….As if in conspiratorial lockstep, the media are dutifully responding with round-the-clock distortions and deceitful context manipulation of Rush’s clearly articulated statement that he hopes Obama’s socialist blueprint for America fails, and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is circulating a petition denouncing him……

TAMPA – Super Bowl XLIII has a tie in to the pro-life movement as one of the members of the Rooney family, which owns the Pittsburgh Steelers, is heavily involved in pro-life activism through the Thomas More Law Center in Ann Arbour Michigan.  Brian Rooney, the Law Center’s Director of Communications and Development, is also a member of the Pittsburgh Steelers Board of Directors.

Brian Rooney commented on Art Rooney Sr., the founder of the Pittsburgh Steelers saying: “My grandfather, Art Rooney, went to church service everyday – no matter where he was or how important any signal game may be.  He was always interacting with the players, coaches, and everyone else in the organization. His faith was infectious and still sets the tone for the team today.  Before every game we have a family Mass.  In fact, when I get to Tampa on Saturday, the first place I will be is the Saturday family Mass before the big game.”

Rooney went on to say, “I remember as a young boy, after every game – no matter how big – the team would come into the locker room, take a knee, and recite the Lord’s Prayer.  Only after the prayer would Coach Chuck Noll, another man of great Christian faith, say his post game comments.

“Tony Dungy was a Steelers player and assistant coach then, and Noll’s quiet faith and leadership style shaped Coach Dungy’s.  It’s no accident that Coach Mike Tomlin, a protégé of Coach Dungy’s, leads the team in line with how Noll and Dungy led.  This has always been the Steelers’ way, the Rooney way, which is really founded upon the rock of our Christian faith.  No matter who wins the game on Sunday, the Bidwells, Rooneys, and many players on both sides will give thanks to God after, and this says more about our country then the game itself.”

And while their respective teams will be in a fierce battle on the field at Raymond James Stadium this Sunday, the owners of the Arizona Cardinals have been friends with the Rooney family since the founding of the NFL, and are also deeply committed Christians.

Curt Warner, the quarterback of the Cardinals is known for starting every interview by thanking God.  Troy Polamalu, the long-haired free safety for the Steelers said at Super Bowl media day, “I feel like faith is the foundation of everything I do on the field and off.  It determines how you live your life when you love God.”

Steelers Defensive end Aaron Smith said he relies on his faith and prayers to God, along with a men’s ministry book, “The Sampson Syndrome,” as his 5-year-old son Elijah battles leukemia. “My prayers are thanking the Lord for every minute I get to raise him,” Smith said.

Steelers Head Coach Mike Tomlin said, “First and foremost, I want people to know who I am and what the most important thing is in my life, my relationship with Jesus Christ.  Football is what we do; faith is who we are all the time.”

…..Says the movement must never stop trying to overturn Roe v Wade . . . (Archbishop Raymond Burke) particularly urged pro-life and family people to be on guard against becoming discouraged. “Discouragement is itself a prime temptation that Satan uses to get people to stop working for the good”…..

By Hilary White – Rome Correspondent, January 30, 2009, LifeSiteNews.com

VATICAN CITY – In an exclusive interview with LifeSiteNews.com earlier this week, Archbishop Raymond Burke sent a message of support from Rome to those in the U.S. who defend human life and the traditional family, telling them not to give up the fight, even though things may seem dire with the election of Barack Obama.

The Archbishop particularly urged pro-life people to continue the political and legal battle against the 1973 US Supreme Court decision, Roe vs. Wade, that legalised abortion.

“We are in a very dark period for the pro-life movement, which means that now we have really to re-double all of our efforts,” he said.

The new president, Archbishop Burke said, must hear from the American people “who I believe are, in the end, pro-life, above all else.” But the time has come, with the election of the man who is being called by pro-life advocates the “most pro-abortion president” in US history, to announce clearly and firmly the message of the sanctity of life and family more than at any other time.

“There can never be any let-up on the effort to overturn Roe versus Wade,” he said, “because there is, at its deepest core, our most unjust judicial decision. It has to be overturned.”

He agreed that people of good will could work with the Obama administration to provide improved services to women in crisis pregnancies and pointed out that the Catholic Church has “above all, been in the forefront of that.” But, he said, “that can never exempt us from the duty” to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

Despite the difficulties ahead, he urged the pro-life people to be the “tough who get going when the going gets tough.”

“It’s going to depend upon the pro-life movement to make that voice heard, and to get people to express to the president their dismay with what he’s doing, so that he understands that the people of the United States are not for the murder of infants in the womb.”

LifeSiteNews.com spoke to Archbishop Burke, who is regarded as a hero by many in the pro-life and family movement, at his offices in Rome, where he was recently appointed by Pope Benedict XVI as head of the Catholic Church’s highest tribunal, the Apostolic Signatura. The office of Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura is normally regarded as a “red hat” position that brings with it appointment as a Cardinal. It is widely expected among Vatican watchers that Pope Benedict will name Archbishop Burke a Cardinal at the next consistory.

