Saturday, September 6, 2008

Catholics Outraged by Palin Insults


Palin Continues to Smear Catholic Action

Catholics across the country continue to be outraged by Republican politician Sarah Palin who repeated her smear against Catholic Action by mocking Barack Obama’s service as director of a community group sponsored by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (an arm of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops) and led by eight Catholic parishes on the South Side of Chicago.

First, the Dallas Morning News gives us the facts on the background:

Starting at age 23, Obama ran a faith-based charity called the Developing Communities Project.

It was made up of eight Catholic parishes when he got there and had one staff member. He was its director, meaning he was in charge. He made decisions about it, including staffing, budgets, etc. And when he left in 1988 to go to law school, he had grown its budget from $70,000 to $400,000, its staff from 1 to 13 people. More important, he created a job training program for this community and a college prep tutoring program. As mayor [of Wasilla, Palin] built a hockey rink/rec center using eminent domain (because apparently there just isn't enough land in Alaska).

Now for the attacks on this Catholic sponsored social action initiative. At the Republican Party National Convention, Palin and ex-New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani mocked the work Barack Obama did for this group of churches that were concerned about their parishioners, many of whom had been laid off when the steel mills closed on the south side of Chicago. As for Barack Obama’s service as a community organizer, Giuliani even sneered “I don't even know what that is.” Palin, who was baptized but not raised Catholic and sought “re-baptism” in a Protestant Church can be forgiven for knowing little of the Catholic Church’s admirable witness for the poor and socially marginalized. But even a lapsed Catholic like Giuliani should know of the Catholic Church’s concern for the poor and oppressed.

Joe Klein’s take on this: This is what Palin and Giuliani were mocking. They were making fun of a young man's decision "to serve a cause greater than himself," in the words of John McCain. They were, therefore, mocking one of their candidate's favorite messages. Obama served the poor for three years, then went to law school. To describe this service--the first thing he did out of college, the sort of service every college-educated American should perform, in some form or other--as anything other than noble is cheap and tawdry and cynical in the extreme.

America magazine, the national Jesuit weekly, shared in the shock at this repeated attack on Catholic Action.

A Midwestern Catholic leader wrote: In an stunning insult to 76.9 million Americans, another politician continues the republican bias towards Catholics. Sarah Palin's acceptance speech scoffed at work that her opponent had done in the 1980s for the Catholic Campaign for Human Development. She belittled Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama's experience as a community organizer in Catholic parishes on the South Side of Chicago, work he undertook instead of pursuing a lucrative career on Wall Street. The US Conference of Catholic Bishops has operated the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, its domestic anti-poverty and social justice program, since 1969. In 1986, the Bishops issued Economic Justice for All: Pastoral Letter on Catholic Social Teaching and the US Economy, which said, "Human dignity can be realized and protected only in community." Senator Obama worked in several Catholic parishes, supported by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, helping to address severe joblessness and housing needs in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods of Chicago.

72 comments:

Sean2 said...

Please cite your specific references for this.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

"Palin and ex-New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani mocked the work Barack Obama did for this group of churches that were concerned about their parishioners...."

Surprise, surprise, surprise. Of course Giuliani mocked the work Barack Obama did for a "community organizing" organization. Most of the community organizing organizations in New York City that were funded by the Catholic Campaign for Human Development targeted Giuliani when Giuliani was mayor. Giuliani still has a bitter taste in his mouth over community organizations.

I know because I live in New York C ity and I have worked for (and still do) some of those organizations Giuliani and Palin mock.

Sean2 said...

First, the Dallas Morning News gives us the facts on the background: Starting at age 23, Obama ran a faith-based charity called the Developing Communities Project. It was made up of eight Catholic parishes when he got there and had one staff member.

You're kidding right. That is an op ed piece. The DCP was a spin off of the group he originally went to work for and was composed of a number of Churches. In fact to his credit Obama was able to bridge the strong differences between the Catholic and Protestant churches involved in the coalition.

Here is a fact from the DCP website, Developing Communities Project (DCP), the largest church-based community-organizing agency on Chicago's far south side began in 1984 as a branch of the Calumet Community Religious Conference (CCRC).

Here is a list of the supporters of the DCP. Does this mean that Sen. Obama worked for them too?
Catholic Campaign For Human Development
Chicago Capacity Building Initiative
Chicago Community Trust
Chicago Foundation for Women
Girl's Best Friend Foundation
Illinois Department of Human Services
Mayer & Morris Kaplan Family Foundation
Polk Bros. Foundation
Tribune Charities
Wieboldt Foundation
Woods Fund of Chicago
US Bank
Giuliani even sneered “I don't even know what that is.”

In fact a quick web search will find out that there is no real definition of what a community organizer is. Read the debate at Wikipedia for a start.

What is a smear is your continued bias against Sarah Palin to distort her words into some kind of criticism of Catholic Action. You keep stressing the role of the Catholic Church in social action but it is interesting that Sen Obama went to work for two gentleman who were disciples of Saul Alinski who was hardly Catholic. In fact he dedicated his book to Lucifer the first rebel.

Katherine said...

In fact a quick web search will find out that there is no real definition of what a community organizer is.

But Sarah Palin clearly meant it to indicate the director of of Catholic Campain sponsored project.

You keep stressing the role of the Catholic Church in social action but it is interesting that Sen Obama went to work for two gentleman who were disciples of Saul Alinski who was hardly Catholic.

Alinsky. An yes, he was a Jew. I'm sure that's an issue for some.

In fact he dedicated his book to Lucifer the first rebel.

You need to stop reading the talking point Rustler get from The Wanderer, a publication that has not improved much since when it was published only in German.

Jean said...

I was not aware that Obama worked for Catholic Charities. Given what the Republicans say about faithf based charities, I am surprised one of their top leaders would be so critical.

Bob said...

So the Catholic Church wants to "empower" a bunch of South side welfare queens. Big deal. Palin should tell the bishops to go jump in Lake Michigan for wasting the laity's money like that.

