A little presidential history

Do you realize that (barring a last-minute miracle for Ron Paul) this year will mark the first presidential election since 1924 in which neither candidate has seen military service?

There was a spate of service-less elections in the early twentieth century, but those were all contests between men who had come of age in the late 1800s, when the military was mostly composed of professional soldiers and it was unusual for a young man to serve and then go on with his life.

Heck, the latter half of the nineteenth century and most of the twentieth were dominated by veterans of the War Between the States and the Second World War, respectively. Every president between 1945 and 1980 was a combat veteran. (To his credit, President Reagan served but was not allowed into combat service.)

Newt, Rick, Mitt and Barack are all guys who had ample opportunity to serve their country and instead stayed home safe. Embarrassing. I hope it's not going to be a trend. The willingness to place one's body between one's home and danger is a crucial part of what makes a good statesman. And a man who is going to be the commander-in-chief of the armed forces ought to have done his time in those forces.

Disclaimer: I never served myself. I paid a visit to an army recruiter in high school, but was turned down because of my childhood asthma, and I never made any further effort to enlist. To my lasting regret.

A chilling thought

Up to now, I've been assuming that the HHS mandate was simply a colossal misstep on the president's part, thinking that because so many Catholics contracept, he could get away with demanding that the Church buy them contraception. I figured it was going to backfire on him in the election. We make up a fifth of the country, after all, and a majority of Catholics voted for him the last time around. Depriving them of their first amendment rights seems like a sure-fire way to lose in November.

But last night, it occurred to me: what if the president has been reading history and knows exactly what he's doing? What if he's familiar with the Edmunds-Tucker Act?

For those who are maybe less brushed up on religious suppression than our Dear Leader, the Edmunds-Tucker Act outlawed the Mormon church, allowed the government to confiscate its property, and denied the franchise to any practicing Mormon. Incredibly, it was upheld by the Supreme Court, and remained on the books until 1978, although the 1890 manifesto renouncing polygamy made it irrelevant. (Incidentally, one of the petitioners in the case was Mitt Romney's great-uncle.)

Currently, the Catholic Church operates 625 hospitals, 230 colleges and universities and God only knows how many charities (adoption agencies, soup kitchens, homeless shelters, hospices, and so on). What's to stop our Democratic Overlords from confiscating all those institutions and using them as building blocks for a single-payer system? He's already shown that he thinks of the First Amendment as legal Charmin. Why should he respect any of our other rights if he gets away with it the first time?

I suspected this might be coming three years ago, but I didn't think it would ever get to this point, and certainly not on a federal level.

As much as I hate to say it, if the administration won't back down on this point, then the bishops need to close the institutions that aren't covered. Immediately, so that the government doesn't have a chance to seize them. If Obama wants to get us out of the charity field, he's welcome to try, but under no circumstances should we provide him with the facilities he so desperately wants to pervert to immoral uses. I know it's harsh to withdraw so much good from the needy (who aren't to blame for this whole disaster in the first place), but if the alternative is to render unto Caesar the things that are God's, then I don't see that we have much choice.

Pissed off to the point of derangement

(Sorry for the language in this one. But I think it's warranted.)

You know, I promised when he was elected that I wouldn't succumb to Obama Derangement Syndrome. And I think I've stuck pretty well to that. I haven't mocked his teleprompter or claimed that he really was so stupid that he thought there were 57 states. I haven't freaked out at his every move and shouted that he was going to clap us all into concentration camps. Overall, I think I've been pretty respectful to the president.

But that ends now. I want that back-stabbing sonofabitch out of office, whether by election or impeachment. I want his name so besmirched that Democratic politicians will beg him not to endorse them. I want his legacy to be on a par with Nixon's. Catholics (not me, but plenty of others) tipped the scales in his favor in the election, and this is how he repays them?

On second thought, forget the Catholic part. I'm not angry on behalf of my church, but of my country. We're American citizens, God damn it, and we will not be stripped of our guarantee of free exercise of religion. Not by Barack Obama, and not by anybody else. If this be derangement, so be it.

