Reality Is No Impediment To A Demagogue
by Thomas A. Droleskey
The administration of Barack Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, Jr., is filled with racialists, men and women who believe that is is necessary to "correct" past injustices, real or imagined, by exculpating those who skin color happens to be anything other than "white" when they are accused of serious crimes or of seeking to intimidate the descendants of those associated with the slave-holding of the past even though most white people never owned slaves and a significant number of them are descended from immigrants who suffered all manner of unjust, invidious discrimination upon their arrival on the shores of the United States of America and simply offered up the difficulties as they sought to make new lives for themselves without considering themselves to be perpetual victims who had to "right" every "wrong" of the past.
Barack Hussein Obama and his wife, Michele Obama, who is also an attorney, and United States Attorney General Eric Holder are indeed racialists, people who believe that nonwhites are superior to whites and thus have the "right" to special, preferential treatment insofar as discipline in schools for errant behavior and grading on examinations and admissions to colleges or universities or professional schools and in being hiring and considered for promotions by employers. The Obamas and Eric Holders believe that they are "entitled" to the "power" that has come their way, determined to use that power to make it difficult for their hated "white power structure" to recapture any claim on policy-making and to "force" them to submit to their own "vision" of a "just" United States of America where preferential treatment must be given to nonwhites in perpetuity even though nearly fifty years of so-called "affirmative action" has resulted in the rise of generations of Americans who believe that life is one gigantic "entitlement" program that indemnifies them against incompetence, sloth, malfeasance and even overt criminal activity. In other words, blacks can do no wrong and "whitey" just has to "pay" for what he did to "their people" in the past.
Such is the belief of pagans who are nothing other than the end-products of Modernity, veritable monsters whose souls are seething with hatred and revenge, people who believe that the possession of power in this world defines their "importance" of human beings and assures "their people" of "getting what is due them" once and for all.
Too strong?
Well, consider Attorney General Eric Holder's own words twenty-seven and one-half months ago when questioned on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, by a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations of the United States House of Representatives about why he did not seek to prosecute members of the "New Black Panther Party" in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who stood outside of a polling place on November 4, 2008, as they shouted such things as "white devil" and "you are about to ruled by the black man, cracker." One of their number, a fellow going by the name of "Minister King Shabazz," was holding a billy club in a menacing manner. Poll watchers saw several people turn away from the polling place as a result (here is a video of the incident):
Attorney General Eric Holder said Tuesday that voter intimidation by
members of the New Black Panther Party was different than the historic
intimidation experienced by “my people.”
The New Black Panther Party had uniformed members stationed outside
of Philadelphia polling stations in November 2008 shouting racial
insults. One carried a nightstick.
Holder responded to statements made by Texas Republican Rep. John
Culberson at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing. Culberson
said, “There’s clearly overwhelming evidence that your Department of
Justice refuses to protect the rights of anybody other than
African-Americans to vote.”
Holder said, “When you compare what people endured in the South in
the ’60s to try to get the right to vote for African Americans, to
compare what people subjected to that with what happened in
Philadelphia… I think does a great disservice to people who put their
lives on the line for my people.”
In December, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights released a scathing report on the Justice Department’s handling of the New Black Panthers case.
Civil Rights Commission Chairman Gerald A. Reynolds wrote, “Because
the Department withheld relevant documents and relevant officials’ and
supervisors’ witness testimony, the Commission was limited in its
ability to complete a final report.”
“Based upon the incomplete, incorrect and changing explanations
offered by the Department for its actions, the Commission decided to
examine whether the U.S. Department of Justice enforced voting rights in
a race-neutral manner when it reversed course in the New Black Panther
Party case,” Reynolds wrote in an introductory letter for the report.
The Justice Department had dropped nearly all charges against defendants from the New Black Panther Party.
“The Department refused to comply with certain Commission requests
for information concerning DOJ’s enforcement actions, and it instructed
its employees not to comply with the Commission’s subpoenas for
testimony,” Reynolds wrote.
The New Black Panther Party has been denounced by leaders of original
Black Panther Party as a bastardized, racist version of the 60s’ group.
Reacting to the new group, co-founder of the original Black Panthers, Bobby Seale, said, “The Black Panther Party were not revenge nationalists. My
organization was all power to all the people whether you’re black,
white, blue, green, yellow, or polka dot.”
“The Party operated on love for black people, not hatred of white
people,” said the foundation dedicated to the memory of the late Huey Newton.
Megan Mitchell, communications director for Culberson, told The Daily
Caller, “the congressman believes that the attorney general needs to be
the attorney general of all Americans.” (Eric Holder and "My People"; see also the scathing report of the U. S. Civil Rights Commission on this unquestioned exercise preferential treatment being accorded to human beings solely because of the color of their skin.)
"My people."
"My people."
What a racialist.
Voter intimidation of white Americans cannot be compared to voter intimidation of black of Americans because to do so would be to a " great disservice to people who put their
lives on the line for my people"?
Prosecutors should go easy in cases of "black on white" crime and seek maximum penalties in cases of "white on black" crime? An endless succession of "affirmative action" and other preferential programs to "level the playing field" in the acquisition, retention and increase of civil power, economic clout and social prestige. Yes, this is the vision and the goal of the Obamas and Eric Holder, who says that "affirmative action" has only just begun to remedy the injustices of the past:
Our own attorney general, ostensibly committed to even-handed enforcement of the nation's laws, referred to blacks as "my people."