He told LifeSiteNews.com that he is becoming “very concerned” at the number of people who have written to him to say that the election of Obama is a sign that the pro-life movement has definitively failed to overturn Roe vs. Wade. He particularly denounced the idea, put forward by some in the pro-life movement in the US, that the time has come to abandon the fight against Roe and turn exclusively to “education” and to cooperate with the new administration in “reducing abortions” by improving welfare and health services for women.

Archbishop Burke responded, saying, “To me this is a form of self-deception because the law itself is one of the principle teachers in any culture, and you have a law, a decision of the Supreme Court of your country, which says, in effect, that an infant in the womb can be destroyed right up to the time of birth and even in the act of birth.”

Until Roe vs. Wade is overturned, he said, “that law remains a teacher in the culture” and “represents a direction given to the life of the society, of the nation.

“So I’m very concerned that some of the dedicated pro-life people don’t fall prey to this false reasoning, and then not continue their work for the repeal of this Supreme Court decision.”

Archbishop Burke is known in the US as one of the most outspoken members of the US hierarchy on the Church’s teachings on the sanctity of life. He was the first among a very small number of US Bishops who enforced can. 915 of the Code of Canon Law, saying that pro-abortion Catholic politicians are not to be given Holy Communion.  His position was confirmed by a letter of then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger in June of 2004.  Upon the announcement of his transfer to Rome, Judie Brown, the president of the American Life League, said, “Archbishop Burke’s contributions to the Church go beyond anybody’s imagination. He is among the most courageous bishops that I have known in my entire life.”

The archbishop said, “I have been for years very much in the heart of the pro-life movement as I believe that I should be as a bishop.”

“It was painful for me to leave the United States because of my strong conviction about the importance of strong leadership, a prophetic leadership on the part of the bishops in the whole work of promoting the respect for human life.”

He particularly urged pro-life and family people to be on guard against becoming discouraged. “Discouragement is itself a prime temptation that Satan uses to get people to stop working for the good,” he said.  “But the minute you give into discouragement he can get you to do whatever he wants. But if we are people of life, if we are people who honour the dignity of every human life, then we also are necessarily people of hope.

“I understand, from a human point of view, why people are discouraged and why they want to give up or try some radically different approach, but as people of hope we don’t have any choice in this matter. We have to continue the battle.”

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

North American Leaders Bid Farewell to Pro-Life Hero Archbishop Burke
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/jun/08062709.html

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jan/09013011.html

Fr. James Farfaglia, Corpus Christi, Tx, January 30, 2009

Friday of the Third Week of Ordinary Time, Jan. 31, 009

Father Ernest Daly, LC

Mark 4:26-34
Jesus said to the crowds, “This is how it is with the kingdom of God; it is as if a man were to scatter seed on the land and would sleep and rise night and day and the seed would sprout and grow, he knows not how. Of its own accord the land yields fruit, first the blade, then the ear, then the full grain in the ear. And when the grain is ripe, he wields the sickle at once, for the harvest has come.” He said, “To what shall we compare the kingdom of God, or what parable can we use for it? It is like a mustard seed that, when it is sown in the ground, is the smallest of all the seeds on the earth. But once it is sown, it springs up and becomes the largest of plants and puts forth large branches, so that the birds of the sky can dwell in its shade.” With many such parables he spoke the word to them as they were able to understand it. Without parables he did not speak to them, but to his own disciples he explained everything in private.

Introductory Prayer: Lord, I come into your presence with openness of heart. I know that you want to plant your seed in me and help it to bear fruit. I trust that you will pour out your mercy on me as I spend this time with you. I want to love you more and become a better instrument of your love.

Petition:Lord, help me contemplate the action of your grace upon the world and fully cooperate with you.

1. Steady Growth Jesus reminds me that his grace is working in the world. His message carries an interior dynamism that affects souls and brings about change in them. I think of someone who has surprised me by a sudden conversion or steady growth in Christian living. I see many people who are working on projects of evangelization or are full of Christian charity. I see many other people who are trying in their secular occupations to do their part to make this world better. I contemplate the many families that are striving to be places of love in which each person is valued as a unique gift. This is the seed of the Gospel that grows silently without our knowing how.

2. When the Grain Is Ripe God, in his mercy, often adds years to our life so that we can learn wisdom and produce in our actions fruit that is worthy of eternity. How much do I value the opportunities I have each day to do simple acts of charity or leave messages that have a beneficial effect on others? How often do I pray for others? Each day, I should be attentive to the small and big opportunities the Lord gives me to help establish his kingdom more deeply in my soul and in the souls of others.

3. Disproportionate Strength Like the image of the mustard tree in the parable, Christ’s grace sustains many men and women throughout the world. People discover in Christ’s friendship the true home their hearts seek and the communion with all men they intuitively desire. What a great gift we have in the Church! Let us try to make it a true home for all people. Let us partake deeply of its teachings and its grace and become more deeply a gift for others. The strength of love sustains us.