Anonymous said...

I cannot believe people would even think to mock Obama for his charitable work. It's really a shame to see such heartless insensitive people writing things against him. Sarah Palin is a selfish, self-serving person. Out of the millions of words she could have used, she chose to use words to mock Barack Obama's experience as a Community Organizer. Oh, wait, that's right, the speech writer for George Bush wrote Palin's speech as well. That explains a lot.

Mark said...

Some posters here and the speakers at the RNC show a deep hatred for Barack Obama that is hard to fathom. How many people would do what he did at 23 to give back to the poor and hopeless?

The hatred is so deep they would also attack any group that is associated with him and I guess Catholics and Jews are in their sights too. I saw mock and mock again and tell us Catholics that our charity is misplaced and our values are wrong.

Blessed are those persecuted for seeking righteousness for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

We need leaders with empathy not self righteousness and hebris. I hope the Catholics in this country see what this election is about.

We are our brothers and our sisters keepers. As Jesus said What you do to the least of my brothers you do unto me. God bless

sean2 said...

But Sarah Palin clearly meant it to indicate the director of of Catholic Campain sponsored project.

No matter how often you repeat the lie does not make it true. I have proved sufficiently that no matter how much money they received from CCHD, nor the fact they had an office in a Catholic Church makes them a Catholic organization.

Alinsky. An yes, he was a Jew. I'm sure that's an issue for some.

Did I mention anything about his race or religion? Curious why you should.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

sean2,

"In fact a quick web search will find out that there is no real definition of what a community organizer is. Read the debate at Wikipedia for a start."

I agree with you that there is no consistent definition of a "community organizer." I am a community organizer with a much different background and training than Obama. In fact, I find the community organizing organization Obama got his Community Organizer training from (Saul Alinsky) very irritating and self-absorbed. They come across to me as more interested in praising the glories of their own names than promoting the works their communities promote. But, I say that as an insider among community organizers who knows the difference.

None of that authentically addresses what Obama got out of his own work as a community organizer or what he wants to contribute to the White House. To get that, one needs to listen to Obama's own explanation of what he got out from his experience of community organizing and what he wants to contribute to the White House.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

bob,

"So the Catholic Church wants to "empower" a bunch of South side welfare queens. Big deal."

Obama, thirty years ago, worked as an organizer, mobilizing middle-class factory workers who saw their jobs dropped because the steel industry was outsourced.

You can joke, here. But I promise you, there are many more of those people today who meet the conditions of those Obama was organizing thirty years ago. You can call them "welfare queens" if you want to. Obama calls them "Americans." And so do most American voters.

Count you and your sarcastic rhetoric outdated and expired.

Rustler45 said...

CATHOLICSFORMARXISM SAID: "I know because I live in New York City and I have worked for (and still do) some of those organizations Giuliani and Palin mock."

I KNEW you were a Marxist. I mock those corrupt organizations as well so you're not making any kind of a convincing argument here. Any good knowledgable Catholic won't give them a nickel.

MOCK MOCK MOCK

But we already know that you don't know what you're talking about. Remember, you don't know anything about Aristotle which makes sense since you're a political science major?

You're proving your Marxist character by trying make Sarah Palin into a mocker of Catholicism over her refusing to use taxpayer money to fund a communist front pretending to be Catholic.

I thought ya'll believed in separation of church and state? Oooh a little hypocrisy here.

Anonymous said...

These so called welfare queens ...wer actually out of work steel workers who had nowhere to turn once their jobs left....

Clemsy said...

Palin and Giuliani didn't just mock Obama's work as a community organizer. Their words clearly mocked community organizing in general.

Actually, I'm impressed they were so flagrant about it. The point being that current 'conservative' ideology paints the poor as flawed and unworthy and the middle class as a Darwinian sink or swim battleground.

Palin's inclusion on this ticket, given her extreme, theocratic 'Christian' views is frightening.

A gas pipeline is "God's will."

The Iraq war is "God's will."

Great. A war and oil god. Just what America needs.

Sounds like heresy to me, by any Catholic standard anyway.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

"Welfare queens?"

I hope Palin takes your advice and tells the "bishops to go jump in Lake Michigan". It would bring about an immediate end to her political career.

McCain's VP choice was a dangerous, irresponsible one. Clearly he will do anything to win, including flip flopping on almost every issue to secure the support of the right-wing, and choosing a VP candidate who thinks the end-times are coming soon.

McCain made an impulsive choice on the most important decision he may every make based on political calculation, and with little regard for the country---virtually no background check.

This shows us what kind of leader McCain would be. An impulsive one. Oh, yes, the kind that the right-wing adore. Sarah Palin is George Bush in lipstick.

MsSKWEsq said...

"Welfare Queens" wow, how neanderthal of you! Seriously, the people Obama and the Catholic Outreach worked with were laid off steel workers, both whites and non-whites alike. Hard working, tough, proud people, who were brushed aside by the multi-nationalist economy where people are just an asset to use up and write off. You should be ashamed! And read your Bible, Jesus helped the poor and called for all of to do the same.

Anonymous said...

I am an Irish Roman Catholic, and I feel Sarah Palin should take off the gloves and tell us candidly and without her typical rancor what she, a zealous Evangelical, feels about our Church, its' doctrines, and its' dual historical role as advocate and protector of the poor AND big boat to Salvation for all who love Jesus,accept the guidance of His Beatitudes, and keep His commandments.

It is evident that she has already passed judgement on us in her heart, and not in a kindly way.

Ms Palin's factual record seems to indicate she lauds herself for supposedly being a true reformer of politics and government in her state of Alaska. And, she has developed a significant bandwagon of followers adn media types who repeat this, making it rise to the level of a reputation.

A closer look at the record shows she has actually used her gubernatorial power to cost working people their livelihoods in order to satiate her raging temper, her anger, and resentment against a former brother in law. She can attempt to frame and rationalize this any way she wishes, it is after all, still a free country. However, that doesn't satisfy the deman for truth, and the regret over being decpetive in this matter, as well as others, will nag and bite at her until some ultimate collapse. One untruth begets others-- what will happen when she is a breath away from the nuclear trigger?

