Home Articles Golden Oldies Speaking Schedule About Christ or Chaos Links Donations Contact Us
April 14, 2011


Scratch A Liberal, Find A Fascist

by Thomas A. Droleskey

Caesar has spoken again! All Hail! Caesar Obamus, hard-core ideologue of the naturalist "left," a man whose mind was deformed as a child by his atheist mother and as an adolescent by his Marxist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, as a preparation for his bare-knuckles, take-no-prisoner and distort-the-truth approach to "community organizing" he learned while cutting his political eye-teeth in the devil's den known as the late Saul Alinsky's organizations in the Chicago, Illinois, area (see Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals).

President Barack Hussein Obama is a shameless prevaricator, whose stern lectures to the American people about "justice" and "fairness" and "morality" demonstrate time and time again that he, who supports the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn, that he, a prisoner of his ubiquitous weapon of mass disinformation, the TelePrompTer, is an arrogant elitist who believes that he knows better the rest of us, mere mortals who have not been as "blessed" as he has been with his personal qualities of intelligence and leadership.

The arrogance of Caesar Barackus Obamus Ignoramus's leftist elitism was on full display yesterday, Wednesday, April 13, 2011, in the speech on fiscal policy that he delivered at George Washington University in Washington, District of Columbia. Obama's length speech, during which his pro-abortion Vice President, Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr., a Catholic who continues to maintain his "good standing" in the conciliar structures despite his own nefarious, demagogic support for the chemical and surgical assassination of innocent preborn children (see Lest We Forget and Memo to Joseph Biden and Nancy Pelosi and Their Conciliar Enablers), apparently fell asleep, was nothing other than a campaign speech designed to appeal to his base of support amongst the professional leftists who can help turn out the vote next year in urban areas in "swing states" amongst various constituency groups whose members are dependent upon government redistribution programs for their livelihoods. Obama and his political team, knowing full well that Obama's support of extravagant government spending and the raising of the income tax on the "rich" and on small business owners will never pass muster with the Republicans in the United States Congress, have, it would appear, enough poll data at their disposal to convince them that it is worth it to them in terms of potential electoral support to defend the welfare state by waging a kind of class warfare against the naturalists of the "right" in the Republican Party that would make past American masters of class warfare such as Franklin Delano Roosevelt and William Jefferson Blythe Clinton to complete and utter shame.

 As others have noted, Obama's speech yesterday was a campaign speech, not a policy speech designed to address the profligate spending that was contained in his original plan for Fiscal Year 2012 that was contained in what appears to be a now superseded budget that he unveiled at Parkville Elementary School in Baltimore, Maryland, on Monday, February 14, 2011. Obama's original budget for Fiscal Year 2012 proposed cutting $400 billion in spending over the course of a decade. He now says that he has a "plan" to save $4 trillion over the course of the next twelve years while continuing to "invest" in the taxpayer-funded exercise in child-abuse called "public education" and in "people" by means of ObamaCare (see Kill Truth, Kill Babies, Front Men For The New World Order, and Hubris All Over the Map) and Medicare while providing no details as to the specifics of his William Claude Dukenfeld flimflam proposal. It turns out, of course, that Obama is not flimflamming the American public all by himself. The agreement he reached with United States Representative John Boehner, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, six days ago to avert a government shutdown that called for $38 billion in budget cuts for the rest of Fiscal Year 2011 is itself a complete sham as the Congressional Budget Office reports that the actual amount to be saved is in the neighborhood of $352 million. What a farce:

The $38 billion in budget cuts touted by Republicans over the weekend might end up being less. A lot less. 

According to a Congressional Budget Office estimate, the hard-fought budget deal funding the government for the rest of the year saves only $352 million from non-war accounts this year. The new figure has rankled conservative lawmakers who thought they had extracted a fair amount of concessions out of the other side of the aisle. It wasn't the $61 billion in cuts they had originally sought, but House Speaker John Boehner and his deputies insisted $38 billion in cuts was the best deal they could get, with the White House and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid on the other side of the negotiating table. 