Strangely, it is socially acceptable for only certain groups to proudly
claim ethnic group membership. If similar tribal loyalties were
publicly boasted by a white ethnic, that would be seen as sinister.
Just imagine the reaction if a President Bush had identified -- on the basis of race -- with a victim of minority-on-white crime by saying, "Channon Christian looks like my daughters."
Identifying
with an ethnic group as one's own "people" will lead in most cases to
in-group favoritism. Cultural pride is one thing, but proclaiming
exclusive ethnic group affiliation while occupying a position of public
trust is another. This tendency is too often written off as a harmless
cultural tic or a healthy form of therapeutic identity formation. The
trouble is that there is a worldview lying beneath the "my people"
language.
In his remarks, the attorney
general has provided the most explicit statement of ethnic favoritism
and racial grievance by a high public official in American history. And
the racket has just begun:
"When do people of color truly get the benefits to which they are
entitled?" asks Holder. The question is rhetorical, and his
constituents know the answer.
In
this liberal, racialized conception of society, minority groups are
supposedly not getting "benefits to which they are entitled." The
danger in this attitude is not just that people are asking for free
stuff from the government. The danger is that minority group members
are made to believe that society is purposefully withholding benefits
from them due to their racial group membership. Hence the resentment
and latent animosity lurking at the core of the welfare state, and its
ever-expanding legion of dependents.
This
menacing fact was once openly recognized by sociologists. Decades ago,
Edward C. Banfield wrote that urban social problems will increasingly
come to be regarded as the fault of "callousness or neglect by the
'white power structure'" [2]. Just as expected, we now have a cult of anti-white resentment named Critical Race Theory being taught in law schools around the nation.
The
constant use of physical metaphors like "white power structure" will
guarantee that some people view themselves -- usually falsely -- as
being intentionally excluded from that structure. Of course, structures
comprise people, so real human beings will inevitably become targets of
the resentment originally intended for abstract "power structures."
The
victim mentality feeds off racial bitterness, which is constantly
politicized and enflamed. We see this in the rhetoric of Congresswoman
Frederica Wilson (D-Florida), who said that Trayvon Martin was "hunted down like a dog." The attorney general and president are doing their part
to sow the seeds of bitterness, entitlement, and racial favoritism. By
acknowledging those seeds, one begins to understand why racial double
standards and potential violence are so easily stirred up amidst controversies such as the current one involving Trayvon Martin. (Eric Holder's Revenge. I want to add that the late Edward Banfield's The Unheavenly City and The Unheavenly City Revisited were outstanding books describing urban poverty. I read the first book when taking a course on Urban Politics at Saint John's University as an undergraduate in the Spring Semester of 1972--can that be forty years ago now?--and used it in courses that I taught on the subject over the decades. Obviously, Banfield's books provided no supernatural perspective. One who read them, however, with an understanding of First and Last Things could nevertheless appreciate the author's insights about how the policies of the statists had enslaved the poor to make them a new caste of slaves here in the United States of America.)
Reality, though, is no impediment to demagogues such as the race-baiting Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and his race-baiting Attorney General, Eric Holder. It is to their utter advantage to ignore the simple fact the the jury in the unnecessary, politically-motived case brought by the State of Florida against George Zimmerman did not find that the defendant acted with racial motives, that he was not unreasonable for a man whose head was being pounded into a cement sidewalk by a hooded teenager to believe that his life was in imminent peril.
Although it is arguably the case that George Zimmerman should have stayed in his car as the police had instructed him to do when he called 911 to report a suspicious individual in his gated community, to state that Travyon Martin was a victim of racial profiling as Obama/Soetoro has done and that was rejected by the jury, something that the editors of the conciliarist apologetical journal known as the National Catholic Register have done as well as they lauded Francis the Anti-Apostle's concern for the "poor," is the work of pure demagoguery--and nothing else.
None of that means anything to those whose very political lifeblood takes strength from every opportunity imaginable to fan the flames of racial resentment and hatred.
Indeed, President Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro injected himself into the aftermath of the jury verdict in the case of George Zimmerman three days ago, saying that Trayvon Martin could have been him thirty-five years earlier:
You know, when Trayvon Martin was first shot I said that this could have
been my son. Another way of saying that is Trayvon Martin could have
been me 35 years ago. And when you think about why, in the African
American community at least, there’s a lot of pain around what happened
here, I think it’s important to recognize that the African American
community is looking at this issue through a set of experiences and a
history that doesn’t go away. (Remarks by the President on Trayvon Martin.)
Well, Mister President, you professional liar whose administration specializes in the suppression of political dissent, ruling by executive decrees and stonewalling and/or deceiving both Congress and the American public on such matters as the deaths of Americans in Benghazi, Libya, the targeting of political adversaries by the Internal Revenue Service, the securing of wiretaps on journalists such as James Rosen and others and, among others, the scheme to traffic guns known as "Fast and Furious," here is what you would have looked like thirty-five years ago as, first all, you would have been suspended from high school:
SANFORD -- As thousands of people gathered here to demand an arrest in the Trayvon Martin case, a more complicated portrait began to emerge of a teenager whose problems at school ranged from getting spotted defacing lockers to getting caught with a marijuana baggie and women’s jewelry.