It's time again for Cheesy Christmas Movies!

And you thought I'd forget this year, didn't you?

Today's classic is called "Son of the Navy", from 1940. I posted this one back in 2007, but it's worth a second look.

"Son of the Navy" is one of those movies where Christmas isn't the primary theme, but does provide an excuse for some sentimentality that you couldn't get away with any other time. Consider the plot: young Tommy runs away from an orphanage to find himself a set f parents of his very own. First he bamboozles a sailor (Mike, played by James Dunn) into posing as his father, and Mike goes along with it so he can hitch a ride back to his ship. The two of them are picked up by a beautiful young woman (Jean Parker, as Stevie) and after Mike ships out, the boy keeps up the pretense. In Hollywood fashion, the woman turns out to be a naval officer's daughter, and she's furious that Mike would leave his son behind while he's at sea. Now, I ask you: would you buy that plot even in a B movie?

Of course not, not if it was, say, August or March. But this takes place in December, and Tommy wants a family for Christmas. Mike's shipmates are initially furious with him for abandoning Tommy, but once that's resolved they form themselves up into a squadron of uncles. It's all very family-heavy, and at Christmas, you can get away with a lot of family content.

It helps that there are some solid if underrated actors in this. I cannot fathom why Jean Parker never made it into the big-budget films. James Dunn isn't brilliant, but he's competent. And Martin Spellman, who plays Tommy, is several notches more believable than most of the child actors of his time. (Mr. Spellman is alive and well in California, it appears. One of these days I'd like to call him and see if I can get his thoughts on this film.)

As always, if you watch this, leave me a comment and tell me what you thought.

Oh, for the love of God heaven absolutely nothing!

Apparently all that peace on earth and goodwill toward men is just too much for the professional dogs-in-the-manger to stomach:

For the past 57 years, the churches erected 14 displays along the length of Ocean Avenue depicting scenes from the nativity story about the birth of Jesus Christ using life-size figures.

In all that time, the churches have had little to no competition for the total 21 spaces available for displays, because only three regular applicants took up approximately 16 spaces.

Not this year.

For the first time in the history of the winter holiday displays 13 individuals entered the race for the 21 spaces rather than the usual three, forcing City Hall to use a random lottery system to allot the spots.

That process left the churches with only two spaces on which they can put up only three of the usual 14 scenes.

A Jewish group received one space for a menorah and two individuals snagged a total of 18 spaces for "solstice greetings." One person can request a maximum of nine spaces.

To date, only two of the solstice spots have been filled, and both with set-ups declaring an aversion to organized religion.

So they're snapping up the spaces for the sole purpose of making sure they can't be used.

These people are basically civic vandals. They not only take no joy in a festive season, but they insist on spray-painting over any beauty that anybody else might enjoy. They demonstrate their superiority by pissing all over our traditions. They spew their hatred over us and then call us haters for being happy in spite of them.

A Puritan has been snidely defined as someone who lies awake worrying that somebody somewhere may be having a good time. Scratch a militant atheist, find a Puritan.

Ex-gay penguins

Who'da thunk?

Of course, this is patently impossible. Everybody knows that homosexuality is permanent and since animals engage in it, it must be healthy and natural. It's time for Buddy and Pedro to undergo some sensitivity training. The little h8rs.

Immaculate Conception

Mother! whose virgin bosom was uncrost
With the least shade of thought to sin allied;
Woman! above all women glorified,
Our tainted nature’s solitary boast;
Purer than foam on central ocean tost;
Brighter than eastern skies at daybreak strewn
With fancied roses, than the unblemished moon
Before her wane begins on heaven’s blue coast;
Thy Image falls to earth. Yet some, I ween,
Not unforgiven the suppliant knee might bend,
As to a visible Power, in which did blend
All that was mixed and reconciled in Thee
Of mother’s love with maiden purity,
Of high with low, celestial with terrene!

William Wordsworth


I don't think I could post anything better about the Blessed Mother than I did back when this blog was new.

Christians in the lead...