Conversation with Christ: Lord, thank you for the workings of your grace in so many souls. I want to be united with your grace throughout this day and throughout my life. Help me to use this day in such a way that I will be planting your love around me.

Resolution: Today I will take time to say a special prayer or make a special sacrifice for the conversion of sinners.

http://www.regnumchristi.org/english/articulos/articulo.phtml?se=363&ca=975&te=735&id=20302

CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY, JANUARY 31, 2009

John was born in 1815 in Recchi, Italy. When John was two, his father died prematurely. As a boy, John lived on a farm with his family doing the only thing they knew how, farming. Poverty and a lack of formal education in the home did not stop the growth of John Bosco as a person. His mother was for real, realizing the importance of God in life.

Getting a formal education was a constant struggle for John. The family finances being what they were, his brothers felt that he was wasting time, energy, and money and that it would be better for all if he stopped going to school and worked on the farm, earning money.

John was talented. He must have understood physical fitness for as a youngster he was known and respected as the town¹s acrobat and juggler. Many would assemble to witness his tricks. What was amazing is the fact that before any performance he would ask his audience to join him in prayer. God was his friend.

This friendship with God became powerful and slowly John prepared for the priesthood. In 1841 at the age of 26, John was ordained priest. He was now ready to make his contribution toward the poor and homeless.

While in Turin, the rejects of society appealed to him. His awareness of ³what could be² in them motivated him to commit his work and style of living to the building of people. His life is unbelievable as his burning love brought him to hospitals and prisons, to the troubled and the dying. His ministry forced him to beg for jobs for the boys he was helping, visited private homes, taught night classes, heard confessions, and celebrated the Eucharist. His life was deeply questioned by his confreres. He was deeply disturbing the establishment and efforts were made by the authorities to have him committed to a mental asylum. Somehow God took care of him as he attempted to help the people around him. His life was so full that his health began to fail.

John’s mother shared his dream and worked along with him. One of his boys, Dominic Savio, was also extraordinary and the Church declared him a saint.

John died at the age of 73 in 1888 ending a life spent for others. His work lives on in the Salesian order he founded.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/saint.php?n=133

FOXNEWS.COM, JAN. 30 2009

…..One Wonders. . . Is Obama a Figure-Head Sitting Aboard a Big Clinton Machine? Crossing the Line Between Politics and Media . . . Where does Obama Begin and End?….

WATCH: http://www.foxnews.com/video-search/m/21815273/conflict_call.htm

Mrs. Regina Childress with the Reverend Childress and the good Sisters of Life.   At right is Francis Petersen, who sang our National Anthem.

Then the Reverend Clenard Childress of LEARN went to work.  If you’ve ever heard him speak, you know what that means!

At this year’s Walk for Life West Coast young people are everywhere!

The Walk begins–the Pro-Life cause includes everybody!

This year’s speakers were wonderful! Video can be found on our 2009 press page.

January 27, 2009

2009 West Coast Walk For Life from Matteo on Vimeo.

–Galatians 1:15-17

http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/galatians/galatians1.htm

Patriot Post, Friday Digest – Vol. 09 No. 04

“The fact that we are talking about this very large, by traditional standards, recovery package is an acknowledgment that the — the — the right-wing philosophy of ‘leave the market alone,’ it hasn’t worked. Now, it’s a mistake sometimes politically to accept your basic victory and then get too bitterly embroiled over the details. This is a repudiation of the Republican conservative philosophy and an affirmation of what’s traditionally been Democratic philosophy, which is private and public sectors can work together constructively.”

–Rep. Barney Frank (S-MA)

http://patriotpost.us/

Patriot Post, Friday Digest – Vol. 09 No. 04

“A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

–Second Amendment, United States Constitution

To support and defend…

WASHINGTON — Every new president flatters himself that he, kinder and gentler, is beginning the world anew. Yet, when Barack Obama in his inaugural address reached out to Muslims with “to the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect,” his formulation was needlessly defensive and apologetic.

Is it “new” to acknowledge Muslim interests and show respect to the Muslim world? Obama doesn’t just think so, he said so again to millions in his al-Arabiya interview, insisting on the need to “restore” the “same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.”

Astonishing. In these most recent 20 years — the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world — America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them.

It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved — and resulted in — the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq.

The two Balkan interventions — as well as the failed 1992-93 Somali intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) — were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake. In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on earth. Why are we apologizing?

And what of that happy U.S.-Muslim relationship that Obama imagines existed “as recently as 20 or 30 years ago” that he has now come to restore?

Thirty years ago, 1979, saw the greatest U.S.-Muslim rupture in our 233-year history:   Iran’s radical Islamic revolution, the seizure of the U.S. embassy, the 14 months of America held hostage.

Which came just a few years after the Arab oil embargo that sent the United States into a long and punishing recession. Which, in turn, was preceded by the kidnapping and cold-blooded execution by Arab terrorists of the U.S. ambassador in Sudan and his charge d’affaires.

This is to say nothing of the Marine barracks massacre of 1983, and the innumerable attacks on U.S. embassies and installations around the world during what Obama now characterizes as the halcyon days of U.S.-Islamic relations.