But the CBO analysis showed the savings mostly won't materialize this year, potentially spelling trouble for the deal as it approaches a floor vote Thursday, though Boehner insists it'll pass. 

About $8 billion in immediate cuts to domestic programs and foreign aid are offset by nearly equal increases in defense spending. When war funding is factored in the legislation would actually increase total federal outlays by $3.3 billion relative to current levels. 

To a fair degree, the lack of immediate budget-cutting punch is because the budget year is more than half over and that cuts in new spending authority typically are slow to register on deficit tallies. And Republicans promise that when fully implemented and repeated year after year, the cuts in the measure would reduce the deficit by $315 billion over the coming decade. 

The CBO study confirms that the measure trims $38 billion in new spending authority relative to current levels, but many of the cuts come in slow-spending accounts like water-and-sewer grants that don't have an immediate deficit impact. Other cuts come in areas where the government was unlikely to spend the money anyway, CBO suggested. 

In addition, cuts to mandatory benefit programs, while producing no deficit savings, can be claimed under budget rules to pay for spending increases elsewhere in the legislation. All told, $17.8 billion in such savings is claimed but just a tiny portion of it would actually reduce the deficit. (Fuzzy Math At Work? )


What was that I wrote in Never Counting the Cost of Sin five days ago now? This is all a sideshow, especially when one considers that someone in the office of House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy sent out an e-mail blast referring to Republicans who opposed the Obama-Boehner-Harry Reid (United States Senate Majority Leader) agreement as Hanoi Jane before McCarthy's office stepped in to undertake "damage control" prior to the House vote this afternoon that saw fifty-nine Republicans vote against the sham measure. Ah, yes, the "gatekeepers" of the naturalistic farce that is American electoral politics and policy-making really, really resent it when people think for themselves rather than march in lock step with them and their dictates. (This is, of course, very similar to the attitude of some of the self-anointed "leaders" in the "defend Benedict at all costs and all times rather than to admit sedevacantism is even a remote possibility" segment of the "resist but recognize" movement within the counterfeit church of conciliarism.)

Full well aware of the divide that separates the "realists" from the "purists" in the Republican Party, Obama's speech was nothing other than a call-to-arms in behalf of the presuppositions of the "left" that have their origins in large part with John Locke, the Scottish "philosopher" whose writing provided a bridge, if you will, between the relativist theology of Protestantism whose "rights" to the English throne he sought to defender, and the rise of Judeo-Masonry, of which his own liberalism continues to play such an important role in sustaining and shaping as it mutates over the course of time.

It is wise, therefore, to the influence of John Locke upon the liberal mindset that was reflected in Barack Hussein Obama's speech yesterday at George Washington University, starting with a brief review of the events that caused him to chart the course of an ideology that was and remains nothing other than an exercise in human self-redemption, the belief that a majority of "reasonable men" could improve social conditions by the use of government structures without any reform of their own individual lives.

The Protestant Revolt, you see, engendered murder and mayhem in the German states after it was launched by the hideous, lecherous, drunken Augustinian monk named Father Martin Luther, O.S.A., on October 31, 1517, when he posted his "ninety-five theses" on the door of Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany. Luther himself was aghast to see the almost instantaneous moral degeneration of his "evangelicals" into violent mobs who pilfered and sacked formerly Catholic churches and lived riotously, oblivious to the fact that he was responsible for this degeneration by depriving those who followed his revolution against Christ the King of the Sacraments and of the true teaching that Our King has entrusted to His Catholic Church for Its eternal safekeeping and infallible explication.

