situation in our countries and our own actions.” • Following the Pope's words, a lector read a series of questions, punctuated by intervals of reflection, for an examination of conscience. Among them were the questions : “In the Church of my country, how have we dealt with bishops, priests, deacons and religious accused of sexual assault? What abuses have been committed against children and young people by clergy and others in the Church of my country?” They were also asked to reflect on what “I know about the people in my diocese who have been abused and violated by priests, deacons and religious.” The bishops were asked to examine their consciences regarding the response of the Church in their country and how they have treated those who have been abused. “How did we deal with those whose crimes were established? What have I personally done to prevent injustice and establish justice? What have I failed to do?” they were asked. The final questions looked to the future : “What steps have we taken in my country to prevent new injustice? Did we work to be consistent in our actions? Were we consistent? In my diocese, have I done what is possible to bring justice and healing to victims and those who suffer with them? Have I neglected what is important?” • Following the examination of conscience, the bishops and other religious leaders made a “confession of faults,” praying : “Lord Jesus Christ, we confess that we are sinful human beings.” • The bishops also listened to the Parable of the Prodigal Son and a homily given by Archbishop Philip Naameh of Tamale, the president of the Ghana bishops’ conference. In his homily, Archbishop Naameh noted that it is “almost taken for granted” for bishops and religious to preach to sinners on the Parable of the Prodigal Son but forget to apply the Scripture to themselves. “Just like the prodigal son in the Gospel, we have also demanded our inheritance, got it, and now we are busy squandering it,” he said. “The current abuse crisis is an expression of this. Too often we have kept quiet, looked the other way, avoided conflicts,” the bishop said. “We have thereby squandered the trust placed in us -- especially with regard to abuse within the area of responsibility of the Church, which is primarily our responsibility. We have not afforded people the protection they are entitled to, have destroyed hopes, and people were massively violated in both body and soul....No one can exempt themselves, nobody can say : but I have personally not done anything wrong, he stated. “We are a brotherhood, we bear responsibility not only for ourselves, but also for every other member of our brotherhood. What must we do differently, and where should we start? Let us look again at the prodigal son in the Gospel. For him, the situation starts to take a turn for the better when he decides to be very humble, to perform very simple tasks, and not to demand any privileges. His situation changes as he recognizes himself, and admits to having made a mistake, confesses this to his father, speaks openly about it and is ready to accept the consequences,” he said. • Archbishop Naameh ended with strong words : “There is a long road ahead of us,” he concluded, saying that just as the prodigal son had to do, the bishops must “win over our brothers and sisters in the congregations and communities, regain their trust, and re-establish their willingness to cooperate with us, to contribute to establishing the kingdom of God.” • • • DEAR READERS, the examination of conscience -- the admission of errors and faults and sins -- weighs heavily on the Catholic Church at this moment. It also weighs heavily on America. Protestant and Catholic churches need to speak out about abortion up to delivery. They need to open the dialogue with their congregations and with their church leadership. American women need to examine their consciences -- do they really need to have the right to abortion up to, and even beyond, delivery? Do they, at least after adolescence, need abortion at all, considering the availability of preventive measures and morning-after pills. Has America abandoned the ethical considerations of teaching teenagers responsibility for the ease of abortion on demand? These are political, as well as ethical, questions because they will partly shape the electoral debate in 2020. • Lloyd Marcus wrote on Monday in his American Thinker article : "Folks, something has gone terribly wrong in the hearts and minds of Democrat politicians. Similar to a school playground bully, leftists will continue stickin' it to us as long as we allow them to get away with it. We must ask God for his wisdom and strength; stand up and push back in a Godly and legal manner." • On Sunday, Pope Francis said of the sexual abuse crisis : “We need to recognize with humility and courage that we stand face to face with the mystery of evil, which strikes most violently against the most vulnerable, for they are an image of Jesus. For this reason, the Church has now become increasingly aware of the need not only to curb the gravest cases of abuse by disciplinary measures and civil and canonical processes, but also to decisively confront the phenomenon both inside and outside the Church.” • That same "mystery of evil, which strikes most violently against the most vulnerable, for they are an image of Jesus" applies equally to abortion's victims -- both the unborn or just-born child and the fragile and traumatized mother. • Again Pope Francis on Sunday : “In people’s justified anger, the Church sees the reflection of the wrath of God, betrayed and insulted by these deceitful consecrated persons. The echo of the silent cry of the little ones who, instead of finding in them fathers and spiritual guides, encountered tormentors, will shake hearts dulled by hypocrisy and by power. It is our duty to pay close heed to this silent, choked cry.” • Who is speaking on behalf of the "choked cry" of the unborn but living aborted children? • Pope Francis made “a heartfelt appeal for an all-out battle against the abuse of minors both sexually and in other areas, on the part of all authorities and individuals, for we are dealing with abominable crimes that must be erased from the face of the earth.” The Pope reflected on the Gospel’s emphasis on mercy. He stressed that “if our hearts are open to mercy...we proclaim before the world that it is possible to overcome evil with good.” • LATE BREAKING NEWS TELLS US that the times really are a'changing. The latest Marist Poll has found that Americans are equally likely to identify as pro-life as pro-choice, a double-digit shift from just last month, the leftist Axios reports. Marist, in a poll commissioned by the Catholic group the Knights of Columbus, asked respondents about their views on abortion and compared the results to a similar poll from last month. The February poll shows 47% pro-choice, 47% pro-life. In January, the Marist poll showed 55% pro-choice and 38% pro-life. The latest Marist poll also found that most Americans -- 80% -- think abortion should be restricted to the first three months of a pregnancy.Both New York and Virginia have passed measures on abortion in recent weeks, primarily concerning late-term abortion, which Marist Poll director Barbara Carvalho credits with changing Americans’ attitudes on abortion : “The recent legal changes to late-term abortion and the debate which followed have not gone unnoticed by the general public. Current proposals that promote late-term abortion have reset the landscape and language on abortion in a pronounced -- and very measurable -- way.” The most significant shift, according to Carvalho, was found among young Democrats. In the February Marist poll, 34% of Dems under 45 identify as pro-life, 61% as pro-choice. In January, the numbers were 20% identified as pro-life and 75% as pro-choice. Carvalho told Axios : "This has been a measure that has been so stable over time. To see that kind of change was surprising. And the increased discussion [of late-term abortion] in the public forum in the past month appears to have made the biggest difference in how people identify on the issue." The Marist survey has a margin of error of 3.5% • The old slogan "Save the Children" is before us today on two fronts. Will we rise to the challenge, reject the infanticide-as-abortion laws being passed by radical ProgDems, and save the children entrusted to us by God?