Smelling A Mouse, Or: Let’s Talk About “Humble”
So, we are told that Judge Amy Coney Barrett is “mind-blowingly intelligent” and “humble”.
Perhaps I should address a couple of issues that humble, mind-blowingly intelligent people should actually have figured out for themselves.
The first one is that no Catholic, no matter how mind-blowingly intelligent, can think that he can reshape Catholic doctrine. Smart or dumb, a Catholic must believe everything that the Church believes and profess everything that the Church professes. This means, of course, not the blind following of what Francis, or some leftist theologian of questionable virility, states, because they are not the Church. It means, on the contrary, the unconditional adherence to the Depositum Fidei. If this is not understood, no discussion is possible, because you can’t talk Catholicism with a person who does not agree with you on the simple fact of what it means to be a Catholic.
The second, which follows straight from the first, is that a Catholic is in favour of Capital Punishment, full stop. Again, no mind-blowing intelligence is necessary to understand this, but humbleness certainly is.
Amy Coney Barrett is, unless I have been reading fake news, on record with being personally opposed to Capital Punishment. This means that either the mind-blowing intelligence or the humbleness are just not there. She is also not twenty anymore, and as a professed Catholic with a high degree of education, and accustomed to the legal and historic evisceration of the issues she has to deal with, you would expect that she actually knows what the stance of the Church on Capital Punishment is.
I don’t want to say that I smell a rat here, and I will say in her defence that she has refused to stand in the way of capital punishment in her professional capacity. However, I would say that I certainly smell a mouse.
Still, politics is, as Giulio Andreotti used to say, “the art of the Possible”. Trump needs a fast appointment, and he does not want to offer the flank to virtue-signalling, closeted anti-Trumpers, who would ask for nothing better than show the nation their wonderful independence of mind, whilst kow-towing to the mob and looking good in their wealthy Washington circles.
We will know tomorrow. I think it will be Coney Barrett.
I’d have preferred the judge version of Clint Eastwood, or Tom Cotton, or Ted Cruz. But I honestly don’t think any Clint Eastwood-esque judge would make it to Justice before the elections, so this is where we are.
Trump Prepares To Play 4D Chess, Again
I do not like it when certain attributes – like having a vagina, or melanin in one’s skin – are used as a criterium for something that should be based solely on competence, like the decision of who should be the next Supreme Court appointee.
I also notice that even men – who should be less sensitive to social ostracism than women, who are, by their nature, more social and less willing to go for protracted confrontations – tend to “go native” after moving near the champagne-sipping circles of Washington. Roberts is an obvious recent example, let us pray very hard that Gorsuch does not become another. Make no mistake: the social pressure on a woman to align to the social world in which she lives will be massive, and we will need a Margaret Thatcher-like grit to resist to it.
Still, there are good arguments for the, ahem, strategic choice of a woman – provided she would be good enough without any consideration about her sex – for the Supreme Court. In fact, there is even more than can be said for the appointment – with the conditions explained above – of a minority woman. Let me say this once again: of a minority woman who would have been a very decent pick for the Court if she had been a man. Note, in fact, that Trump does not say that the next candidate has to be a woman, because equaliteee. He has said that he will make a choice, and it is likely to (happen to) be a woman.
It would be extremely embarrassing, for the Democrats, to throw mud on a “woman of color”. The fact is, this is something they are not supposed to do, no matter what. If it is fine for Jacob Blake to be a felon, because systemic racism, it must be fine for the minority woman who get picked to be around twenty time more atrocious than embodiments of White Privilege like, to mention one for all, Nancy Pelosi. Whatever issues the candidate would supposedly have – and they would invent some calumnious ones without any compunction – it would be merely the product of the systemic injustice working against all wymyn, particularly wymyn of coooolor, right?
My suspicion is that Trump would, in normal times, relish a protracted fight. But the time is not normal, and there isn’t much of it left. Therefore, he presents the candidate that would make it the most difficult for the Dems to attack him, and creates a situation in which it is easier for Mitch McConnell to put an end to the debate before November, put the thing to a vote and see how Romney, Collins and Murkowski react.
If he wins, he goes into November surfing the wave of success like he is the new edition of the Beach Boys. If he does not win, he can use this to ask the American people to return him and a true Republican Senate majority in November. No one could accuse him of not having done enough. He would be the absolute idol of the Republican masses. The mobilisation would be, I think, huge.