The Miami Gardens teen who has become a national symbol of racial injustice was suspended three times, and had a spotty school record that his family’s attorneys say is irrelevant to the facts that led up to his being gunned down on Feb. 26.
In October, a school police investigator said he saw Trayvon on the school surveillance camera in an unauthorized area “hiding and being suspicious.” Then he said he saw Trayvon mark up a door with “W.T.F” — an acronym for “what the f---.” The officer said he found Trayvon the next day and went through his book bag in search of the graffiti marker.
Instead the officer reported he found women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that he described as a “burglary tool,” according to a Miami-Dade Schools Police report obtained by The Miami Herald. Word of the incident came as the family’s lawyer acknowledged that the boy was suspended in February for getting caught with an empty bag with traces of marijuana, which he called “irrelevant” and an attempt to demonize a victim.
Trayvon’s backpack contained 12 pieces of jewelry, in addition to a watch and a large flathead screwdriver, according to the report, which described silver wedding bands and earrings with diamonds.
Trayvon was asked if the jewelry belonged to his family or a girlfriend.
“Martin replied it’s not mine. A friend gave it to me,” he responded, according to the report. Trayvon declined to name the friend.
Trayvon was not disciplined because of the discovery, but was instead suspended for graffiti, according to the report. School police impounded the jewelry and sent photos of the items to detectives at Miami-Dade police for further investigation.
A lawyer for the dead teen’s family acknowledged Trayvon had been suspended for graffiti, but said the family knew nothing about the jewelry and the screwdriver.
“It’s completely irrelevant to what happened Feb. 26,” said attorney Benjamin Crump. “They never heard this, and don’t believe it’s true. If it were true, why wouldn’t they call the parents? Why wasn’t he arrested?”
Trayvon, who was a junior at Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High School, had never been arrested, police and the family have said.
“We think everybody is trying to demonize him,” Crump said.
No evidence ever surfaced that the jewelry was stolen.
“Martin was suspended, warned and dismissed for the graffiti,” according to the report prepared by schools police.
That suspension was followed four months later by another one in February, in which Trayvon was caught with an empty plastic bag with traces of marijuana in it. A schools police report obtained by The Miami Herald specifies two items: a bag with marijuana residue and a “marijuana pipe.”
The punishment was the third for the teen. On Monday, the family also said Trayvon had earlier been suspended for tardiness and truancy.
Trayvon was shot to death Feb. 26 while serving out his suspension in Sanford, where his father’s girlfriend lives. A neighborhood watch volunteer called the police to say he saw someone in a hoodie who looked high on drugs, and was suspicious because he walked too slowly in the rain. The unarmed teenager carried Skittles and iced tea, and was talking to his girlfriend on the phone, records show. (Multiple suspensions paint complicated portrait of Trayvon Martin.)
This is who you could have been, Mister President?
Suspension from school?
Writing graffiti on lockers?
Breaking the law by carrying traces of marijuana (please, do not write to me about how "tame" marijuana is alleged to be as it is the gateway to all other substances designed to anesthetize reality and lull people into states of euphoria that results in all too many instance of people living for the next "high")?
That's who you could have been, Mister President?
Well, Mister President, we know what you are: a professional, calculated liar and professional race-baiter who could not even tell the truth about yourself in your own autobiography, including the fact that you did not become a race-baiter until it suited your purposes to do so after your training, funded in small part by the Archdiocese of Chicago under the nefarious heretic and lavender-sympathizer named Joseph "Cardinal" Bernardin" in the methods of Saul Alinsky (see Conciliar Church Paid for Obama to Take Alinsky Training):
David Maraniss’s new biography of Barack Obama is the first sustained
challenge to Obama’s control over his own story, a firm and
occasionally brutal debunking of Obama’s bestselling 1995 memoir, Dreams from My Father.
Maraniss’s Barack Obama: The Story punctures two sets of falsehoods: The family tales Obama passed on,
unknowing; and the stories Obama made up. The 672-page book closes
before Obama enters law school, and Maraniss has promised another
volume, but by its conclusion I counted 38 instances in which the
biographer convincingly disputes significant elements of Obama’s own
story of his life and his family history.
The two strands of
falsehood run together, in that they often serve the same narrative
goal: To tell a familiar, simple, and ultimately optimistic story about
race and identity in the 20th Century. The false notes in Obama’s family
lore include his mother’s claimed experience of racism in Kansas, and
incidents of colonial brutality toward his Kenyan grandfather and
Indonesian step-grandfather. Obama’s deliberate distortions more clearly
serve a single narrative: Race. Obama presents himself through the book
as “blacker and more disaffected” than he really was, Maraniss writes,
and the narrative “accentuates characters drawn from black acquaintances
who played lesser roles his real life but could be used to advance a
line of thought, while leaving out or distorting the actions of friends
who happened to be white.”
That the core narrative of Dreams could have survived this long into Obama’s public life is the product
in part of an inadvertent conspiracy between the president and his
enemies. His memoir evokes an angry, misspent youth; a deep and lifelong
obsession with race; foreign and strongly Muslim heritage; and roots in
the 20th Century’s self-consciously leftist anti-colonial struggle.