In like manner, of course, the the Protestant Revolt in England engendered murder and violence, much of which was state-sponsored as Henry Tudor was responsible between the years of 1534 and 1547 for ordering the executions of over 72,000 Catholics who remained faithful to the Catholic Church following the decree that Parliament has passed that declared him to be the "supreme head of the Church in England as far as the law of God allowed." As was the case in the German states as princes gave Luther protection so that they, the princes, could govern in a Machiavellian manner free of any interference from Rome or their local bishops, so was it the case in England that the Protestant Revolution provided the receipt for the unchecked tyranny of English monarchs.

Indeed, the kind of state-sponsored social engineering that has created the culture of entitlement throughout Europe and here in the United States of America since the administrations of Presidents Thomas Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a social engineering that is near and dear to the statist heart of Barack Hussein Obama, had its antecedent roots in King Henry VIII's revolt against the Social Reign of Christ the King and His Catholic Church in the Sixteenth Century.

Henry Tudor had Parliament enact various laws to force the poor who had lived for a nominal annual fee on the monastery and convent lands (as they produced the food to sustain themselves, giving some to the monastery or convent) off of those lands, where their families had lived for generations, in order to redistribute the Church properties he had stolen to those who supported his break from Rome. Henry quite cleverly created a class of people who were dependent upon him for the property upon which they lived and the wealth they were able to derive therefrom, making them utterly supportive of his decision to declare himself Supreme Head of the Church in England. Those of the poorer classes who had been thrown off of the monastery and convent lands were either thrown into prison (for being poor, mind you) or forced to migrate to the cities, where many of them lost the true Faith and sold themselves into various vices just to survive. The effects of this exercise of state-sponsored engineering are reverberating in the world today, both politically and economically. Indeed, many of the conditions bred by the disparity in wealth created by Henry's land grab in the Sixteenth Century would fester and help to create the world of unbridled capitalism and slave wage that so impressed a German emigre in London by the name of Karl Marx. Unable to recognize the historical antecedents of the real injustices he saw during the Victorian Era, Marx set about devising his own manifestly unjust system, premised on atheism and anti-Theism, to rectify social injustice once and for all. In a very real way, Henry of Tudor led the way to Lenin of Russia.

The abuses of power by English monarchs led to all manner of social unrest in England, especially as those Anglicans who were followers of John Calvin sought to eradicate all remaining vestiges of Catholicism from Anglican "worship" and "doctrine" (removing Latin from certain aspects of the heretical Anglican liturgy, smashing statues, eliminating high altars in favor of tables, things that have been undertaken in the past forty years in many formerly Catholic churches that are now in the custody of the counterfeit church of conciliarism). This unrest produced the English Civil Wars of the 1640s and the establishment in 1649 of what was, for all intents and purposes, a Calvinist state under the control Oliver Cromwell that became a Cromwellian dictatorship between the years of 1653 to 1660 until the monarchy under the House of Stuart was restored in 1660. Oh yes, King Charles I lost his head, quite literally, in 1649 as the "Roundheads" of Oliver Cromwell came to power in 1649 following seven years of warfare between "parliamentarians" and "royalists." Revolutions always wind up eating their own. The English monarchy itself was eaten up by the overthrow of the Social Reign of the King of Kings by Henry VIII of the House of Tudor in 1534.

King James II, who had converted to Catholicism in France in 1668 while he was the Prince of York under his brother, King Charles II of the restored monarchy, acceded to the English throne in on June 6, 1885, following his brother's death, which occurred after Charles II himself had converted to the the Faith on his deathbed. Suspicious that the property that had been acquired and the wealth that had been amassed as a result of Henry VIII's social-engineering land grab of 150 years before would be placed in jeopardy, Protestant opponents of King James II eventually forced him to abdicate the throne in 1688, his rule having been declared as ended on December 11 of that year. The abdication of King James, whose second wife, Mary of Modena, had been assigned Blessed Father Claude de la Colombiere as her spiritual director when she was the Princess of York, is referred to by Protestant and secular historians as the "glorious revolution," so-called because it ushered in the penultimate result of the Protestant Revolution, the tyranny of the majority.