Ms Palin's sect is one that believes in Armageddon as a literally good and necessary thing.They are "reconstructionist" and are fervid enthusiasts of a forthcoming "rapture." They feel very much that they and only they are the cognoscenti, the elect, in such matters.

How does that square up with Catholic Doctrine, and with the Catholic Conscience? Aren't we told it is not for us to know or expect but that if and when the ultimate time comes, ALL will be revealed to everyone, not merely a few. It is not our task to actually help precipitate Armageddon, or to hunger for it, just our destiny to know love and serve God, to do His good works, keep His commandments, and spread His truth-- and fear his just retribution if we don't. Just asking.

I do not hate or despise Evangelicals. To the extent that they love Christ, keep His commandments and live under the guidance of His beatitudes while doing the work of the angels, promoting a justice tempered by Charity and fully informed by reason, I admire them.

Also,I pray for them, as I pray for the entire human race, Catholics included. We all need help. Nobody has a monopoly on God's Love or the truth as best we can discern it. Only God is omniscient, by definition.

Only one word adequately describes the clever spin control coyly surrounding her actions and remarks in small insider groups,her use of state funds to further that groups work, her comments on national television about philanthropic community works of which our Chirch is a prime sponsor, and her attempt to appeal to the largely single issue Right to Life movement in our Church. That word is duplicitous. A corrolary is patronizing: how confused or stupid does she feel we are? And by the way, why has the press not been permitted to ask the necessary if unpleasant nagging questions of her on the record that normally are asked of all executive office candidates?

From those to whom much benefit has been given, much is expected. Of that which is expected fo Sarah Palin, how much has she deigned to help the widows, feed the hungry, clothe the naked, nurse the sick, comfort the elderly,help educate the ignorant, nurture the young and especially the young orphans, to make peace rather than war, to resolve enmities....

Anonymous said...

Bob is a Dick, not like anyone didn't think so already.

Katherine said...

Did I mention anything about his race or religion?

Yes, you did. You made the point he was not of our faith and did so with a negative overtone.

Anonymous said...

What does god need with a gas pipeline or a war in iraq or anywhere else for that matter? And if god did need such things, wouldn't the will of the all powerful be quite enough to furnish them without the help of Caribou Barbie?

Frank McEvoy said...

I'm not sure if other people noted, but this number of working for the greater good after college is rare indeed. Maybe the Republicans can't imagine that anyone wouldn't sell out if given half the chance.

For me, after college, I went into the Navy for three years (a full hitch for me). With the draft breathing down my neck, I decided that I'd rather have some control over where I went. My career had to wait, though I did note that Dick Cheney "had other priorities" regarding the service.

Anonymous said...

This blog and the comments are interesting to read. But it seems like most of the commentators are too hard edged. Be a little kinder in your remarks. If you have a strong opinion or a good case, you don't need to present it with such ferocity. Look, Palin insulted Obama. And, by extension, insulted the work of all Community Organizers. She showed us all very clearly where she stands. We shouldn't vote for someone who acts and speaks as she does. Period.

sean2 said...

Katherine,

I said so with a negative overtone? There goes the sin of calumny again.

Sean2

Anonymous said...

I would go further. Palin's brand of Christianity is fundamentally anti-Catholic, and you can go further and say its anti-Christian.

Taking Calvinism to its extreme, their protestant fundamentalism rejects good works, and the Beatitudes in general, and replaces God with Mammon. Some like John Hagee and Ian Paisley even see the mother church as the "whore of babylon." You can't get more anti-catholic than that.

Giuliani, the poster boy for lapsed Catholicism, agrees. He is full of fear and hate.

Rustler45 said...

What DemoMarxist? Did that make you mad because I got it right without even checking?

I can also tell you that your stab about drunkeness is just as accurate as your insinuation that Sarah Palin mocked the Catholic Church. I have never been a drinker but enjoy a beer now and then.

Since you can accuse me without doing your homeword and get it wrong I can one more time accuse you without doing any homework and get it right. You have done drugs haven't you? And you have experimented with other illegal immoral things haven't you?

MARXISTCATHOLIC SAID: "Obviously, the "Campaign" is not socialist, but grants funding according to the collective mind of the United States Catholic bishops."

hahahahaha Obviously the "Campaign" IS socialist. Look at who the authors of it are. The same men who brought us homosexual "pedophiles" and somebody is surprised that we have a Church full of Marxists?

Collective? See I told you it was all Marxist. You can't resist or refrain from the word "collective." That impresses you doesn't it?

Collective – Is the opinion of the elite while the opinions of the poor and powerless are not withstanding. It equates to absolute tyranny.

The late Bishop Thomas Dolinay walked out of the USCCB conference and told them all that they were a "bunch of communists." He died 20 years ago and since then nothing has changed. I already knew it without his saying it. What's your problem?

DEMOMARXIST: "But, Rustler, you were never really serious about who is or who is not a dissident. You were and are only concerned about stirring shit up and drawing attention to yourself."

Wonderful Demo! Show us some more about yourself.

Anonymous said...

What a juvenile response this is to the comments made by Palin and Guiliani.

It's obvious to THIS Catholic that their comments were a direct refutation of the Obama campaign's denigration of Palin's experience as a Mayor and Governor. Their statements in no way reflected a condemnation of the work done by Obama whether it was for a Catholic organization or not. Seriously, no one is doubting that good was accomplished. However, was this the type of experience that qualifies someone to be President? That, I believe, was the crux of the jabs.

So excuse me for saying GROW UP!

Katherine said...

I said so with a negative overtone?

Given the sentence immediately following that statement of yours, its hard to see how you did not mean it negatively.

But, if you meant it with no negativity (or even with positive appreciation) to Mr. Alinsky or Senator Obama, then I happy to hear that.

regina said...