Obama’s conservative critics have, since the beginnings of his time on
the national scene, taken the self-portrait at face value, and sought to
deepen it to portray him as a leftist and a foreigner.
Reporters
who have sought to chase some of the memoir’s tantalizing yarns have,
however, long suspected that Obama might not be as interesting as his
fictional doppelganger. “Mr. Obama’s account of his younger self and
drugs…significantly differs from the recollections of others who do not
recall his drug use,” the New York Times’s Serge Kovaleski reported dryly in February of 2008, speculating that Obama had “added some writerly
touches in his memoir to make the challenges he overcame seem more
dramatic.” (In one of the stranger entries in the annals of political
spin, Obama’s spokesman defended his boss’s claim to have sampled
cocaine, calling the book “candid.”)
Maraniss’s deep and
entertaining biography will serve as a corrective both to Obama’s
mythmaking and his enemies’. Maraniss finds that Obama’s young life was
basically conventional, his personal struggles prosaic and later
exaggerated. He finds that race, central to Obama’s later thought and
included in the subtitle of his memoir, wasn’t a central factor in his
Hawaii youth or the existential struggles of his young adulthood. And he
concludes that attempts, which Obama encouraged in his memoir, to view
him through the prism of race “can lead to a misinterpretation” of the
sense of “outsiderness” that Maraniss puts at the core of Obama’s
identity and ambition. (The Real Story Of Barack Obama.)
Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro's "enemies" do understand him very well as the young Barry Soetoro who morphed into Barack Hussein Obama, a man who has never released his medical records or college transcripts. Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro became the racialist that he remains to this day because of the ideological programming he received from Saul Alinsky's disciples, and it is by this programming that he seeks to demonize and "isolate" all those who oppose him, including his hapless opponents in the organized crime family of the false opposite of the naturalist "right," as those who, in the more crude words of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., want to "put y'all [black Americans] back in chains" (see Biden, Obama & the Slavery/Race Card, Ya'll; for a video clip of Biden's latest exercise in demagoguery, see Biden: Romney Wants Americans Back In Chains). And what Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro and Eric Holder and their other professional race-baiters are doing to inflame passions following the verdict in the case of George Zimmerman is reprehensible.
Alas, reprehensible behavior in our public officials is precisely what one can expect in a world not informed by the Sacred Deposit of Faith that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ entrusted to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication and not submissive to the Our Lord's Social Reign as It must be exercised by His Holy Church.
In a world not submissive to the Social Reign of Christ the King, you see, people will come to identify themselves on the basis of tribalism, believing that their skin color or ethnicity or gender exempts them from
the binding precepts of the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law. As readers of this site know very well, of course, we
are not judged by God at the moment of our Particular Judgments on the
basis of our skin color or ethnicity. We are judged on the basis of whether we are in
a state of Sanctifying Grace as a member of the Catholic Church.
There is no "affirmative action" program in Heaven,
and the mere fact of being black, white, red, brown, yellow, pink or
turquoise (or any combination thereof) has no bearing whatsoever on
one's absolute obligation to live in accord with the binding precepts of
the Divine Positive Law and the Natural Law as these have been
entrusted by Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ Himself to the
Catholic Church for their eternal safekeeping and infallible
explication. Each and every human being on the face of this earth has an
obligation to try, despite their sins and failings, to cooperate with
the graces won for us on Calvary by the shedding of every single drop of
Our Lord's Most Precious Blood that flow into our hearts and souls
through the loving hands of Our Lady, she who is the Mediatrix of All
Graces, to live in accord with the Deposit of Faith, and those who serve
in public office have an positive obligation to pursue the common
temporal good in the light of the pursuit of man's Last End, the
possession of the Beatific Vision of God the Father, God the Son, and
God the Holy Ghost for all eternity.
Says who? Every true pope of the Catholic Church, that's who, including Pope Saint Pius X?
That the State must be separated from the
Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as
it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious
cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for
the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves
their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not
only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him.
Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order.
It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity
during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political
societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this
is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal
happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But
as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the
conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the
civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest,
but must aid us in effecting it. (Pope Saint Pius X, Vehementer Nos, February 11, 1906.)
As Catholics, my friends, we know that God does not judge us on the basis of the race or ethnicity. Our immortal souls is made unto His own very image and likeness in that we have a rational soul with an intellect to know Him and a will to choose with which to love and to serve Him. Human beings do not love God as "blacks" or as "whites" or as "Latinos or Latinas" or as "Orientals" or as "Native Americans" or as "Italians" or as "Croatians" or as "French" or as "Americans" but as creatures whose immortal souls have been redeemed by the shedding of every single drop of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Human beings are called upon to love God as He has revealed Himself to them through His true Church, the Catholic Church, and to love their own immortal souls as they have been redeemed at so great a cost. Our principal identity as human beings is as members of the Catholic Church. Everything else about us (race, ethnicity, nationality, gender), although occurring certainly within the Providence of God, is secondary.