It was to justify the rise of majoritarianism that John Locke, a Presbyterian (Calvinist) minister, wrote his Second Treatise on Civil Government. Locke believed, essentially, that social problems could be ameliorated if a majority of reasonable men gathered together to discuss their situation. The discussion among these "reasonable men" would lead to an agreement, sanctioned by the approval of the majority amongst themselves, on the creation of structures which designed to improve the existing situation. If those structures did not ameliorate the problems or resulted in a worsening of social conditions then some subsequent majority of "reasonable men" would be able to tear up the "contract" that had bound them before, devising yet further structures designed to do what the previous structures could not accomplish. Locke did not specify how this majority of reasonable men would form, only that it would form, providing the foundation of the modern parliamentary system that premises the survival of various governments upon the whims of a majority at a given moment.

In other words, England's "problem" in 1688 was King James II. The solution? Parliament, in effect, declared that he had abdicated his throne rather than attempt to fight yet another English civil war to maintain himself in power as the man chosen by the parliamentarians to replace him, his own son-in-law William of Orange, who was married to his daughter Mary, landed with armed forces ready to undertake such a battle. The parliamentary "majority" had won the day over absolutism and a return to Catholicism.

Unfortunately for Locke, you see, social problems cannot be ameliorated merely by the creation of structures devised by "reasonable men" and sanctioned by the majority.

All problems in the world, both individual and social, have their remote causes in Original Sin and their proximate causes in the Actual Sins of men. There is no once-and-for-all method or structure by which, for example, "peace" will be provided in the world by the creation of international organizations or building up or the drafting of treaties.

Possessed of the false premises of John Locke by way of the filter provided by a thousand other noxious sources, including out-and-out Marxism, Barack Hussein Obama cannot comprehend the fact that the events of the past five hundred years have robbed men and their nations of the guidance that they need from Holy Mother Church in her exercise of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all that pertains to the good of souls. The civil is thus seen as the first, last and only "solution" to problems that are the result of the prevalence of sin in the world and the systematic, planned destruction of the family by the organized forces of Judeo-Masonry as the basic building block of society.

Rent asunder by contraception and the materialism and self-indulgence that made this frustration of God's Sovereignty over the sanctity and fecundity of marriage a "necessity" in the lives of so many married couples, marriage and the family were rendered so unstable that the civil state stepped in to "care" for those women and children whose husbands had left them as a result of the infidelity that was made "easier" as a result of contraception and the availability of divorce. This placed pressure on married couples who remained faithful to each other as their taxes were raised to such a confiscatory amount as to make them little more than prisoners to the civil state, incapable of providing for many of their own legitimate needs, putting aside the extravagant spending of those who have "postponed" children in order to enjoy material goods and leisure time that have plunged them deeper and deeper into debt, thereby enriching the modern-day Shylocks who return part of their usurious booty to their friends in the organized crime families of naturalism, the Democratic and Republican Parties. The lords of the civil state have desired to restrict the legitimate liberties of citizens in order to enrich and empower themselves when engaging in massive exercises of social engineering upon us all with our own taxpayer dollars (see Making Us Our Own Jailers).

Barack Hussein Obama sees himself as our "secular savior," a man whose ObamaCare is necessary even if we do not know that it is "good" for us. He chafes at the notion that anyone cannot see the "received wisdom" that has "enlightened" him to lead us in such a benevolent manner. As is the case with any adherent of the naturalist "left," Barack Hussein Obama is capable of understanding true root causes, incapable, for example, of understanding that it is precisely because of the overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King that we have lost our true understanding of our duties as citizens and the limited powers of the civil state and the fact that Holy Mother Church, is the chief minister to the temporal needs of others if families cannot care for themselves, that the civil state's involvement in providing such assistance is to be as temporary as possible and employed only as a last resort according to the Natural Law principle of Subsidiarity that was defined as follows by Pope Pius XI in Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931:

As history abundantly proves, it is true that on account of changed conditions many things which were done by small associations in former times cannot be done now save by large associations. Still, that most weighty principle, which cannot be set aside or changed, remains fixed and unshaken in social philosophy: Just as it is gravely wrong to take from individuals what they can accomplish by their own initiative and industry and give it to the community, so also it is an injustice and at the same time a grave evil and disturbance of right order to assign to a greater and higher association what lesser and subordinate organizations can do. For every social activity ought of its very nature to furnish help to the members of the body social, and never destroy and absorb them.