At Mass today in my parish we prayed during the intercessions in thanksgiving for the many dedicated men and women who work as community organizers for CCHD programs.

The response from the congregation seems a little louder and more zippy than the response to the other petitions. I think Palin made a big mistake here by going after the Catholic Church.

Anonymous said...

Q. What's the difference between Sarah Palin and George Bush?

A. Lipstick.

The relentless bashing of Obama's community organizing and community service in general shows the GOP campaign slogan-push for Service for what the McCain-Palin ticket really stands for: Bush'e third term and Hypocrisy.

david said...

I was not aware that the group Obama worked for was sponsored by the Catholic Church. In my parish we have some young people who had worked with the Jesuit Volunteer Program. They are great kids. I think having a president with a background like this is a good thing, not something to insult.

Anonymous said...

anonymous said: "However, was this the type of experience that qualifies someone to be President"

Why ONLY cite Obama's first 3 years out of college almost a quarter century ago? You are wrong, this was a DIRECT attack on community organizers and it's interesting to note that in Obama's first 3 years out of college, he did more than Palin did as mayor of her little tiny Wasilla. Putting in a hockey rink/rec center isn't really so great, especially when you realize that she didn't even know enough to have the papers signed and ended up with mountains of litigation; eventually putting the little town into debt. That's gross mismanagement. See the article from the Wall Street Journal titled, "Palin's Biggest Project, A Hockey Rink with Legal Troubles" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122065537792905483.html

Obama on the other hand, increased his staff from 1 to 13 and put in a job training program while increasing the budget. But it doesn't end there, he went to Harvard and became president of the Harvard Law Review, no small task, he then became a civil rights lawyer, taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago (I kinda think that's a bonus), became a state senator and instituted several breakthrough legislative triumphs such as pushing for video taping of interrogations and confessions, putting in legislation to insure all children in the state of Illinois, major ethics reform are just a few. From the Washington Post:

"He played a major role in passing many other bills, including the state's first earned-income tax credit to help the working poor and the first ethics and campaign finance law in 25 years (a law a Post story said made Illinois "one of the best in the nation on campaign finance disclosure"). Obama's commitment to ethics continued in the U.S. Senate, where he co-authored the new lobbying reform law that, among its hard-to-sell provisions, requires lawmakers to disclose the names of lobbyists who "bundle" contributions for them.

Taken together, these accomplishments demonstrate that Obama has what Dillard, the Republican state senator, calls a "unique" ability "to deal with extremely complex issues, to reach across the aisle and to deal with diverse people." In other words, Obama's campaign claim that he can persuade us to rise above what divides us is not just rhetoric.

I do not think that a candidate's legislative record is the only measure of presidential potential, simply that Obama's is revealing enough to merit far more attention than it has received."

Obama is more than qualified and READY to be the next President of the United States.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

And here are some Palin whoppers that need explaining:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/politics/animal/main4414049.shtml

Anonymous said...

The Catholic Bishops love giving money to commie groups like the Campaign for Human Development. Anyone working for one of these groups is probably a Marxist, as are most of the bishops.

Angela said...

I do not get Palin and McCain mocking Obama's early adulthood in serving the community.

By the way,A fellow McCain POW who has known McCain since the academy did a well done thoughtful video in which he states McCain is not cut out to be president.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KjsEs46C70

Anonymous said...

Certainly Obama has some stellar accomplishments - how many of you would spend 3 years of your life working at a Charity? I thought so. I'm also always surprised by the "welfare" comments - these same dittoheads have no problem with "corporate welfare", like the $50 billion bailout the big 3 automakers, or the millions the "rich" state of Alaska received for their "bridge to nowhere" - with Palin's blessing "let's get our hands on more of that Federal dough". Well, this U.S. taxpayer has had enough of these corporate bailouts. What do we expect when we vote in the friends of Enron? How many billions of our taxdollars to rescue Fannie Mae and Freddie? In Soviet Russia they subsidized the bread, in the U.S. they subsidize your SUV and your house. So watch that Marxist name calling - guess it takes one to know one, eh?

Oscar said...

I love to hear the wingnuts refer to Democrats as Marxists, socialists or communists. Let's see, what is now the biggest communist country in the world? Oh, right, it's China. The same China that the Rethugs have gone nearly $1 trillion into hock so they can go on wars without end - or at least John McCain's 100-year war in Iraq. And we'll keep needing China's money to pay for the young men and women who'll be drafted if McCain has his way. Yes, drafted. How many tours of duty can the present troops keep going on for the next 10, 20, 30 years? How many volunteers will we get when they know, as a certainty, they'll be going to war? How does it feel to know our soldiers are fighting with weapons bought and paid for with loans from the Chinese? How does it feel to know that every pair of shoes you buy for your family is made by a communist? How does it feel to know that the communist Chinese can pull the financial rug out from under us and plunge our country into bankruptcy to at least the next 10, 20, 30 years? For all this, plus a war they lied us into and an economy that will put thousands of employed workers into the ranks of the unemployed this year, next year, and the year after that, we can thank eight years of Republican mis- and maladministration. So, my Republican friends, how about a cheer for the communist Chinese and their grand generosity? Without them, you wouldn't have a proverbial pot to pee in. See, you don't even need money from the Democrats; the Chinese have more than enough for you. And if you're lucky, maybe you'll be outsourced (with your job) to China. Hey, we can even bail out Freddie and Fannie by borrowing from the Chinese. Is this a great country, or what?

Anonymous said...

This blog is a piece of garbage. You people have no business calling yourselves Catholics. The Liberals have torn this country apart and they will ultimately be the demise of this country. Obama is not hated as an individual, I will say to Mark that we hate his idealogy because we see what damage the liberals have done. Abortion is only one piece of this broken nation. Anyone who would condone abortion has a seriously broken moral compass. I've heard all the arguments you people offer on the abortion issue and you sound like morons every time. There is no jusification, ever. I could at least respect your opinions if you came out and admitted that you have no sense of humanity or that you have no respect for life, but you can't even do that. I repeat, this blog is trash and you people shoudl stop pretending to be Catholics.