Look. If Barack Obama wants to say, as he said to al-Arabiya, I have Muslim roots, Muslim family members, have lived in a Muslim country — implying a special affinity that uniquely positions him to establish good relations — that’s fine.   But it is both false and deeply injurious to this country to draw a historical line dividing America under Obama from a benighted past when Islam was supposedly disrespected and demonized.

As in Obama’s grand admonition:   “We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith’s name.” Have “we” been doing that, smearing Islam because of a small minority? George Bush went to the Islamic Center in Washington six days after 9/11, when the fires of Ground Zero were still smoldering, to declare “Islam is peace,” to extend fellowship and friendship to Muslims, to insist that Americans treat them with respect and generosity of spirit.

And America listened. In these seven years since 9/11 — seven years during which thousands of Muslims rioted all over the world (resulting in the death of more than 100) to avenge a bunch of cartoons — there’s not been a single anti-Muslim riot in the United States to avenge the greatest massacre in U.S. history. On the contrary.

In its aftermath, we elected our first Muslim member of Congress and our first president of Muslim parentage.

“My job,” says Obama, “is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.” That’s his job? Do the American people think otherwise? Does he think he is bravely breaking new ground? George Bush, Condoleezza Rice and countless other leaders offered myriad expressions of that same universalist sentiment.

Every president has the right to portray himself as ushering in a new era of this or that. Obama wants to pursue new ties with Muslim nations, drawing on his own identity and associations. Good. But when his self-inflation as redeemer of U.S.-Muslim relations leads him to suggest that pre-Obama America was disrespectful or insensitive or uncaring of Muslims, he is engaging not just in fiction but in gratuitous disparagement of the country he is now privileged to lead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/01/us_respected_and_bled_for_musl.html

By Gary Bauer, HUMAN EVENTS, 01/30/2009

Scanning the new White House website can be an exercise in anger management for conservatives. The two dozen items under “The Agenda” section constitute a laundry list of leftwing policy goals and big government initiatives. But I was encouraged to see that our new president seemed to have at least one item prioritized correctly. Under “Homeland Security,” President Obama acknowledges that “[t]he first responsibility of any president is to protect the American people.”

Sadly, in the opening days of his administration, President Obama appears determined to accomplish something much different: to reassure the Muslim world that we no longer have the resolve to protect ourselves.

Last week, he extended new rights to terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay while authorizing the sentencing to death of innocent children around the world through taxpayer-funded abortion.

Things didn’t improve this week. In his first TV interview as president, with Dubai-based Al-Arabiya news channel, Obama made three assertions that provide insight into our new president’s worldview. It’s not very reassuring.

First, President Obama said he felt his “job” was to communicate “to the Muslim world … that the Americans are not your enemy.” Why does the American president feel compelled to reassure Muslims that Americans are not their enemy? It was the United States that was attacked on 9-11 by jihadists acting in the name of Islam.

Our response to that cowardly attack was to send our military not to subjugate Muslims but to liberate millions in Iraq and Afghanistan from the rule of tyrants.

Citizens of both countries were able to vote for the first time in their lives. In Afghanistan today, in areas where the U.S. is in control, Muslim girls are permitted to go to school. Where radical Islamists are in control, acid is thrown in the faces of girls who try to go to school, and their classrooms are blown up.

After the 9-11 attack, we went out of our way to ensure that mosques in the United States were safe from any kind of backlash. American politicians visited mosques and prefaced every statement about the attack by reassuring Muslims that America was not at war with a faith but only with its extreme adherents.

Muslims are arguably treated better in America today than they were before Muslim extremists declared war on us. We have Muslim members of Congress, and we go out of our way to accommodate Islamic religious practices. Taxpayer money is spent around the world to renovate mosques, and the U.S. gives billions in humanitarian assistance and foreign military aid to Muslim countries.

One might think Muslims would be the ones trying to reassure us that they are not our enemy. But I have yet to hear one Muslim leader do so. In fact, throughout the Muslim world, Christians and Jews continue to be persecuted. We hear that the U.S. and Israel are to blame for everything from Islamic nations’ lack of economic development to 9-11 itself.

Every day in the Palestinian territories — on television, in movies and in music — there is a steady diet of incitements against Jews, who are routinely compared to apes and monkeys. Palestinian students are taught that Jews use the blood of kidnapped Muslim children in religious ceremonies.

During his interview, President Obama told his Muslim audience that he had another task: “to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives.”

Even if the president is right, my first reaction is: So what? Muslims who simply want to enjoy peace and quiet are not the problem. It’s the Muslims who nurture groups like Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and countless other murderous fanatics who have become the subject of investigation.

I met with Indian leaders this week to talk about the problem of Islamic terror in the world’s largest democracy. They told me that extremism is a big problem among the 14 percent of their population that’s Muslim, and the situation is deteriorating

Even if only ten percent of the Muslim world supports these murderers, then our enemy numbers 150 million.

