Obama vs. Santorum. Two Populist Candidates,Two Views of Freedom Comments
Rick Santorum's view of government - and economics - is from below, with the family as the first government and the first economy. All other government must assist and not usurp its primary role. It must proceed from the bottom up. This is about more than "limited government", though it certainly is that. This is about good government. Can government be good? Yes,when freedom flourishes. Good in the sense of efficient, deferring to ... Continue Reading
1 - 10 of 64 Comments
Leave a Comment
Most Popular
Pope Francis says atheists can do good and go to heaven too! Read More
There's the problem! Americans are out of touch with scientific consensus on climate change Read More
Culture of Corruption: Why Obama's misuse of Marines is wrong Read More
Bill Donohue, Catholic League, Disclose Fight with the IRS, Demonstrate Courage Read More
Receiving the Eucharist: I Have Decided to Kneel For Jesus Read More
Daily Readings
Reading 1, Sirach 6:5-17
A kindly turn of speech attracts new friends, a courteous ... Read More
Psalm, Psalms 119:12, 16, 18, 27, 34, 35
Blessed are you, Yahweh, teach me your will! Read More
Gospel, Mark 10:1-12
After leaving there, he came into the territory of Judaea and ... Read More
Saint of the Day
St. David I of Scotland
May 24: David, the youngest son of Scotland’s virtuous queen, (Saint) ... Read More
Marketplace
Three Steps to Sanctity
"Nothing in life is worth so much as our becoming saints.” A powerful ... Read More
SAINT BENEDICT MEDALS THE MOST POWERFULLY BLESSED! Read More
Bravo Pete. You are exactly right. The fight around social issues is merely a diversionary tactic so the plundering of our treasure can continue. The sound bite electorate has been performing as expected. We are pitted one against the other assuring that the status quo will remain. As you mention the 99% versus the 1% (not a reference to occupy Wall Street), once the 1% cashes in all their chips, they will quietly withdraw from the casino and leave us with whatever is left.
Pete Brady: I concur. God bless.
Rob: I don't run to any party. I run to the candidate that is closest to my principles and values as a devout Catholic. If that person happens to be a Democrat, so be it. If Republican, ditto. You can defend Soros all you want. I don't begrudge his wealth. It's promoting communism in America and around the world with his wealth that I object to. And you should too. And, you sure like to throw that word "hate" around. People that don't have hate in their heart rarely use that word. Get this straight. I don't hate Obama or anyone else on this God given paradise. As a matter of fact, what I've seen of him as a person (not politician) has been very congenial. A great husband, father and has a fairly good sense of humor. What I "hate" is what he and his comrades are doing to this country. You say you didn't vote for him and I believe you. BUT, if you did not vote at all and if you do not vote at all this November to get him out of office, that is a back door to supporting him. As far as the "shortcomings" of Reagan and Bush, you are right. There were many things that each of them did that I wasn't too happy with but they weren't anti-American as is Obama. If you want proof of that, read his book. You can't deny his own words. Your post finally reveals who you really are. I am not criticizing that. You are free to think and do and say what you please. Cherish that right while you "still" have it. Like you and I both have said, we will agree to disagree. But don't go throwing around accusations of hatred. It is not very becoming. God bless.
Should not the following two quotes be of much greater concern to Americans as this election approaches? More so than having a "populist" candidate? In 1924 the former English Chancellor of the Exchequer, Reginald McKenna, said this: "I am afraid that the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money. ... And they who control the credit of the nation, direct the policy of governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people." At about the same time the eminent Catholic historian, Hilaire Belloc, said the following with regard to the creation of money afforded to government: "The first advance had been just over a million. In four years the national debt was twenty millions, and in twenty years it was already over fifty millions. It became a permanent institution. In this fashion governments were enabled, for their purposes, to saddle posterity with the duty of financing their wars, whilst what was worse, wealthy men found the opportunity for levying a permanent tax on the community." Sound familiar? Although almost a century ago, and in Britain, does it not sound all just a bit too familiar? Have we learned nothing? Should not the words "End the Fed" be a resounding cry in America? It is troubling that as Americans go to the various primaries and eventually "the election" they are generally ignorant of the intimate relationship between the FED and rising gas prices, crony capitalism, endless wars, the 99% versus the "one per-centers," and almost every other ill that besets the very well-being and integrity of what makes this nation, "America, the land of the free." Are we to go into the dustbin of history with nary a whimper?
Now that the bloodletting has subsided a bit there's a question that has bothered me ever since I first read the title to this article. "Populist?" Since Obama (bad) and Santorum (good) are both described as "populist candidates" in pretty much the same breath is that an important thing to have in our presidential candidate? Above other considerations? Is it fundamental to what the Constitution imbues to the executive? Does it help with the problems this nation faces at this time in our history? Or is more at a superficial pandering to a "sound bite" electorate? I am concerned that "populist" is a word that should not be found to be descriptive of any branch of our government.