Anonymous said...

Oscar, you're an absolute idiot. Punch yourself for me.

t-bone said...

So what does the Pork Princess Palin and her syncophants have to say about that marxist b*tch community organizer Dorothy Dix? Inquiring minds want to know.

Marybeth said...

"So excuse me for saying GROW UP!"

Just to clarify, I was the "anon" who ended my comment with the above statement.

In reading through all of the comments, I am struck by the fact that there is such hatred directed at each other and at Republicans in general.

Among my Catholic friends (myself included), there is a divide between voting for Obama and voting for McCain. In general, the dividing line is the abortion issue (although not always). We have lively, passionate discussions but at the end of the day we agree to disagree. When this election is over and we have either President Obama or President McCain, we will all continue to live as we always have - serving others through our faith.

We know that there are good Catholics on both sides of the fence and we respect each other. I don't sense any respect in these comments. There is hatred and vitrol like I have never seen.

I would humbly suggest that we are Catholics first, Americans second and Rs or Ds third. Don't let politics define us - we need to be much more than that if we are to work together when this election is over.

And please don't objectify the poor as in "I help the poor". They are people struggling to do the best they can. Get in there and get personal. Buy groceries for a family. Babysit. Mow a lawn. Adopt a child even if only spiritually. Listen to their stories without judgment. And most importantly, don't talk about it - just live it. Our actions speak volumes to those who don't have faith - our harsh words will destroy that action if we aren't careful. I don't mean to imply that you don't do those things already, but personal actions are what strengthen our resolve and our souls.

None of us can help everyone but together we can help many - one at a time. The time for hating needs to come to an end - let's put aside our differences and grab a hand and help the person it belongs to and someday, they may be able to return the favor.

May God truly Bless each and every one of you.

Kurt said...

Here is what Bishop Roy Dixon of the San Diego said:

"As a life-long Republican, the comments I heard last night about community organizing crossed the line. It is one thing to question someone's experience, another to demean the work of millions of hard working Americans who take time to get involved in their communities. When people come together in my church hall to improve our community, they're building the Kingdom of God in San Diego. We see the fruits of community organizing in safer streets, new parks, and new affordable housing. It's the spirit of democracy for people to have a say and we need more of it."

Anonymous said...

to Marybeth, who said she was a single issue voter (pro-life).

I am catholic and I am personally pro-life but politically pro-choice.
I don't see any good reason to push my views and values on someone else. We can't, (or at least shouldn't) force everyone to conform to the catholic view or any other religious view either. Being pro-choice allows others to hopefully choose life but we don't force them to conform to our values. Democrats have unwittingly allowed republicans to cast pro-choice (the freedom to choose) as pro-abortion. That is the problem...it simply isn't true.

If you really give this some thought, God also allows us to choose. If we couldn't make choices in our lives, and the choices were made for us, then what would be the value of life? We may as well be ants with no meaning to our existence at all. We learn, we live, we make choices. That is what life is all about. Hopefully we learn from the choices we make. God allows me to make choices everyday; I don't see any reason to deny others theirs.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

"Liberals have torn this country apart and they will ultimately be the demise of this country. Obama is not hated as an individual, I will say to Mark that we hate his idealogy because we see what damage the liberals have done."

Yeah. Because we all know how many levers of power liberals have had their hands on over the course of the last fifteen years.

Please.

tom said...

I kinda thought Palin was the best thing McCain had going for him until I found about this. It really is low to be attacking Catholic Charities.

Anonymous said...

I saw Palin's convention speech, and didn't think she was showing disrespect to Catholics at all. She was poking a little fun at Obama's resume, in that he was using his community organizer work as something that made him suitable for the presidency. Considering the vicious attacks on her and her family from the media and Obama's followers, surely you could allow her that. She's taken a lot more abuse than she's handed out.

bluin84 said...

can someone tell me if it is true that obama has voted for infanticide when he was governor. i read that he doesn't believe a child has human rights.

Rustler45 said...

"It really is low to be attacking Catholic Charities."

You must not know anything about Catholic Charities.

Rustler45 said...

"Because we all know how many levers of power liberals have had their hands on over the course of the last fifteen years."

And I suppose you think Bush is a conservative? You're so far left that Marxism looks right wing.

Anonymous said...

It would be refreshing to see this election be on the serious issues confronting this country rather than the subjects of abortion etc. being the defining issue again.

bob said...

"It really is low to be attacking Catholic Charities."

You must not know anything about Catholic Charities.


Ditto here, Rustler. Catholic Charities is a bunch of socialists. Those who know 'Catholic Charities' know ho they have their hand out for government money so they can give it to welfare queens while paying top salaries to "social workers". Who wants to pay anything to a bunch of liberal socialist workers?

Marybeth said...

To Anon: (Why are so many commenters afraid to attach their names to their beliefs?)

I never said I was a single issue voter, I merely said that abortion was often the tipping point among my friends.

Let me state right up front that I was a long-standing member of the "personally opposed but" crowd. What follows is some of what changed my heart; perhaps it will change one or two here as well.

Let's start with your second argument first. God did give us free will, which we are to use responsibly. However, God did not give us free reign. Along with free will, he gave us the ten commandments to guide us in our choices. Do we break those commandments? Of course we do - all the time. Should God change the ten commandments to the ten suggestions because of our willful disobedience? That will never happen.

Which brings us to your first point about imposing our religious/moral views on others. First, please understand that SCIENCE, (not various religions or morality) states that life begins at conception. That is scientific FACT - please don't take my word for it. Look it up.

Second, we already have many laws that are based on morality such as murder, assault and theft. We haven't changed those laws due to the imposition of someone else's morality since to do so would bring about anarchy.