As I tried to explain to students during my days as a college professor, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ embraced all of the legitimate joys and sorrows of this passing, mortal vale of tears as He underwent His fearful Passion and Death. We suffer or experience joy as human beings, as redeemed creatures, not as mere animals identifiable by external characteristics. There are no such things as "black" tears or "white" tears or "Indian" tears. There is no such thing as "white" joy or "black" joy" or "Latino" joy. The use of the "race" or "ethnicity" or "gender" card is the refuge of cowardly scoundrels who seek privilege and/or to indemnify slothful or corrupt behavior.
We are to see in each person the very impress of the Divine Redeemer and to treat Him accordingly, rendering unto each person that which is his due. We are to discriminate unjustly (we must discriminate justly in many circumstances of our lives as we choose which merchant to patronize, which person to employ, who to admit to a seat in a college or a professional school, to deny employment or privileges to those steeped in public scandal, etc.) against no one nor must we use the external characteristics of a human being to extend privileges that are undeserving and/or would result in an injustice to someone else.
Ah, the Obamas and Eric Holder are penultimate expressions of the farce that must occur in a world when people do not realize that they identities are defined by the fact that they have rational, immortal souls created in the very image and likeness of the Most Blessed Trinity that have been redeemed by the shedding of the Most Precious Blood of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, during this fearful week of weeks.
Human beings are supposed to be bound together by the common bonds of the Catholic Faith, not to break into warring tribes along ethnic or racial or geographic lines, seething with hatred and resentment at those who have "more" (power, money, fame, prestige, accomplishment) than they do. We are to help each other get home to Heaven as members of the Catholic Church who aspire to make reparation to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary for our sins, fulfilling these words of Saint Paul in his Epistle to the Ephesians as we seek to build up each other as members of the Mystical Body of Christ on earth:
[16] From
whom the whole body, being compacted and fitly joined together, by what
every joint supplieth, according to the operation in the measure of
every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the edifying of itself in
charity. This then I say and testify in the Lord: That henceforward you walk not as also the Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, [18] Having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of
God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of
their hearts. [19] Who despairing, have given themselves up to lasciviousness, unto the
working of all uncleanness, unto the working of all uncleanness, unto
covetousness. [20] But you have not so learned Christ;
[21] If so be that you have heard him, and have been taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus: [22] To put off, according to former conversation, the old man, who is corrupted according to the desire of error. [23] And be renewed in the spirit of your mind: [24] And put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth. [25] Wherefore putting away lying, speak; ye the truth every man with his neighbour; for we are members one of another.
[26] Be angry, and sin not. Let not the sun go down upon your anger. [27] Give not place to the devil. [28] He that stole, let him now steal no more; but rather let him labour,
working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have
something to give to him that suffereth need. [29] Let no evil speech proceed from your mouth; but that which is good, to
the edification of faith, that it may administer grace to the hearers. [30] And grieve not the holy Spirit of God: whereby you are sealed unto the day of redemption.
[31] Let all bitterness, and anger, and indignation, and clamour, and blasphemy, be put away from you, with all malice. [32] And be ye kind one to another; merciful, forgiving one another, even as God hath forgiven you in Christ. (Ephesians 4: 16-32.)
This spirit of the Divine Redeemer, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, He Who is the King of all men and all nations whether or not they know or accept Him as such, is far, far from the wretched, darkened hearts of haters such as the Obamas and Eric Holder, people intent on "remedying" every past injustice imaginable as they seek to persecute and harass those who disagree with what they believe to be their "infallible" ideological agenda that they pursue relentlessly in behalf of one objectively grave evil after another.
Our new caste of political leaders who are but the final product of false, naturalistic, anti-Incarnational and semi-Pelagian principles of the American founding (a little reminder, the price of Conversion in Reverse has been lowered to $3.99) will protect "their people" while they use the full powers of the Department of Justice to intimidate "reactionary" citizens such as Mary Susan Pine who try to be a peaceful, prayerful presence in front of America's killing centers so as to convince at least one woman to save her baby from those who are paid to butcher her innocent preborn baby and to use the offices of the Internal Revenue Services to conduct audits on political opponents such as even low-level members of the self-described "Tax Enough Already" (TEA) Party.
The administration of Barack Hussein Obama/Barry Soetoro has become somewhat analogous to the "Ministry of Justice" in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics from its earliest days of operation. Nikolai Krylenko, who would rise eventually to the post of "Commissar of Justice" under Joseph Stalin in 1929 and served in this position until 1931, was the chief prosecutor of Moscow in 1923 during the show trial of Archbishop Jan Cieplak, of the countless numbers of Catholic martyrs of the Soviet Union that was so admired by Barack Hussein Obama's Marxist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. It was during ths unjust prosecution of Archbishop Cieplak that Krylenko made a bold pronouncement, which is contained in the following paragraph about the persecution of Christians by the Soviets
Krylenko, who began to speak at 6:10 PM, was moderate enough at first, but quickly launched into an attack on religion in general and the Catholic Church in particular. "The Catholic Church", he declared, "has always exploited the working classes." When he demanded the Archbishop's death, he said, "All the Jesuitical duplicity with which you have defended yourself will not save you from the death penalty. No Pope in the Vatican can save you now." As the long oration proceeded, the Red Procurator worked himself into a fury of anti-religious hatred. "Your religion", he yelled, "I spit on it, as I do on all religions, -- on Orthodox, Jewish, Mohammedan, and the rest." "There is no law here but Soviet Law," he yelled at another stage, "and by that law you must die." (Francis McCullagh, The Bolshevik Persecution of Christianity, E. P. Dutton Company, New York, New York, 1924, p. 221.)