It’s not the situation I would like to be in. But RBG has done all she could to damage the US Institutions – and the Supreme Court in particular – from her very death bed.
Trump needs to play with the hands of card he was given. It seems to me he is about to make a smart play.
March On, Mr President! Make Liberals Cry Again!
I read that the decision has already been made: the Senate is ready to examine the candidate to replace the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
It is late in the day, but not too late. If the Senate plays, there is time not until November, but actually until January. If the usual judases (Murkowski, Romney!) put obstacles in the way, this will inflame the campaign and mobilise even more Trump voters.
I think there is a clear enthusiasm differential between the vast number of clearly pro-life Republicans, and the smaller number of abortion bigots on the other side. This issue might well persuade to vote 1.25, or 1.5, or even 2 Republican voters for every Democrat who will decide to vote to prevent a more conservative Supreme Court. The fact is, the educated people on both sides are voting anyway, but against less educated and perhaps apathetic Republicans who might be moved to go to the poll because they find sufficient motivation in the SCOTUS appointments, there will be much fewer less educated Democrats who have even a faint interest in matters that do not give them a new TV set.
This is, by the way, why Republicans find it so easy to mobilise their voters with the SCOTUS arguments, whilst the Democrats need to stoke racial hatred as the only way to mobilise the overfed backsides of their less educated voters. The fact is that, as I wrote just some days ago, the ground is slowly but surely shifting, and on the matter of the unborn it is the Republicans who are now on the offensive and have the more motivated troops.
In fact, it is not unrealistic to think that, with God’s grace, the emerging of the Supreme Court appointment as a key issue in the 2020 election (whether the replacement for RBG is appointed or not; Breyer isn’t a spring chicken, either, the Wide Latina has health issues, and a 2020 victory opens the door for the replacement of Thomas and Alito with younger, but solidly conservative candidates) will move the one or other religious Black voter, who for mysterious reasons had refused to add two and two, to finally jump on the Trump Train.
March on, Mr President! Make Liberals Cry Again!
RBG: Forgive Me If I Don’t Cry
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has just passed away.
De mortuis nihil nisi bonum, they say. But I have never seen anyone refraining from saying a couple of inconvenient truths about Stalin, Hitler, or Pol Pot. Therefore, I take the beautiful, graceful saying to apply to people not in a public position, and who cannot give scandal or be used to cause evil anymore.
I have said my three Eternal Rest for her. I must confess it was hard. But after I did it for Bin Laden, I set a precedent I want to stick to.
Let me be clear: the news is not as good as when it became known that Hitler had offed himself. But it’s not much worse, either.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a perfect representative of an evil generation of angry feminists, so disappointed that they were born without a willie, that they lost sight of their humanity in the process.
I am pretty sure she did not see herself as a monster helping the killing of millions of babies. Like many people who have deluded themselves that they are good, because they pursue some lofty ideal existing only in their minds, she must have thought of herself as someone who, actually, does some good. Make no mistake, what she thought of herself in her delusion is not of any help to her now.
When sanity comes back, History will remember her as one of the example of the murderous insanity of this utterly insane age.
She was, predictably, openly atheist. As such she is, to all of us, a dire warning of what monsters can grow in the mind of a person, when faith has been kicked out of it. There is no one more evil than those who, without God in their mind, think that they can “change the world”.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has gone to her judgment and, if her life is any indication of the state of her soul at the moment of her death, the destination appears clear: hell, and not even an ordinary suffering in it at that. Jewish, Atheist, and openly abetting baby killing, she was a triple rejection of Christ, and a triple menace to Christianity.
No, I will not cry for her. Instead, I will rejoice in the thought that God’s Perfect Justice is at work at all times. May He have mercy on me, a poor sinner, when I die.
Pray for her because you are a Christian. Think of her poor Guardian Angel, whose tribulations have now come to an end. But do not join the chorus of those who will, now, “celebrate” this piece of feminist, atheist human disgrace.
By now, Ruth Bader Ginsburg has realised that it would have been infinitely, infinitely better for her if she had become, say, a housewife; happy in her role, obedient to her husband, caring for her children and those around her, spreading joy among those who love her and whom she loves; following her religion, even if the wrong one, and one day either joining the Church by God’s Grace, or among the very few who, living and dying in the wrong religion, are, thanks to the inexhaustible Mercy of Our Lord And Saviour, still saved, however little the chance may be.