... in Muslim Spain. From Wikipedia:

Saint Laura of Cordoba' (Spanish: Santa Laura de Córdoba) (died 864) was a Spanish Christian who lived in Muslim Spain during the 9th century. She was born in Córdoba, and became a nun at Cuteclara after her husband died, eventually rising to become an abbess. She was martyred by Muslims who took her captive and scalded her to death by placing her in a vat of boiling lead.

Her feast day is today. How to celebrate?

The times, they are a-changin'

125 years ago, it was illegal for a practicing Mormon to hold public office. Mitt Romney's grandfather was chased out of the country for his religion. Mitt may be our next president.

When Herman Cain was born, his parents took their lives in their hands every time they tried to vote. He wasn't allowed to set foot in the same school as white kids. Herman may be our next president.

When Barack Obama was born, his parents' marriage was illegal in 21 states. Today, he's the president.

Yeah, we've come a long way.

Wanna work? Or just a job?

I got my first full-time employment here when I was 20. My boss, John Landstrom (God rest his foul-mouthed, hot-tempered, honest and generous soul), said to me my first day, "If you're looking for a job, you're in the wrong place. If you want to work, I have some for you." Over the six years I worked for him, I got an education in the difference. Boy, did I.

Since then I've spent a total of maybe four months unemployed. I earned a college degree while working 60 hours a week. I've worked two jobs most of my adult life, and sometimes three. I've lugged furniture, pulled weeds by the road, cleaned ashtrays and toilets, and made deliveries on a motorcycle in 35-degree weather, all in addition to working my way up at the Greatest Newspaper in the Northwest™. I support a family of nine at well below poverty level. Some of that is circumstances and some of that is the result of my own choices, good and bad. That's the way it goes.

Here in tater country, growers are having trouble finding enough legal workers to bring in the harvest. (Fortunately, in these parts nobody scrutinizes a worker's Social Security card too closely and there are still Mexicans doing it. Other places aren't so lucky.) Three generations ago, desperate Okies like my Lovely and Brilliant Wife's family streamed into California looking for any work they could find. They found it and did it: dirt, sore backs, indignity and all.

So forgive me if I'm a little short on sympathy for the college-educated, employable twenty-somethings bitching on Wall Street that they can't find a job. What they mean by that is they can't find convenient, dignified jobs. That hard stuff is for Mexicans and Okies.

Yes, the economy is tight. Yes, a lot of the work that are out there is unpleasant, poorly paid and menial. But there is no work that's less dignified than being unemployed. People who really want to work are the ones doing it. The people who just want a job... well, they're sitting on sidewalks waving signs.

None of the above?

From MSNBC:

So what do we make of Herman Cain’s surprising -- and overwhelming -- victory at Saturday’s Florida Straw Poll? Call it a vote for “None of the Above” by the conservatives who gathered in Orlando.

No, you cretins. We call it a victory by Herman Cain. Pushing him to the back of the news bus isn't going to make him go away.

Anybody want to start a pool on how long it takes before the media actually acknowledge that there's a black contender in the race?

Update: Note the wording of this article in the LA Times. Any time you see someone "insisting" something in in a news story, it means you're supposed to disbelieve it.

Denial is overflowing.

And we wonder why foreigners think we're stupid.

In my dad's day, young guys were required to do things like this. But they didn't get to go home in a week.

Lynch mobs of love

As I've said before, I don't hate gay people. True, I have opinions about the morality of some of their actions, which is not the same thing. The few gay folks I know are probably aware of this and don't really care what I think. So the matter never comes up.

Others aren't so lucky. One blogger's expression of distaste for a homosexual display has thrust her right in the path of the gay jihad. Lavender warriors have bravely descended on her en masse (with their names courageously concealed) to clog up her comment boxes with... well, they're gay, so we can't really call it hate, can we? But certainly extreme disapproval.

Naturally, it's not just that one post that draws their righteous indignation. Anything this blogger writes is up for vilification, as well as any post in her defense. By now someone has certainly traced her home address and phone number. It took me two minutes.

