"Missing" Explosives & Russia

The Washington Times is set to publish a huge story in tomorrow's edition. This article will surely dash any last hopes of a Kerry win after Kerry's weak attempt at an "October Surprise" conspiring with the New York Times and CBS to falsely accuse President Bush and the military of allowing the 380 tons of explosives in Iraq to slip through their fingers.

So, once again we have a permanent member of the UN Security Council in cahoots with Saddam Hussein. It is ridiculous to think we have any chance to work through the UN; a vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism.

Kerry & Catholic Values

John Kerry said in tonight's debate that he "can't legislate or transfer to another American citizen my article of faith" in response to an abortion question. Please don't read between the lines and believe that Kerry is pro-life, but feels that it's not appropriate to legislate that belief.

It's one thing to not impose your beliefs on others and it's quite another thing to support legislation contrary to those supposed beliefs. John Kerry believes what he votes regarding abortion legislation. John Kerry supports partial-birth abortion. In fact, he supports all abortion - any time, any circumstance. A child is an inconvenience, a nuisance, and a problem to be dealt with in John Kerry's world view.

And if it's not appropriate to legislate biblical principles then why do we have laws at all? Do we as a society not have a right to hold people accountable for stealing property or murdering a fellow citizen? Society needs a moral fabric to hold it together or we end up with anarchy.

In November of 1998, a statement was issued by the Catholic Bishops of the United States titled "Living the Gospel of Life: A Challenge to American Catholics". Let me point you to section 25 from this statement:

Today, Catholics risk cooperating in a false pluralism. Secular society will allow believers to have whatever moral convictions they please -- as long as they keep them on the private preserves of their consciences, in their homes and churches, and out of the public arena. Democracy is not a substitute for morality, nor a panacea for immorality. Its value stands -- or falls -- with the values which it embodies and promotes. Only tireless promotion of the truth about the human person can infuse democracy with the right values. This is what Jesus meant when He asked us to be leaven in society. American Catholics have long sought to assimilate into U.S. cultural life. But in assimilating, we have too often been digested. We have been changed by our culture too much, and we have changed it not enough. If we are leaven, we must bring to our culture the whole Gospel, which is a Gospel of life and joy. That is our vocation as believers. And there is no better place to start than promoting the beauty and sanctity of human life. Those who would claim to promote the cause of life through violence or the threat of violence contradict this Gospel at its core.

Too many Catholics have become passive in their beliefs. If you claim to be a Catholic you must let Catholic teachings inform your actions or you're merely a hypocrite. If you don't agree with Catholic teaching then you're outside the bounds of Catholic orthodoxy.

Catholic moral theology recognizes, in the writings of approved authors who faithfully represent the theological tradition of the Church, sound guides for forming a Catholic conscience. One such author is Father Henry Davis, SJ:

It is the duty of all citizens who have the right to vote, to exercise that right when the common good of the State or the good of religion and morals require their votes, and when their voting is useful. It is sinful to vote for the enemies of religion or liberty...
[Moral and Pastoral Theology, vol. 2, Chapter V, 4th Commandment, p. 90 (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1935, 1959)]

Colin B. Donovan, STL comments on Fr. Davis' quote:

Who, then, are the enemies of religion or liberty for whom it would be sinful to vote? Reasonably, it would be those who attack the most basic rights in a society, since all rights depend on those which are logically or actually prior. Among the enumerated inalienable rights recognized by the Declaration of Independence is the right to life. The right to life is both logically and actually prior to all other rights since liberty is meaningless to those who have been unjustly killed. The protection of innocent human life is thus the first obligation of society. This is why protection against foreign enemies is the first duty of the federal government and protection against domestic enemies (criminals) is the first obligation of local government.

They are also enemies of religion and liberty who attack the most basic cell of society, marriage and family. A society that doesn't foster the life-long commitment of a man and a woman to each other and their children is self-destructing. Granting that we have already reaped the fruit of easy divorce laws, the most pernicious attacks against the family today are by those who favor homosexual unions and the granting of marital status to homosexual unions. It is also undermined by an unjust tax system which penalizes marriage in favor of fornication.

Those who are anti-life and anti-family manifest this darkening of conscience, a darkening which makes their other political decisions inherently untrustworthy. No Catholic can reasonable say "this candidate is anti-life and anti-family, but his social policies are in keeping with Catholic principles."

Donovan demonstrates that the protection of innocent life (i.e. the unborn) is pre-eminent over other rights or issues. He also infers that protection against foreign enemies (i.e. terrorists) should be the first concern of the government. John Kerry cannot in good conscience consider his political platform to be acceptable from a Catholic perspective and no informed Catholic can in good conscience support John Kerry's candidacy for president.

Why the UN Resolutions Couldn't Work

There are five countries on the UN Security Council: the United States, Britain, Russia, China, and France. Saddam knew France was the weakest member, so he targeted them as well as actively bribing Russian and Chinese officials. Here's an excerpt from the Scotsman:

SADDAM HUSSEIN believed he could avoid the Iraq war with a bribery strategy targeting Jacques Chirac, the President of France, according to devastating documents released last night.

Memos from Iraqi intelligence officials, recovered by American and British inspectors, show the dictator was told as early as May 2002 that France - having been granted oil contracts - would veto any American plans for war.

Saddam was convinced that the UN sanctions - which stopped him acquiring weapons - were on the brink of collapse and he bankrolled several foreign activists who were campaigning for their abolition. He personally approved every one.

To keep America at bay, he focusing on Russia, France and China - three of the five UN Security Council members with the power to veto war. Politicians, journalists and diplomats were all given lavish gifts and oil-for-food vouchers.