It was rabid feminism, baby killing, and a rabid chase after her insatiable ego instead.
Let me conclude with one last point, and it will not be an easy one to read.
We do not have the details yet, but it seems unlikely to me that RBG did not know that the end was near, perhaps to the month. My take on this is that she knew, and she chose not to resign anyway, in order to make it as difficult as possible for Trump to appoint a replacement before the election.
This one, ladies and gentlemen, was a bitch to the end.
US Supreme Court: Before The Decision.
To a Continental European like me, the working of the judiciary system in the United States is beyond stupid.
A homosexual judge living in “partnership” with his fellow pervert is allowed to walk over the majority of the voters of a 38 million state and decide that something concerning … him must be against the Constitution because… he is a pervert; after which a process start ending in front of a bunch of people – at least one of whom also officially a pervert – deciding whether what the people have decided is fine, or whether some fat lesbian should not decide it's better to do it her own way.
These judges – including the lesbian – are, following a system which to my knowledge has no parallel in Continental Europe, elected for life. Once a combination of a President without scruples and a Senate ready to back him is given, you can end up with a pervert in the Supreme Court for the next several decades, and can only hope she kicks the bucket fast.
It would still be less absurd if there was a tradition – as in Italy, say – of respect for the will of the democratic elected lawmakers, with the Constitutional Court very attentive not to fall into, so to speak, social engineering by the back door; but this is clearly not the case in the United States, where such elementary rights like the right to be born are trampled under the pretence the Constitution, erm, ahem, well (cough) says so.
It is, therefore, certainly the case that in the United States the biggest social changes of the last decades (abortion, and sodomy) have been introduced or are in the way of being introduced by judicial activism, with the asinine mob soon following the diktat of the judges because hey, the law says so. As I never tire to say, the laws of one generation are the morality of the following one, because unthinking minds – the vast majority, if we are honest – tend to consider moral what is legal. The perverts know this, and will try to have their way not through the democratic, but through the judicial route.
At some point, the reaction organises itself and the pendulum starts to swing the other side; but this only happens when the stupid generation who has first tolerated the judicially mandated societal changes dies, and a new generation is born that is not ready to accept the status quo, with abortion clearly a point in case. Probably the Supreme Court judges – and many others – thought Roe vs Wade had changed the landscape forever. Forty years later, we know this is absolutely not the case and the game is changing again, with ever the former Miss Roe now on the side of… Mr Wade.
If the Supreme Court of the United States comes out with another piece of subversive and perverted piece of social engineering, we can be sure that the battle to overturn it will go on for decades; but this time we will be comforted by the knowledge that whilst God's laws are immutable, one or two generations can be enough to put abominations once considered irreversible to a very severe test.
There is no way, I am afraid, our generation can hope to die in a world freed from the celebration of sexual perversion and the brutal uprooting of Christian culture from vast strata of the population; but this must not be on the least an occasion of dismay or despair. If they help us to gain Heaven, the few decades of battle against the arrogance of the perverts and the stupidity of the asinine mob will have been, the day we die, a small price to pay.
Our stupid, stupid generation is very probably destined to see a breakdown of Christian values without precedent in the history of the West, providing a very rich harvest for Satan and his minions; but such an age will also allow those who steadfastly refuse to conform to the lies of the age to accumulate merits, and perhaps to develop a love for a truth, that might not for many of us – and very probably for me – have been possible if we had lived under different circumstances.
When I think of our situation I am often reminded of the time of the Arian heresy, sweeping not only a great part of society, but even of those who called themselves orthodox Christians. The faithful soldiers of Christ of that age must have felt very isolated, and must have been continuously insulted and called impious, their lack of “inclusiveness” and “hate” for those oh so tolerant, open-minded Arians for everyone to see.
Do you think they cared? No, they didn't. They had their eyes fixed on Truth, not on the wrong opinions of their countrymen, or of the majority of the clergy, or of Pope Liberius himself. Wrong is wrong even if everyone is wrong, and right is right even if no one is right.
Let the fat lesbian do her worse, and a bunch of perverts and their stupid, stupid cheerleaders rejoice as much as they want.
They will get their reward.
But we, we will continue steadfastly, and try to our last day to merit, as far as we can, ours.
You must be logged in to post a comment.