Of course, freedom-loving nations cannot rely on the “international community” for help. As Joseph Loconte reports in The Weekly Standard Online, the United Nations General Assembly recently approved a “defamation of religions” resolution complaining that Islam is “frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.” The resolution encourages member states to take legal action against “discrimination, intimidation, and acts of violence in the name of religion.” But, as Loconte notes, the resolution names only Islam and Muslims as “targets of defamation… In a breathtaking omission, the U.N. document makes no mention of the appalling levels of persecution against dissenting Muslims and non-Muslim minorities in much of the Arab world.”

President Obama talks about a new kind of foreign policy that emphasizes diplomacy over dictation. But what about the diplomacy of freedom? Like Obama, President Bush routinely reassured Muslims that Americans are not their enemy. But, unlike Obama, he did it by reassuring them that the United States would not abandon them in their struggle for freedom.

Obama also said that America was not born as a colonial power and that he hoped for a restoration of “the same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago.” But 30 years ago, the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran declared war against the West, a war he initiated by seizing the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and taking American hostages.

Twenty years ago, the U.S. shot down two Libyan jets over the Gulf of Sidra, Hezbollah militants tortured and killed an American Marine, and the Soviet Union finished pulling out of Afghanistan, a move that allowed the Taliban to entrench itself there.

Perhaps our President wants to take us back to a time of American hostages and fundamentalist coups. Or maybe he’s just a very poor student of history. Either way, it’s not very reassuring.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30479

By James Todd, Pewsitter.com, January 29, 2009

Earlier this month, in the days leading up to his inauguration, President Obama promoted a comparison between himself and Lincoln. They were both from Illinois, Obama made the same train stops on his way to the inauguration as Lincoln, Obama used Lincoln’s bible for the swearing in ceremony.. and there are others. However, these similarities are largely superficial ones. On more substantive issues the comparison between the two Presidents reveals not a similarity but an irony.

President Lincoln, our 16th President, fought to rid the country of slavery and to free the slaves. His motivation was simple and expressed most eloquently and succinctly in the Lincoln Douglas debates. In response to a Douglas comment about slavery, Lincoln said “There is no right to do a wrong.”

The Dred Scott decision, which had been handed down before Lincoln became President, had enabled slavery to continue by designating the worth or value of a black man at 3/5′s of a person. Since blacks weren’t fully persons that could be bought and sold, mistreated abused and even killed. In short they were not persons so they were denied basic and fundamental human rights.

Today in 2009, almost 150 years after Lincoln’s election to the same Office, President Obama is facing a similar moral imperative. Like Dred Scott, Roe vs. Wade has made large scale abortion possible in the U.S. by declaring that the unborn are not persons. Like their slave counterparts 150 years ago, babies in the womb suffer the ultimate injustice – which is death.

President Obama stands at the cross roads of history in 2009. Lincoln, one of our greatest presidents, had the moral courage to stand up for what was right. In doing so, after a bloody civil war, he was able to free the slaves and rid the country of slavery. Lincoln’s place in history and his recognition as one of our greatest Presidents was achieved because of this.

The country and President Obama are confronted with no less a moral injustice as Lincoln did with slavery when it comes to the unborn. Unlike Lincoln, who understood that there is no “right” to commit a wrong, Obama has not only refused to fight to protect the unborn and free them from persecution, but he has made it clear that the discrimination and wanton killing of the unborn is a “right” that should be protected.

The irony of an African American man in the oval office – - made possible by Lincoln’s stand against injustice — imposing legislatively through FOCA and judicially through his stated support of Roe v. Wade, the continued unjust discrimination against his fellow man – the sanctioned and protected killing via abortion, stands in stark contrast with Lincoln.

Lincoln’s triumph enabled President Obama’s historic election.

President Obama’s tragedy of abandoning the unborn, will undoubtedly rob this country of other future leaders, scientist, composers, and perhaps even the country’s first woman president.

On the superficial realities there are similarities between our 44th President and our 16th, but substantively, on the great moral issues of the day, there is contrast and hypocrisy. President Obama may want to rethink that Lincoln analogy; at this juncture Lincoln’s shoes are much too big for Obama to fill.

CNN’s Campbell Brown asks Obama administration officials to do what they think is best for the country….MR. OBAMA… ‘Be Straight With Us’

“My view is simple: Mr. President, if you want to hire former lobbyists because you think they are the best people to do the job, then hire former lobbyists. Just don’t hold a big news conference first to tell us how your administration is going to be so different from previous administrations in that you won’t be hiring lobbyists….It’s the hypocracy and the double-talk that makes so many of us so cynical…Just be straight with us……….”

…It’s sad that it took so long for Republicans to take a united stand against government spending, but better late than never . . . the horrendous $819 billion stimulus package is a rotten piece of legislation that uses the economic crisis as a pretext to spend hundreds of billions on a hodgepodge of long-standing Democratic pet projects….

By Philip Klein, AMERICAN SPECTATOR, 1.30.09

For eight years, conservatives pounded their heads against the wall as Republicans not only squandered an opportunity to reduce the size of government, but used their time in power to usher in a bold new era of runaway spending.