The supreme authority of the State ought, therefore, to let subordinate groups handle matters and concerns of lesser importance, which would otherwise dissipate its efforts greatly. Thereby the State will more freely, powerfully, and effectively do all those things that belong to it alone because it alone can do them: directing, watching, urging, restraining, as occasion requires and necessity demands. Therefore, those in power should be sure that the more perfectly a graduated order is kept among the various associations, in observance of the principle of "subsidiary function," the stronger social authority and effectiveness will be the happier and more prosperous the condition of the State. (Pope Pius XI, Quadragesimo Anno, May 15, 1931.)


The naturalist theater of the absurd that occupies the time of so many people as we prepare to enter the Week of Weeks during which Our Divine Redeemer, Christ the King, underwent His fearful Passion and Death to redeem us is very reminiscent of the expectations of the Jewish people who preferred Barabbas, who was promising them political "liberation" by means of armed forced from the hated Romans who had imposed a reign of cruel oppression upon them, to their very Saviour in the Flesh. Most Americans today, including most Catholics, do not understand that the mountain of fiscal debt accrued as a result of the profligate spending of their own tax dollars on unjust, unconstitutional and immoral programs and unjust, immoral wars is but the logical result of what happens to men and their nations when are drowning in tsunamis of and unrepentant sin and personal excess. The one and only answer is Catholicism and the truly liberating force of the Cross of the Divine Redeemer Himself, Christ the King.

We must ever believe in the power of Our Lady's Most Holy Rosary, using this great spiritual weapon as a shield against sin in our own lives and as the means by which the blinded eyes and the hardened hearts of Catholics steeped in the jingoistic ways of nationalism and naturalism will be, respectively, opened and softened to accept the simple truth stated by Our Lord Himself to Saint Margaret Mary Alacoque:


"I will reign in spite of all who oppose Me."

May it be our privilege, therefore, to plant a few seeds for the restoration of Christendom as we seek to remain faithful to Our Lady's Fatima Message, which is the antidote to each and every secular " ism.: We must continue to do the work of apostles no matter the likelihood of any tangible, earthly success. We must seek to be faithful to the cause of our King by serving Him through His Immaculate Queen's Immaculate Heart, enthroning our own homes to His Most Sacred Heart and to that same Immaculate Heart, helping at least a few souls to His champions as we remember these words that Father Miguel Augustin Pro, S.J., uttered as the bullets fired at him by the Masonic revolutionaries in Mexico pierced his flesh on November 23, 1927:


Viva Cristo Rey!

Our Lady of Loreto, pray for us.

Saint Joseph, pray for us.

Saints Peter and Paul, pray for us.

Saint John the Baptist, pray for us.

Saint John the Evangelist, pray for us.

Saint Michael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Gabriel the Archangel, pray for us.

Saint Raphael the Archangel, pray for us.

Saints Joachim and Anne, pray for us.

Saints Caspar, Melchior, and Balthasar, pray for us.

Saint Justin Martyr, pray for us.

Saints Tiburtius, Valerian and Maximus, pray for us.

See also: A Litany of Saints


Behold the only standard of true human liberty (not the "liberty bell" or the Masonic "goddess" in New York Harbor.)

The Church of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome, Italy, Sunday, May 22, 2005.

© Copyright 2011, Thomas A. Droleskey. All rights reserved.