It is also by Soviet "law" that Nikolai Krylenko died as he was executed after a twenty minute show trial on July 29, 1938. And it is by such "law" that we are governed at this time.
Imagine if Catholics held the same attitudes of resentment about the harsh, violent and sometimes murderous treatment accorded their forbears by Protestants and Freemasons in this country in the Nineteenth Century as the Obamas and Eric Holder and their ideological brethren do about the injustices that have been done to "their" people. Consider this vignette provided by none other than that great evangelizer and patron of the American Indians, Father Pierre-Jean De Smet, S.J.:
The Carbonari, then numerous in America, received their orders direct from European lodges. They edited a paper, L'Eco d'Italia, and labored unceasingly to prejudice the people against the Church and trammel the authority of the Bishops. In the hope of recovering their waning influence, the Protestant ministers made common cause with the revolutionaries. This was the beginning of a vast conspiracy, which imperiled, for a time, Catholic liberty in the United States.
The Know-Nothings, a new society, began to be organized about 1852. Theirs was a secret order, which bound its members by a solemn oath. It was formed, ostensibly, to defend the rights of the poor against European invasion. "America is for Americans" was its slogan. With this object in view, they endeavored to have severe naturalization laws enacted against the new arrivals from Europe, and exclude citizens born of foreign parents from holding public offices. In reality, these fanatics combated no so much the foreign immigration. as the fidelity of Europeans, especially the Irish, to the Church of Rome. To base calumnies they added murder, pillage, incendiarism, and, before long, found an occasion for opening the campaign. In the spring of 1853 the Papal Nuncio to Brazil, Archbishop Bedini, arrived in New York, bringing the Sovereign Pontiff's blessing to the faithful in the Untied States. He was charged, moreover, to investigate the conditions of Catholicism in the great Republic.
The Know-Nothings saw in this mission a grave attack upon American liberties. Their newspapers denounced the perfidious and ambitious intrigues of Rome. The apostate priest Gavazzi came from London and placed his eloquence at the service of his follow-socialists and friends. for several months he followed the Envoy form one city to the other, vomiting forth lies, threatening him with dire reprisals, and through fiery denunciation endeavored to stir up the masses against the "Papists."
From vituperation and abuse there was but one step to action. On Christmas day in Cincinnati a band of assassins attempted to do way with the Nuncio. Driven off by the police, they revenged themselves by burning him in effigy. This odious scene was enacted in several towns. Conditions pointing to renewed attacks, Archbishop Bedini was forced to depart after a short sojourn in the United States. But the hostilities did not cease with the departure of the Nuncio. The campaign lasted for three years, attended by violent outrages and attacks, and armed forces had presently to interfere to defend life and property. A witness of these disorders, Father De Smet draws a gloomy picture of existing conditions in his letters. "The times are becoming terrible for Catholics in these unhappy States. Nowhere in the world do honest men enjoy less liberty."
"European demagogues, followers of Kossuth, Mazzini, etc., have sworn to exterminate us. Seven Catholic churches have been sacked and burned; those courageous enough to defend them have been assassinated." "The future grows darker, and we are menaced from every side. If our enemies succeed in electing a President from ranks--until now the chances have been in their favor--Catholics will be debarred from practicing their religion; our churches and schools will be burned and pillaged, and murder will result from these brawls. During this present time [1854] over twenty thousand Catholics have fled to other countries seeking refuge from persecution, and many more talk of following them. The right to defame and exile is the order of the day in this great Republic, now the rendezvous o the demagogues and outlaws of every country."
No laws were enacted for the protection of Catholics, and in some States the authorities were openly hostile. "The legislators of New York and Pennsylvania are now busy with the temporal affairs of the Church, which they wish take out of the hands of the Bishops. These States have taken the initiative, and others will soon follow. In Massachusetts, a mischief-making inquisition has just been instituted, with the object of investigating affairs in religious houses. In Boston, a committee of twenty-four rascals, chosen from among the legislators, of which sixty are Protestant ministers, searched and inspected a convent of the Sisters of of Notre Dame de Namur."
While making a tour of the Jesuit houses with the Provincial, Father De Smet more than once braved the fury of the fanatics. In Cincinnati, a priest could now show himself in the street without being insulted by renegade Germans, Swiss, and Italians. In Louisville, thirty Catholics were killed in an open square and burned alive in their houses. Those who attempted to flee were driven back into the flames at the point of pistols and knives. Even in St. Louis, several attempts were made in one week upon the lives of citizens. The Jesuits were not spared. At Ellsworth, Maine, Father Bapst was taken by force from the house of a Catholic where he was hearing confessions, was covered with pitch, rolled in feathers, tied, swung by his hands and feet to a pole, and carried through the city to the accompaniment of gross insults. (Father E. Lavaille, S.J., The Life of Father De Smet, S.J. (1801-1873): Apostle of the Rocky Mountains, published originally in 1915 by P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, New York, and reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers in 2000 with the additions and the subtitle, "Apostle of the Rocky Mountains." pp. 262-265.)