Those on the right watched a Republican-controlled Congress vote for the largest expansion of entitlements since the Great Society in the form of the Medicare prescription drug bill, for increasing the role of the federal government in education through No Child Left Behind, and for one pork-laden budget after another. Even after being thrown out of Congress in 2006, Republicans didn’t get the message, and in his last major act as president, George W. Bush signed a $700 billion bailout that enjoyed the support of 91 House Republicans.

Conservatives were left wondering: what will it take for Republicans to finally join in solidarity against extravagant government spending? This week, they got their answer. With President Bush now out of office, conservatives and moderates alike were willing to stand up to the White House in the name of fiscal restraint, and not a single House Republican voted for the horrendous $819 billion stimulus package.

This wasn’t for a lack of trying by the new President. Eager to gain bipartisan cover for the bill, President Obama had pulled out all of the stops. He invited House Republicans to the White House, and he visited them on Capitol Hill.

When he assailed Rush Limbaugh, President Obama’s aim wasn’t to boost the radio show host’s ratings.  By telling Republican lawmakers, “You can’t just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done,” Obama was trying to brand opponents of his agenda as irresponsible and ultimately fringe characters, more fit for the freak show at Coney Island than the halls of Congress.

But House Republicans didn’t bite.

“This was a bipartisan rejection of a partisan bill,” said House minority leader John Boehner, who was a sponsor of No Child Left Behind and a supporter of the Medicare prescription drug plan under President Bush, but who helped lead the opposition to the stimulus package. Eleven Democrats also voted against the legislation.

House GOP whip Eric Cantor did an admirable job keeping Republicans united, while helping to craft alternative proposals that will enable them to go back to their districts to say they voted for something.

Opposition to the bill was a no-brainer for Republicans.

Objectively, it’s a rotten piece of legislation that uses the economic crisis as a pretext to spend hundreds of billions on a hodgepodge of long-standing Democratic pet projects. Voting for it would have only strengthened President Obama without providing Republicans with any political upside.

If the economy improves and the stimulus bill is viewed as a success in the fall of 2010, it will be a good election for Democrats regardless of whether some Republicans voted for the package. If unemployment remains high and the bill is seen as a lemon, it will help Republicans — but only if they are on record opposing it.

As of now, depending on the poll, support for the legislation ranges anywhere from tepid to outright weak. Gallup found that 52 percent of Americans supported the legislation, a majority, but a rather thin one — especially considering that President Obama’s approval rating has been in the mid-to-high 60s.

A Rasmussen poll was worse, showing just 42 percent of Americans support the package, compared to 39 percent who oppose it. Perhaps more interestingly, the poll found eroding support among unaffiliated voters. “A week ago, unaffiliateds were evenly divided on the plan, with 37% in favor and 36% opposed,” according to Rasmussen. “Now, 50% of unaffiliated voters oppose the plan while only 27% favor it.” Continue reading →

Posted by Tom McFeely, National Catholic Register, January 29, 2009

Screenshot of NBC’s Super Bowl website.

NBC has refused to air CatholicVote.org’s new pro-life ad during its broadcast of this Sunday’s Super Bowl game.

According to a Jan. 29 press release from CatholicVote.org, “After several days of negotiations, an NBC representative in Chicago told CatholicVote.org late yesterday that NBC and the NFL are not interested in advertisements involving ‘political candidates or issues.’”

Brian Burch, president of CatholicVote.org, said in the press release, “There is nothing objectionable in this positive, life-affirming advertisement. We show a beautiful ultrasound, something NBC’s parent company GE has done for years. We congratulate Barack Obama on becoming the first African-American President. And we simply ask people to imagine the potential of each human life.”

The 30-second ad has no graphic content nor even any direct references to abortion.

It features an ultrasound image of a baby in the womb and images of Barack Obama, along with a narration describing how the president’s mother chose to give birth to him and nurtured him as a single mother after his Kenyan-born father left the family, allowing Obama to grow up to become the nation’s first African-American president.

The pro-life ad can be viewed here at CatholicVote.org’s website, as well as here and here at the Daily Blog’s earlier posts regarding the ad. It was released Jan. 19 by CatholicVote.org, timed to coincide with Obama’s inauguration the next day.   It immediately became one of YouTube’s most watched videos after it was posted on the Internet.

The ad was broadcast on the Black Entertainment Television in Chicago during its Jan. 21 coverage of the presidential inauguration.

In a Jan. 27 interview, Burch told the Daily Blog that NBC officials had just told him that their legal department had decided the pro-life ad was suitable for airing during Sunday’s Super Bowl broadcast after watching the CatholicVote.org video.

Burch, who is also president of the Fidelis Center for Law and Policy, told the Daily Blog that a NBC official said to him about the ad, “I’m neither pro-life nor pro-choice, but this is the best pro-life ad I’ve ever seen.”