Since life begins at conception - and our society recognizes that taking another life is wrong - the question becomes: Is abortion really murder? If it is, then we have a real problem that certainly can't be solved easily. But changing our hearts will be a step in the right direction; as long as we follow it with appropriate action as well. "...to be a follower of mine, let him renounce himself and take up his cross and follow me." Christ never said that following him would be easy.

One of your points involved reframing - (your quote) "Democrats have unwittingly allowed republicans to cast pro-choice (the freedom to choose) as pro-abortion."
However consider that, in fact, the reframing was done by the pro-choice crowd to the effect that abortion is merely "the disposal of a clump of cells" or "you have complete rights over your own body" as if the life within were just a tumor.

Scenario: If a woman has an abortion, everyone says that was her right. Two years later, that woman carries a baby to term. During her pregnancy we put "our" hand on her pregnant belly, feel the baby kick and say isn't life wonderful? That is a serious disconnect in our minds and hearts that we need to address, especially as Catholics.

What if Obama's unmarried teenage mother had chosen abortion over life? Who would you vote for? How many presidential candidates, scientists, scholars, inventors, teachers, mothers and fathers are among the millions aborted? Traditionally, young people vote Democratic. Obama could win, hands down, if we hadn't aborted millions from recent generations. Those were our children - why didn't we protect them?

If you substitute the word "slavery" or "torture", it becomes downright frightening as in "I am personally opposed to torture but I don't want to impose my morality on anyone else." We certainly wouldn't accept that as a valid argument so why is it OK to say that about abortion?

And finally, what are we to say to all of those aborted children when we meet them face to face in the next life? Can we honestly justify their deaths because it was easier for us? Can we look them in the eyes and say "I did nothing because I didn't want to impose my beliefs on others?" Is that a sufficient response for the holocaust that we have allowed to happen in our midst?

May God have mercy on us.

Rustler45 said...

Marybeth said... "I never said I was a single issue voter, I merely said that abortion was often the tipping point among my friends."

Marybeth, do not be afraid to say that you are a single issue voter. God is a single issue God and He said that you have to obey ALL ten of the commandments. If you fail on one and keep the others you still fail. The liberals have pulled another little trick with that "single issue" carp.

MARYBETH SAID: "If you substitute the word "slavery" or "torture", it becomes downright frightening as in "I am personally opposed to torture but I don't want to impose my morality on anyone else." We certainly wouldn't accept that as a valid argument so why is it OK to say that about abortion?"

That is excellent Marybeth. This is another old trick of the liberals to make the accusation that we are forcing our morals on others.

#1. Not only is forcing morality on others acceptable it is obligatory. They are forcing their morals on an innocent unborn baby. It is obligatory that we force them not to do that.

#2. If forcing morals on others is wrong then we MUST close down all of our jails and courts because that is what those things are for. Then we must do away with all laws except for parking tickets.

Rustler45 said...

ANOTHERCOWARDLYANONYMOUS SAID: "I would go further. Palin's brand of Christianity is fundamentally anti-Catholic, and you can go further and say its anti-Christian."

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA

Now tell us about Obama's brand of religion. OK, let's be fair about it and be fair about his "Muslim faith."

Rustler45 said...

ANONYMOUSCOWARD SAID: "Palin should take off the gloves and tell us candidly ...feels about our Church...."

That's fair, but let's also hear what Obama's candid feelings are as well. That will never happen. He has told too many lies already.

"...my Muslim faith."

How DO Muslims feel about Catholicism?

Rustler45 said...

REGINA SAID: I think Palin made a big mistake here by going after the Catholic Church.

RUSTLER ASKS: So far no one has given an accurate quote of what she actually said. Can you do that or would it be too much?

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

marybeth,

Very well articulated.

Anonymous said...

I can not understand how people seem to misunderstand the meaning of abortion. Mr. Obama has been asked about finding common ground on pro-life and pro-choice, his answer;

"There is a moral dimension to abortion, which I think that all too often those of us who are pro-choice have not talked about or tried to tamp down. I think that's a mistake because I think all of us understand that it is a wrenching choice for anybody to think about."

I can't see what's so wrenching about the issue. We all know that in aborting you are doing away with something, in this case, an unborn child. So it all boils down to right or wrong! the fact that Mr. Obama did a lot of charity work will not justify he taking part in killing a child. It is said, "two wrongs do not make a right."
Catholics (so called), beware of people in sheep's clothing!

Tom

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

"Catholics (so called), beware of people in sheep's clothing!"

Watch the "Catholic (so called)." It was abrasive in '04 and is still abrasive today.

"I can't see what's so wrenching about the issue. We all know that in aborting you are doing away with something, in this case, an unborn child. So it all boils down to right or wrong!"

Yes. Ultimately, it boils down to right or wrong. What is wrenching is that a woman finds herself experiencing an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy. The "wrenching" part is that she's pregnant and not prepared for that pregnancy. That the "wrenching" part has anything to do with the question of abortion is reflective that our society has lost its moral compass and has become insensitive to the profound dignity of the person who could be aborted.

I think the sad part, in here, is that so many come in here assuming those of us who are supporting Obama's presidential candidacy equivocate over that. I know there are Catholics who do. I don't. And, from my observation, neither do most who comment on here, from either side of the political spectrum.

I do think that Obama is right when he says that both sides of the abortion debate are talking past each other. I think that sense can be extended here to observe that Catholics from varying ends of the political spectrum are talking past each other. That is not healthy for us as Catholics, nor is it healthy for us as Americans engaged in the political process.

Adam said...

"..should know of the Catholic Church’s concern for the poor and oppressed..."

WOW! The catholic church in the past has demonstrated at many different times more of a concern for money than for the poor and oppressed.

My dad has lived in venezuela before. When a catholic member there passes away, the belief is that a series of ceremonies must be PAID FOR in order for the deceased to go to heaven. These are very expensive! They cost usually about 10,000 US dollars!

This is not a percentage, as the law of tithe, but a flat rate.

Q: HOW IS THIS CONCERN FOR THE POOR AND OPPRESSED?