But it's all right, because we're the hateful ones here. They're just loving, peaceful people who happen to form a lynch mob.

Nota bene: I'll tolerate nasty comments up to a point, provided your name and e-mail are included and you keep the language clean. Post anonymously or obscenely, and I'll edit your comments in any way that amuses me.

Who could have seen this coming?

We allow our betters in the school system to groom kids for molestation, and call it "sex education." We bend over backwards (probably the safer direction) to pander to the Pervo-American community, and pride ourselves on our commitment to diversity. We carefully sift out any reference to homosexuality and pretend that being a priest is what makes a man a predator.

And when one man made the mistake of stating the obvious after the Lawrence decision years ago, his very name was turned into a filthy word all across the Internet.

But of course, this is completely out of left field. No connection whatsoever.

Mark Shea said it well: the day will come when the Catholic Church is vilified both for condoning pedophilia and for condemning it.

Teacher who fails to genuflect to his homosexual betters...

... may lose his job for it.

Remember, these are the people who insist they're just like anybody else. So if Buell had expressed his private opinion in favor of same-sex "marriage," would he be hounded from the classroom?

Don't be silly.

New father in town

It looks like we'll be getting us a new priest at The Greatest Catholic Parish in the Northwest™. I'm really sorry to lose Father Felipe, and I'd give a kidney (maybe even one of my own) if we could get Fr. Brooks Beaulaurier back, but that ain't a-gonna happen.

Still, it looks like we're getting a good one in his place. I did a little googling and found this article on him, coincidentally written by a friend of mine. I really like the look of the good Fr. Dufner.

I also happen to agree with him on the question of illegal immigration. My fellow conservatives can like that or lump it. But I didn't do a durn thing to earn my citizenship; I merely had the good fortune to be born into it. Some of the illegal immigrants I've known have done a lot more good than I have here, and yet they can't even apply for fear of being found out. There's something wrong with a system that gives citizenship to useless worms like my daughter's ex-loser, but denies it to people who work 16 hours a day picking asparagus and raise their kids to be upright and decent.

Vancouver riots

When I first read about the aftermath of that hockey game in Vancouver, I was floored. I mean, what does it take to be considered a riot in Canada? Bumping into someone and failing to say "Excuse me?"

I have to confess, I love Vancouver. Back in 1983 when I was 15, my dad was one of the engineers on the project that would eventually become the Skytrain. I went up there to spend a week with him at his hotel in the suburb of Richmond. Since he had to work during the day, he handed me a wad of bills and a bus schedule and said "Here, go explore." I did, as far as my 15-year-old imagination could take me. I've never quite gotten over the city since. I've always thought Vancouver was what San Francisco would have been if it was cleaner and had better weather.

So as I say, the riots surprised me. What sounds completely in character for Vancouver is the response from the ordinary, non-rioting citizens. As soon as it was safe, they came out to the streets and started cleaning up. How many cities does that happen in?

Read this. And then this. Heroism wears a uniform, or a nurse's scrubs. Common decency carries a broom.

What would St. Thomas More do?

So the judge in the Proposition 8 case has been called out on his bias (not that anyone ever thought he was ruling impartially), and a law firm contracted to defend DOMA has been bullied into backing out. This scene is very timely indeed.



I'd say the same thing about a ruling I agreed with. Rigging a trial or intimidating lawyers to ensure that the "good guys" win sets a dangerous precedent. More can be proud of Paul Clement, if of nobody else in this whole business.

To whoever designed the computer system on which we create The Greatest Newspaper in the Northwest™

Sir, I dislike you. Indeed, I hold you in the sort of esteem usually reserved for cockroaches and asparagus. I am in no doubt that your sexual habits are of an unsavory nature and your personal hygiene leaves much to be desired. And it is my fondest hope that one day you will be trapped aboard a boat sinking within sight of the shore, and your mother will be unable to summon help as she runs barking up and down the beach with her ears flapping in the wind.

Bye bye, Mommy!

Because nothing is better for your kids than leaving them behind like worn-out furniture.