The Daily Blog has contacted NBC for comment about the corporation’s subsequent decision to refuse to air CatholicVote.org’s pro-life ad and is awaiting a reply.

Burch said in the Jan. 29 CatholicVote.org press release that a double standard appears to have been applied against the pro-life ad. Burch noted that an animal-rights ad submitted by PETA for airing on this year’s Super Bowl broadcast was rejected for excessive sexual content, not for its advocacy of a political issue.

Said Burch, “NBC claims it doesn’t allow advocacy ads, but that’s not true. They were willing to air an ad by PETA if they would simply tone down the sexual suggestiveness.  Our ad is far less provocative and hardly controversial by comparison.”

Added Burch, “The purpose of our new ad is to spread a message of hope about the potential of every human life, including the life of Barack Obama.”

B. Hussein Obama Promises to Sign FOCA

B. Hussein Obama:  “…We’re at a crossroads right now in America and we have to move this country forward. . . .There will always be people, many of good will,  who do not share my view on the issue of “choice” . . . on this fundamental issue, I will Not Yield and Planned Parenthood will not yield . . . when the real war is being fought abroad, they would have us fight Culture Wars here at home . . . but I am absolutely convinced Culture Wars are so 90′s . . . Their days are growing dark…it is time to turn the page…We want a new day here in America…We’re tired about arguing about the ‘same old stuff” . . .”…

Question from audience:  …”what would you do at the Federal level, not only to insure access to abortion but to make sure that the judicial nominees that you will inevitably be able to pick are true to the Core Tennets to Roe v. Wade”…

B. Hussein Obama Answers:  “Well the first think I’d do as president is sign the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA)…that’s the first thing that I’d do’ . . . I am absolutely convinced we’re not only going to win an election, we’re going to transform this nation”…..

CNSNews TV, Online with Terry Jeffrey, Monday,

January 26, 2009 EST

Life Prize winner Jill Stanek describes the fight for a law to

protect babies who survive abortion.

…. scientism has its roots in Darwinism. . . . Tufts University professor Daniel Dennett writes that Darwinism, rightly understood, is a “universal acid” that dissolves away all traditional moral, metaphysical, and religious beliefs…..

By Charles Colson, CATHOLIC EXCHANGE, January 30th, 2009

In his inaugural address, President Obama said he would “restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality.” By this, many suspect he means to spend taxpayer money on embryonic stem cell research, which destroys humans at the embryonic stage.

Evidently, President Obama has been listening to those who want research funded, some because they are driven by greed but many others driven by a dangerous worldview called scientism.

As Nancy Pearcey and I write in our book, How Now Shall We Live?, scientism has its roots in Darwinism. Tufts University professor Daniel Dennett writes that Darwinism, rightly understood, is a “universal acid” that dissolves away all traditional moral, metaphysical, and religious beliefs. For if humans have evolved by a material, purposeless process, then there is no basis for believing in a God who created us and revealed moral truths, or imposing those moral views in any area of life.

Dennett is using a common tactic-using science as a weapon to shoot down religious faith. The standard assumption is that science is objective knowledge, while religion is an expression of subjective need. Religion, therefore, must subordinate its claims about the world to whatever science decrees.

Scientism assumes that science is the controlling reality about life, so anything that can be validated scientifically ought to be done. Other things are subjective fantasy-like love, beauty, good, evil, conscience, ethics.

So science, which originally simply meant the study of the natural world, has in this view been conflated with scientific naturalism, a philosophy that the natural world is all that exists.

Humans are reduced to “objects” that can be inspected, experimented on, and ultimately controlled. In 1922, G.K. Chesterton warned that scientism had become a “creed” taking over our institutions, a “system of thought which began with Evolution and has ended in Eugenics.”

C.S. Lewis warned that the rise of scientific naturalism would lead to “the abolition of man,” for it denies the reality of those things central to our humanity: a sense of right and wrong, of purpose, of beauty, of God.

And if we deny the things that make us truly human, by definition we create a culture that is inhuman-a culture that, for example, embraces moral horrors like the killing of humans at the earliest stage of life on the spurious grounds that doing so might cure other people’s diseases. Or cloning. Or medical experiments on humans, as the Nazis conducted.

Our task is to expose the flaws in scientific naturalism-not because we are against science but because we want it to fill its proper role as a means of investigating God’s world and alleviating suffering within ethical boundaries.

And it’s right that we should be doing this because it was a Christian view of reality that led to the scientific method, investigating all the things God has created.

I hope that the President, in using those words, understood the difference between good science and scientism.

This update courtesy of BreakPoint.

http://catholicexchange.com/2009/01/30/115272/

CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY, JAN. 29, 2009

Washington DC  (CNA) – Writing on behalf of the U.S. bishops, Bishop William F. Murphy of Rockville Centre, New York urged Congress to make poor families and vulnerable workers central priorities in economic recovery legislation.

“Low-income families and individuals are experiencing the greatest hardship and have the least capacity to cope in this time of economic crisis,” said Bishop Murphy, Chairman of the Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).