A: IT IS NOT

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

"My dad has lived in venezuela before. When a catholic member there passes away, the belief is that a series of ceremonies must be PAID FOR in order for the deceased to go to heaven. These are very expensive! They cost usually about 10,000 US dollars!

This is not a percentage, as the law of tithe, but a flat rate.

Q: HOW IS THIS CONCERN FOR THE POOR AND OPPRESSED?"

That is not concern for the poor and oppressed. Nor is it the position of the Church.

Canon 1380 of Canon Law: "A person who celebrates or receives a sacrament through simony is to be punished with an interdict or suspension."

Canon 1385 of Canon Law: "A person who illegitimately makes a profit from a Mass offering is to be punished with a censure or another just penalty."

Adam said...

"That is not concern for the poor and oppressed."

That's the point I was trying to make.

"Nor is it the position of the Church..."

It is still practiced though. I need to do more research to confirm that it is the catholic church, not 'catholic' bishops. I shouldn't assume. However, I am fairly positive it was legitimate Catholicism.

And this is somewhat more off-topic, but what about indulgences? They are a similar concept, only if I'm not mistaken purchased before one's death? The idea (if indulgences is what I'm thinking of) was fabricated during a time when the church needed money. To me salvation cannot be simply paid for. This is corruption of the teachings of Christ.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

adam,

You said: "I need to do more research to confirm that it is the catholic church, not 'catholic' bishops. I shouldn't assume."

Thank you for not assuming. The Catholic Church does not function that way.

I am not going to way whether legitimate bishops/clergy in Venezuela are acting that way or not. I do not live in Venezuela. I can only say the type of thing you describe is not consistent with Catholicism, ideologically or officially.

If bishops in clergy are operating that way, I would think you would have a canonical complaint to make. And, if that is the case, you ought to make that canonical complaint. Clergy should absolutely not be treating the sacraments and the eternal well-being of souls as if profits are to be made from either.

Rustler45 said...

ADAM: "I am fairly positive it was legitimate Catholicism."

No telling what kinds of superstition or corruption you'll find in South America.

ADAM: "To me salvation cannot be simply paid for. This is corruption of the teachings of Christ."

Adam, nobody is buying salvation. Indulgences are concerned with Purgatory not Heaven. Indulgences are for the relief of the suffering souls in Purgatory. Buying and selling indulgences is a corrupt practice. It was not fabricated to make money for the Church. Individual priests were responsible for the practice of such.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

Wow! Rustler45 and I happen to agree on something, and what he agree on has to do with Catholicism. That must mean we're both Catholics! And just when I was beginning to wonder......

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

"Buying and selling indulgences is a corrupt practice. It was not fabricated to make money for the Church. Individual priests were responsible for the practice of such."

To be fair, selling indulgences is what paid for the building of the Sistine Chapel. That was a scandal to the Church that was corrected at the Council of Trent.

Adam said...

"

"Buying and selling indulgences is a corrupt practice. It was not fabricated to make money for the Church. Individual priests were responsible for the practice of such."

To be fair, selling indulgences is what paid for the building of the Sistine Chapel. That was a scandal to the Church that was corrected at the Council of Trent.

"

God's true church has no corruption or scandals. God is Alpha, and Omega, and unchanging.

CatholicsForDemocracy said...

Adam,

"God's true church has no corruption or scandals. God is Alpha, and Omega, and unchanging."

You forgot about the point, in our own teaching about our Church; that our Church is both Divine and human. If our Church was purely Divine in inception, there would be no corruption and scandal; but we are also human.

There are plenty of examples in our Church's history where there were corruptions and scandals. Nepotism, at one time, was the scandal. Pope Gregory the Great got rid of that by imposing monastic discipline on secular clergy; hence the promise of celibacy. At another time, ecclesial wealth and greed; hence, the Franciscans, Dominicans and others who brought in the Spirit of Poverty. More recently, sex with children.

These are not all examples of a Church incapable of corruption or scandal.

Though I do agree truth and purity must always win the day in our Church; because our Church is not only human, it has an element of the Divine. But let's not add credit where credit is not due.

Anonymous said...

Catholic, Muslim, Calvinist, blah blah blah. Read Saul Alinsky's works and you will understand what has and is going on with the "community" of the U.S.A. He said "lie, ridicule, whatever it takes to win....."

Antonio33 said...

I guess you will not publish my comments because you are being funded by Soros, who hates the U.S. and all Catholics and Christians.

Katherine said...

"and all Catholics and Christians"

Antonio33, dear friend. Catholics ARE Christians. Your bias is showing.

Arne said...

"The Liberals have torn this country apart"

Right. What the country needs is another uniter like George W. Bush:

Get a grip.

"I refuse to play the politics of putting people into groups and pitting one group against another." the present Republican incumbent said in 1999. In 2001, he said "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." laying the fundament for Republican smears of anyone as unpatriotic and anti-American who opposed Bush's foreign and national security policies.

"I will say to Mark that we hate his idealogy because we see what damage the liberals have done."

Only fools and cowards hate. I commend you for the courage to out yourself. Unfortunately, that means you aren't in the latter group.

By the way, since you right-wingers say you want to fight the "idealogy" (sic) and not the person Obama, let's conduct a little litmus test!

Ayers? Character assassination.
Khalidi? Character assassination (against Khalidi as well, as I may note, since he's never been charged with terrorism, there is no evidence that he ever was a PLO member either, and he has denounced violence against civilians as a "war crime")
Baby-killing Obama? Character assassination, and let me add that it's disturbing to see some of the same people who oppose hate crime legislation for being unnecessary trying to make something of Obama's unwillingness to support this piece of unnecessary legislation.
Raila Odinga? Character assassination, but of the most hilarious kind. That socialist Obama must also be the guy who writes all the spam mail I get from Nigeria.
Obama the muslim? Character assassination.
No birth certificate? Character assassination or at least trying to cast doubt on the candidacy.
Whiteygate and the fantasy tape? Character assassination.