JoAnn/Vance, immigration is a funny thing when you look at the actual record. For starters, we've had plenty of time to build a wall and secure our border. Why all of the sudden there is so much outrage that it's not being done escapes me as violence has always ebbed and flowed along the border. Personally, I think it's our government's way to allowing domestic companies who cannot outsource their labor have access to the same third world labor rates. I guess I could take this cry seriously if there was any sort of consistency to it. But when you consider that it was not a democrat but Reagan who enacted the last amnesty and Bush who pushed for comprehensive immigration reform, I have to scratch my head and wonder why Obama seems to be bearing the brunt of all this. In regards to your research, did you happen to do any reading in regards to who is behind most of the immigration bills being picked up by various states? Private prison companies. Never mind the fact that individuals on Jan Brewer's cabinet are former private prison lobbyist or the guy who drafted the bill is neck deep with connections to this industry. Why is this important, because as this bill was being draftet the prison companies were educating lawmakers that immigrant detention was the next big prison boon. I don't offer this to defend Obama. Obama is just as responsible as every other President who has failed to secure the border (although it's hard to say that Reagan probably isn't more responsible and Bush not doing it after 9/11 shocks me). Do I support border security, you bet. I live in a border state. Do I support private companies jerry rigging our legislative process to make a buck, no. As for George Soros and crew, if you don't like the things he does with his money or how he makes it, then convince our legislators to enact laws to prevent it. But when the very party you run to with open arms enacts laws and prevents regulations that protects markets against the very thing that Soros does, I have to scratch my head and ask if you guys have really looked at this situation. Somewhere I think I've gathered from you guys that people are allowed to spend money as they wish. Again, if we don't like the way George Soros is spending money, then find a billionaire with your ideological bent and get him to spend money against him. Given the individual billionaire funders of these super pacs, there are plenty to go around. But I think you are right, we'll just have to agree to disagree. You do not need to convice me about anything regarding Obama as I didn't vote for him the first time and don't plan to this time. But I will not blindly run to candidates who I believe could actually be worse or who are responsible for some of the very laws that got us into this ditch in the first place. As you focus on every single aspect of Obama's history and words, am I wrong to focus on their votes, postions etc? Isn't that what an educated voter is supposed to do? If your hatred of Obama causes you to lose sight of that, well that's your business, but I'm opting off that train.
Vance: You are right. I know who Mr. Soros is. I've done extensive research on him. He has already done his dirty deeds to other countries. He is known as Mr. Lucifer. He does refer to himself as an "angel." He's the "angel" that is going to "fix" America. He is also known as the man who broke the Bank of England. Not to mention devaluing the ruble in Russia. I heard a great line from Ted Nugent yesterday. It's from one of his songs. It's "There's hope for tomorrow - IF you wake up today." You and I know who Obama is, that's why I recommend his books to skeptics. Since they don't believe people's warnings, maybe if they would read Obama's own words, they would. But, then again, there are some people that you just can't get through to. I'm sure they think the same of us. But it does make for lively dialogue. Like Jesus said when he sent His apostles our to preach. If they don't believe you, shake your sandals off and go to the next village. I paraphrased that. That's why I didn't put it in quotation marks. Ole Georgie Boy is dead set on an "Open Society" throughout the world. No borders. That's why Obama won't do anything about the borders and then has the gall to turn around and sue states that are only trying to protect their citizens. I support Jan Brewer all the way. But I think she should have just did the job without all the bru-ha ha. The law was already on the books. All they had to do was just enforce it. Her making a big deal out of it is what was not very wise. I know she was just trying to relay to people that the Federal Gov. wasn't doing its job but, I think, if she was more discreet about it, she would have had more success. God bless.
JoAnn, You hit the nail on the head about Obama and his minions bringing down our country. Might I suggest who the "Mastermind" is. On October 13, 1917 our Lady of Fatima told Lucia, Francisco, and Jacinta that there is an "Evil" rising in Russia and they will spread their "Errors" throughout the world. Now, we know who the "Evil" is. Today, the "Masterminds" are Multi-Billionaire George Soros and Communist Party International. Obama and the Marxist Democrat Party are just dutiful soldiers for their cause. WE DON"T NEED TO READ HIS LOUSY BOOKS. HE'S ALREADY ((( DEMONSTRATED ))) WHO AND WHAT HE IS!! No, I'm not yelling at you. I'm shouting at Rob and other Obamabots. God Bless.
Rob: Right! But I never said that Obama was the "mastermind." He is the servant. God bless.
JoAnn, I get what you are saying, but I get confused when you call Obama a puppet on one hand but then say he's the mastermind of our country coming apart on the other. When you look at the history of our country, haven't we always had a duality of good and evil. We had a great founding, but slavery. We had self-suficiency but discriminated against blacks. In my opinion, there has always been an effort by those with means to control our society. Whether it be the robber barons of times past or the "elites" of today. Isn't this just one of the prices for living in a free society? At the end of the day, as free people, we can choose to become slaves of whatever worldly system we want, if our own country. Or we can choose to bask in the freedom of living as a disciple of Christ who isn't bound by whatever or whomever is making life tough on us. Maybe you are right and there is more of a concerted effort to bring things down right now. Or maybe this is just a process that we have to go through to get us to wake up. But regardless, the scriptures are pretty clear that sometimes the evil subsists with the good. I think the goal is not to become evil as you fight it. Our country is not the church. God did not proclaim that the gates of hell would not prevail against the USA. Maybe Obama is the grand terrorist who has been ordained to bring this country down, or just maybe he is just another in a long line of puppets who represent those who have been using their money and power to shape things since this country began. This is why we vote right?