Writing in a Jan. 28 letter, he also argued these people are most likely to use new resources on essentials and would thus advance the economy.

Bishop Murphy offered the bishops’ collective support on recovery legislation which would increase funding for nutrition assistance through food stamps and other programs, protect low-income families from losing Medicaid and social service assistance, and extend unemployment insurance benefits.

According to Bishop Murphy’s letter, the bishops “strongly support” efforts to support and expand the refundable child tax credit and the Earned Income Tax credit.

The bishop also advocated the rejection of measures concerning contraception and immigration.

He argued that efforts to increase family planning funding neglect women’s “real needs” and “serve no legitimate purpose.” Pursuing a family planning agenda, he warned, could even reduce basic health coverage if regulations are introduced that cancel support for health benefit programs which do not include contraceptive coverage.

He further cautioned that some regulations would effectively make family planning clinics, many of which are abortion providers, a “necessary entry point” into the health care system. This would ignore women’s genuine needs “as well as their moral concerns.”

Bishop Murphy said the bishops “strongly oppose” a measure requiring that every stimulus package funding recipient use employee identity verification system designed to verify that employees are U.S. citizens or legal residents. He argued that the system’s database has an “unacceptably high” error rate and requiring the system would increase the costs of small businesses, schools and hospitals, state and local governments and non-profit organizations required to enroll in the system.

“We urge Congress to act quickly and wisely with a constant attention to addressing the human impact and moral dimensions of this recession,” Bishop Murphy’s letter concluded. “I pray that working together you can find the courage, wisdom, and skill to build a prosperous economy with greater justice for all.”

Thursday of the Third Week in Ordinary Time, JAN. 30. 2009

Father Ernest Daly, LC

Mark 4:21-25

Jesus said to his disciples, “Is a lamp brought in to be placed under a bushel basket or under a bed, and not to be placed on a lampstand? For there is nothing hidden except to be made visible; nothing is secret except to come to light. Anyone who has ears to hear ought to hear.” He also told them, “Take care what you hear. The measure with which you measure will be measured out to you, and still more will be given to you. To the one who has, more will be given; from the one who has not, even what he has will be taken away.”

Introductory Prayer: Lord, thank you for reminding me today of my dignity as a Christian. By your grace in baptism and by your teaching in the gospels and in the Church, you have put light in my soul. Lord, you are my light.

Petition: Lord Jesus, help me to be a sincere witness of your light.

1. Transparency in Our Lives God sees us. This is a simple truth—an extremely powerful truth. God looks at us with love. We cannot hide from ourselves. We cannot really even hide from others. We certainly cannot hide from God. We need to live in the presence of God. God lets light shine on our lives so that we can see the truth about ourselves, and so that we need not be ashamed that others see the truth about who we are. True happiness is preserved and increased by the tenacious living of sincerity.

2.  Light for the World Our life is not just for ourselves. We are called to be a gift for others, a gift that leads them to God. This is the greatest thing about our life: We are called to give life. We are called to participate in the fruitfulness of God. We give life by enlightening others. We help other people come to the light by trying sincerely to go clearly towards the light and by not fearing to show people the truth. The light shed by our lives produces a real effect in souls. Vatican II reminds us that modern man needs reasons for hope. A Christian carries hope. Will I keep it hidden, perhaps even kill it by being afraid to share it? Or will I let the world receive hope? Will I let the world see that we all can be much greater than we think because our Father is greater than we think?

3. Standing up for the Light of Truth to Be Lived Moral relativism seems to be the norm for our times. Many people think that they can decide what principles they will live by, instead of seeking to form their consciences by principles in accordance with God’s loving design for the human person. Am I content merely to follow what I know to be right, or do I also look to enlighten the consciences of others, prudently and charitably? Have I ever given the impression of condoning actions that are wrong? Do I take an interest in promoting the dignity of life in all of its stages? Am I courageous in nobly defending others when people criticize them behind their backs?

Conversation with Christ:Lord, thank you for this calling. You have given light to my soul so that I can be a light for others. Lord, help me to have confidence in the power of your light: the power of your truth and grace. Let me be brave enough to allow this light to penetrate my soul even more today. Let me be brave enough to not hide from your light; let me be brave enough to give it to others.

Resolution:I will  enlighten my conscience better about a point of our faith or morals by looking it up in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (It can be found on-line at http://www.vatican.va if needed).

CATHOLIC NEWS AGENCY, JANUARY 30, 2009

Born of a noble family near Viterbo (Italy,) she entered a local convent of sisters who followed the Third Order Rule. However, she supplied herself with enough food, clothing and other goods to live a very comfortable life amid these sisters pledged to mortification.

A serious illness required that Hyacintha’s confessor bring Holy Communion to her room. Scandalized on seeing how soft a life she had provided for herself, the confessor advised her to live more humbly. Hyacintha disposed of her fine clothes and special foods. She eventually became very penitential in food and clothing; she was ready to do the most humble work in the convent. She developed a special devotion to the sufferings of Christ and by her penances became an inspiration to the sisters in her convent. She was canonized in 1807.