The list goes on and on. It seems like every time one of the Republican fabrications is exposed, they just come up with the next one and hope that people won't notice. You think that Michael Moore is a distorter and propagandist? Fair enough, but Michael Moore is not running Obama's campaign. McCain's campaign is full of people who make Moore look like the BBC.

Now what about attacks on Obama's (supposed) ideology? There is very little to be seen here except Joe the immortal plumber and the claims of Obama planning to spread his wealth around.

"Anyone who would condone abortion has a seriously broken moral compass."

Anyone who wouldn't punish a woman who was raped and had an abortion (as Palin would), or refuses to stone the adulteress, has a seriously broken moral compass. Notice something? I doubt it.

"CATHOLICSFORMARXISM SAID":

Congratulations. You had me for a moment. I thought I must have missed the fact that the guy you quoted used the pseudonym "CATHOLICSFORMARXISM". However, I am a smart guy, and skeptical about everything people from the fringe come up with, not because I'm a distrustful person, but unfortunately because at least 80% of it are pure lies (see above). So I used my browser's search function and noticed that it's just another distortion, and you sadly lack honor.

Let me tell you a little secret. The McCain-Palin ticket will lose, but it won't lose for the reasons you think it will. It will because Sarah Palin has time and again proven herself to be unfit for presidency (and, by chosing her as his running mate, so did McCain). By gross ignorance regarding foreign policy, economics and science. By being a divider through fear-mongering and name-calling to crowds of right-wingers that crave this stuff, but in doing so she forgot that the rest of the country is watching as well, and the rest of the country is SICK AND TIRED of Karl Rove like smear campaigns, and SICK AND TIRED of being lied to by the Republican party as each and every one of those smears has turned out to be at best an absurd exaggeration in the light of the facts mere days thereafter.

John McCain, who, may I remind you, has been at the wrong end of such despicable acts himself not too long ago, will lose because in his desperation he chose to use these disgraceful tactics himself, without even realising that they no longer work the way they did. Sure, there will always be some who can be swayed away from the other guy. But what McCain doesn't get, is that while it remains true that you just need to throw enough mud until something sticks, the looks have turned from what sticks to Obama to what sticks to McCain's hands. "John, why are your fingers so dirty?", they ask. And the saddest part is that he has no answer other than that he learned nothing from what Karl Rove did to him by spreading the completely fabricated rumor that McCain had fathered a black child out of wedlock. Ironically, even Rove now said that McCain has gone too far in attacking Obama. If that doesn't tell you something, I'm afraid hardly anything will.

Of course Rove doesn't say that because of ethics - he hardly has any ethics to begin with. But at least Rove is clever enough to realize that for every voter McCain's negative campaigning scared away from Obama, he's lost three in return. To Rove, there's a difference between being merely immoral and actually being STOOPID.

It's just like Lincoln (is purported to have) said: "You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time."

Adam said...

Regarding Religion..
I believe that institutions themselves should not be 'human'. If truly God's institution, they would be anything but human.
Of course the people, the members, will be human.
But the institution itself?
Hardly...
God is unchanging.

http://www.answers.com/topic/alpha-and-omega

I find it sad that many churches and people disagree with this and simple 'remove' this verse of scriptures from modern translations.

However, I am much more concnerned with Obama, than Catholicism.

EXPLAIN THIS!

"What they'll say is, "Well it costs too much money," but you know what? It would cost, about... It -- it -- it would cost about the same as what we would spend... It... Over the course of 10 years it would cost what it would costs us... (nervous laugh) All right. Okay. We're going to... It... It would cost us about the same as it would cost for about -- hold on one second. I can't hear myself. But I'm glad you're fired up, though. I'm glad." (Obama)

Which was shortly followed by this -

"Everybody knows that it makes no sense that you send a kid to the emergency room for a treatable illness like asthma, they end up taking up a hospital bed, it costs, when, if you, they just gave, you gave them treatment early and they got some treatment, and a, a breathalyzer, or inhalator, not a breathalyzer. (crowd laughing) I haven't had much sleep in the last 48 hours." (Obama)

That is how he acts under extreme conditions.
In today's tumultuous world we should elect a leader able to react well to international crisis, or terrorist attacks. Obama has previously failed in speaking publicly defending his own beliefs. (sure, maybe he was tired, but this is an 'extreme situation' that he should still be able to maintain his composure in. Imagine how much worse he will react to the world's next big disaster?)


This is only the tip of the iceburg!

Obama has talked about raising capital gains taxes to up to 60% before!

Often (possibly all, I'm not sure) times in the past, increases in capital gains tax actually cause so much INFLATION that the government has LESS MONEY than if the hadn't raised the taxes at all!

Let me summarize:

Higher capital gains tax
=
Less Money For you (duh)
&
Less net money for the government! (Due to inflation)
&
The citizen's remaining money is worth even less too!

Please consider this before you vote for Obama.

Here is my evidence -

http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/capgain/capgain.htm

I'll even quote the best part =)

"The historical evidence suggest that capital gains tax reductions tend to increase tax revenue. When capital gains tax rates were lowered in 1978 and again in 1981, revenue climbed steadily. Conversely, when the tax rate was increased in 1987, revenue began declining despite forecasters predictions it would increase. For instance, capital gains tax revenue in 1985 equaled $36.4 billion after adjusting for inflation, yet $36.2 billion was collected in 1994 under a higher tax rate. In other words, tax revenue in 1994 was slightly less than it was in 1985 even though the economy was larger, the tax rate was higher, and the stock market was stronger in 1994."

Yes, CUTTING CAPITAL GAINS TAX YIELDS MORE NET MONEY!

INCREASING CAPITAL GAINS TAX YIELDS LESS NET MONEY!

(obviously not in all situations, but the statistics don't lie)

So why would anyone be possessed enough to raise it from 15 to 60 percent??

Anonymous said...

Il semble que vous soyez un expert dans ce domaine, vos remarques sont tres interessantes, merci.

- Daniel