No, those persecuted Catholics were not the "people" of Barack and Michele Obama and Eric Holder, which is why they have sought to demonize what they think are the authorities of the Catholic Church in the United States of America who expressed opposition to caesar's mandate requiring all employers, including religious institutions, to provide coverage for contraceptive pills and devices and sterilization. "Their" "people" are only those who "look" like they do and, secondarily, those others who, regardless of their skin color or creed, are "enlightened" enough to agree with them on every prescription of public policy they issue to be followed without a whimper by the unwashed masses who they hold in such utter and complete contempt, which is why they must use demagoguery much in the manner of the Know-Nothings" in order to keep those masses from recognizing them for what they are: tyrannical racialists and race-baiters and Marxist ideologues of the first order.
While they will work with "Catholics" of the ilk as Kathleen Sebelius and Nancy Patricia D'Alesandro Pelosi, the Obamas and Holder have a hated for believing Catholics, especially, as mentioned before in this article, the "white Irish-Catholic power structure" in Cook County, Illinois:
The Chicago Sun-Times’s Lynn Sweet picked out an interesting morsel in Jodi Kantor’s book about the Obama family:
“When Michelle Obama worked in Mayor Daley’s City Hall in the early
1990s, she was 'distressed' by how a small group of 'white Irish
Catholic' families — the Daleys, the Hynes and the Madigans — 'locked
up' power in Illinois.
"She particularly resented the way power in Illinois was locked up
generation after generation by a small group of families, all white
Irish Catholic — the Daleys in Chicago, the Hynes and Madigans
statewide.”
Obama White House Chief of Staff Bill Daley, one of those hated white
Irish Catholics, resigned the same weekend the book’s juiciest tidbits
leaked out.
It is probably all just a coincidence, but sometimes coincidences reveal bigger truths.
And
the bigger truth is that Bill Daley left the White House because he
lost to Valerie Jarrett and to the president’s wife in the battle for
the philosophical direction of the Obama White House.
I don’t
know if Michelle Obama’s antipathy toward white Irish Catholics finally
became too much of a barrier to Daley or not. But I do know that Daley
was only ineffective because his boss would not let him be effective.
Bill
Daley is a political pragmatist. He cuts deals. Like his father and his
brother, he is not a left-wing ideologue; nor is he a Republican in
Democratic clothing.
He is a pro-business Democrat, an increasingly rare breed these days in Washington.
Obama
is not a pro-business Democrat. His wife is not a pro-business
Democrat. They don’t like the business community. They don’t trust the
free market. They want to spread wealth around (other people’s wealth, I
might add). (Obama's real reelection problem.)
Father De Smet accurately described the persecution of Catholics. Unfortunately, however, he believed that the very thing that produced this persecution, the insanity of "freedom of conscience," would save the day for Catholics, who would cheer mightily when their liberties were respected by all others. The logic of the evil of "liberty of conscience" is such, however, that the very thing exalted by so many Catholics, including the courageous, zealous, indefatigable apostle of souls, Father Pierre-Jean De Smet, was bound to wind up infecting the minds of Catholics worldwide, producing a false religion, conciliarism, that sees "good" in all false religions and believes that Catholics can "learn" from the differing beliefs of others. Father De Smet did not understand that the ultimate expression of "liberty of conscience" would be the likes of the Obamas and Eric Holder.
Popes Gregory XVI and Pius IX had issued warnings about "liberty of conscience" that were never repeated to Catholics in the "free" United States of America:
"This shameful font of indifferentism gives rise to that absurd and
erroneous proposition which claims that liberty of conscience must be
maintained for everyone. It spreads ruin in sacred and civil affairs,
though some repeat over and over again with the greatest impudence that
some advantage accrues to religion from it. "But the death of the soul is worse than freedom of error,"
as Augustine was wont to say. When all restraints are removed by which
men are kept on the narrow path of truth, their nature, which is already
inclined to evil, propels them to ruin. Then truly "the bottomless pit"
is open from which John saw smoke ascending which obscured the sun, and
out of which locusts flew forth to devastate the earth. Thence comes
transformation of minds, corruption of youths, contempt of sacred things
and holy laws -- in other words, a pestilence more deadly to the state
than any other. Experience shows, even from earliest times, that cities
renowned for wealth, dominion, and glory perished as a result of this
single evil, namely immoderate freedom of opinion, license of free
speech, and desire for novelty. (Pope Gregory XVI, Mirari Vos, August 15, 1832.)
For you well know, venerable brethren, that at this
time men are found not a few who, applying to civil society the impious
and absurd principle of "naturalism," as they call it, dare to teach
that "the best constitution of public society and (also) civil progress
altogether require that human society be conducted and governed without
regard being had to religion any more than if it did not exist; or, at
least, without any distinction being made between the true religion and
false ones." And, against the doctrine of Scripture, of the Church, and
of the Holy Fathers, they do not hesitate to assert that "that is the
best condition of civil society, in which no duty is recognized, as
attached to the civil power, of restraining by enacted penalties,
offenders against the Catholic religion, except so far as public peace
may require." From which totally false idea of social government they do
not fear to foster that erroneous opinion, most fatal in its effects on
the Catholic Church and the salvation of souls, called by Our
Predecessor, Gregory XVI, an "insanity," viz., that "liberty of
conscience and worship is each man's personal right, which ought to be
legally proclaimed and asserted in every rightly constituted society;
and that a right resides in the citizens to an absolute liberty, which
should be restrained by no authority whether ecclesiastical or civil,
whereby they may be able openly and publicly to manifest and declare any
of their ideas whatever, either by word of mouth, by the press, or in
any other way." But, while they rashly affirm this, they do not
think and consider that they are preaching "liberty of perdition;" and
that "if human arguments are always allowed free room for discussion,
there will never be wanting men who will dare to resist truth, and to
trust in the flowing speech of human wisdom; whereas we know, from the
very teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ, how carefully Christian faith
and wisdom should avoid this most injurious babbling."
And, since where religion has been removed
from civil society, and the doctrine and authority of divine revelation
repudiated, the genuine notion itself of justice and human right is
darkened and lost, and the place of true justice and legitimate right is
supplied by material force, thence it appears why it is that some,
utterly neglecting and disregarding the surest principles of sound
reason, dare to proclaim that "the people's will, manifested by what is
called public opinion or in some other way, constitutes a supreme law,
free from all divine and human control; and that in the political order
accomplished facts, from the very circumstance that they are
accomplished, have the force of right." But who, does not see
and clearly perceive that human society, when set loose from the bonds
of religion and true justice, can have, in truth, no other end than the
purpose of obtaining and amassing wealth, and that (society under such
circumstances) follows no other law in its actions, except the
unchastened desire of ministering to its own pleasure and interests?"
(Pope Pius IX, Quanta Cura, December 8, 1864.)
Father De Smet may not have seen these encyclical letters or have applied them to the situation in the United States of America. Father De Smet did, however, recognize that the Cross of the Divine Redeemer was necessary to civilize any peoples. His tireless work in converting and instructing the Indians prompted them to trust him more than the representatives of the government of the United States of America. Father De Smet had instructed representatives of various tribes gathered at the Fort Laramie Council in September of 1851 about the terms of a treaty that had been proposed by the United States government, writing the following after he had made his presentation:"
"Promises, threats, firearms, and swords," said he, "are less effective than the Black Robe's words of peace and the civilizing banner of the cross." (Letter from Father De Smet to the editor of the Brussels Journal, June 30, 1853, as quoted in (Father E. Lavaille, S.J., The Life of Father De Smet, S.J. (1801-1873): Apostle of the Rocky Mountains, published originally in 1915 by P. J. Kenedy & Sons, New York, New York, and reprinted by TAN Books and Publishers in 2000 with the additions and the subtitle, "Apostle of the Rocky Mountains." p. 235.)
The Cross of the Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, can even civilize the likes of the Obamas and Eric Holder and Al Sharpton and Jesse Louis Jackson. It can always civilize us once and for all if we resolve to quit our sins and make reparation for them as the consecrated slaves of Our Royal Messias through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Most Blessed Mother.
The Cross of the Divine Redeemer is the reality from which the lords of Modernity reject, but which we must embrace as we seek to convert our own lives on a daily basis and to pray for the conversion of those who serve as a contemporary jailers.
It is, therefore, with great
humility that we must recognize how many times we have been on the wrong
of the Cross. We must be recognize that we have denied Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as did Saint Peter, that we have washed our hands of our own guilty as
did Pontius Pilate, that we have sold Him out for thirty pieces of
silver rather repeatedly as Judas Iscariot did just once, Spy Wednesday. We must never kid ourselves into believing that we
have not played--and sometimes continue to play--the roles of a Saint
Peter or a Pontius Pilate or a Judas Iscariot in our lives. What
matters, of course, is that we recognize the fact of betrayals and get
ourselves to a true bishop or a true priest in the Sacred Tribunal of
Penance very week.
As we make reparation each and every day for our own many sins, imitating the life that Saint Mary Magdalene after she gave up her life of sins, we must make sure to pray--and by name--for the conversion of those who in public life who use the "race card" so shamelessly as they support one objective moral evil after another under cover of law, oblivious to the fact that social and economic conditions must worsen in any nation where such evils are protected under cover of law and promoted in every aspect of its popular culture. To this end, of course, we must pray as many Rosaries each day as our states-in-life permit, entrusting all to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary.
The Neros and Diocletians and Trajans of Modernity will pass from the scene upon the Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. They--and their conciliar enablers--will be but footnotes in history. We may not live to see this day. Not to worry. The Apostles did not see the glory of the first Christendom with their own bodily eyes. They were content to plant the seeds for its glories. We can do no less in our own day as the totally consecrated slaves of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of Mary, asking for all of the graces we need each day so that we will not fold like cheap cameras when it comes to our defense of the Catholic Faith, including our defense of the Social Reign of Christ the King.
May Our Lady help us to be led out of the prison of our own sins and selfishness and the lies of Modernity and Modernism as we are enlightened at all times by the Light Who is her Divine Son, Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, King of men and their nations. May the day come soon when He is recognized by the Constitution of the United States of America as the King of this nation as He is of all nations.
Vivat Christus Rex!
Isn't it time to pray a Rosary now?
Our Lady of the Rosary, pray for us.