What more is there to say? Why did America need to "go it alone" (read: coalition not including France and Germany)? Because the UN Security Council wasn't ever going to aggressively move against Saddam in spite of the 17 resolutions that Saddam defied.

hat tip: Captain Ed

Catholic voters continuing to move towards Bush

Bush is getting 53% of the Catholic vote compared to Kerry's 39% in the latest Barna poll. Former Democratic mayor of Boston, Raymond Flynn, had this to say:

They've been moving and closer to George Bush all the time," he said. "I think people don't make decisions on political or social issues; they make decisions on the character of the person. That's where George Bush's strength is: his character and its qualities. He's a good man, and people like him. After I talk about Catholic values, there's no other conclusion for people other than to vote for George Bush.

President Bush is actually getting 60% of the Catholic vote in Minnesota according to a recent Zogby poll. The Democratic party seems to no longer be directed by any sort of moral compass. How can one be against a war to root out terrorists bent on killing innocent people, but support the slaughter of unborn babies? The reality is that we're in a war whether or not we choose to be engaged in one. Our only choice is to passively sit back and wait for further attacks on American soil or stand up and attempt to keep the battle elsewhere.

John Kerry and John Edwards may not think the Iraq war should be viewed as part of the GWOT (global war on terror), but the terrorists most certainly view it that way! Why else would half of the insurgents captured during the recent battles in Samarra be of African descent? The terrorists know what's at stake if democracy takes root in the Middle East.

David and Goliath

Here we go! Torii Hunter just smacked one over the fence in the top of the 12th inning to put the Twins up 6-5. For the Twins to go into the belly of the beast and take the first two games in the series is devastating. The Yankees have come back from an 0-2 deficit in the ALDS previously, but they didn't have to face Johan Santana twice in that series! Sturtze was only good for two innings, but I guess Torre didn't know who to turn to next...

UPDATE: Well, Joe Nathan didn't have anything left, either. Hideki Matsui came up with the bases loaded and only one out. A sac fly was all it took to bring Jeter in from 3rd with the winning run. Back to MN!!! Let's go Twins!

Kerry Caught Cheating?

Apparently, John Kerry was using a cheat sheet (specifically not allowed per the agreed-upon debate rules) at the debate last Thursday. You can see video of Kerry pulling out the cheat sheet here.


Thanks to INDC and the Daily Recycler for the photo!

Kerry vs. Kerry

Kerry’s Top Ten Iraq Flip Flops From First Debate

ONE: Claimed “I’ll Never Give A Veto To Any Country Over Our Security.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Preemption Must Pass “Global Test” First. “No president, though all of American history, has ever ceded, and nor would I, the right to preempt in any way necessary to protect the United States of America. But if and when you do it, Jim, you have to do it in a way that passes the test, that passes the global test where your countrymen, your people understand fully why you’re doing what you’re doing and you can prove to the world that you did it for legitimate reasons.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Would Wait On French And Russians To Defend America. SEN. JOHN KERRY: “I would have done what was necessary to know that you had exhausted the available remedies with the French and the Russians.” (MSNBC’s “Hardball,” 10/20/03)

TWO: Claimed “Reason For Going To War Was Weapons Of Mass Destruction, Not The Removal Of Saddam Hussein.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Said “Greatest Threat” Was Saddam’s “Miscalculation,” Not “Actual” WMDs. KERRY: “I would disagree with John McCain that it’s the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it’s what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that – that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 9/15/02)

THREE: Claimed “This President Has Made, I Regret To Say, A Colossal Error Of Judgment. And Judgment Is What We Look For In The President Of The United States Of America.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Questioned Judgment Of Those Claiming Saddam’s Capture Didn’t Help U.S. Security. “Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture don’t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president.” (CNN’s “Capital Gang,” 12/20/03; Anne Q. Hoy, “Dean Faces More Criticism,” [New York] Newsday, 12/17/03)

FOUR: Complained “We Are 90 Percent Of The Casualties And 90 Percent Of The Cost: $200 Billion – $200 Billion That Could Have Been Used For Health Care, For Schools, For Construction, For Prescription Drugs For Seniors, And It’s In Iraq.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Pledged To Fund Reconstruction With “Whatever Number” Of Dollars It Took. NBC’S TIM RUSSERT: “Do you believe that we should reduce funding that we are now providing for the operation in Iraq?” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “No. I think we should increase it.” RUSSERT: “Increase funding?” KERRY: “Yes.” RUSSERT: “By how much?” KERRY: “By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win. It is critical that the United States of America be successful in Iraq, Tim.” (NBC’s “Meet The Press,” 8/31/03)

FIVE: Claimed “You Don’t Send Troops To War Without The Body Armor That They Need.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Said It Would Be Reckless And “Irresponsible” To Vote Against Funding For Troops. LOS ANGELES TIMES’ DOYLE McMANUS: “If that amendment does not pass, will you then vote against the $87 billion?” KERRY: “I don’t think any United States senator is going to abandon our troops and recklessly leave Iraq to whatever follows as a result of simply cutting and running. That’s irresponsible. What is responsible is for the administration to do this properly now. And I am laying out the way in which the administration could unite the American people, could bring other countries to the table, and I think could give the American people a sense that they’re on the right track. There’s a way to do this properly. But I don’t think anyone in the Congress is going to not give our troops ammunition, not give our troops the ability to be able to defend themselves. We’re not going to cut and run and not do the job.” (CBS’ “Face The Nation,” 9/14/03)

Kerry Voted Against Senate Passage Of Iraq/Afghanistan Reconstruction Package That Included “Money For Body Armor For Soldiers.” (S. 1689, CQ Vote #400: Passed 87-12: R 50-0; D 37-11; I 0-1, 10/17/03, Kerry Voted Nay; “Highlights Of Iraq, Afghanistan Measures,” The Associated Press, 10/17/03)

‘“I Actually Did Vote For The $87 Billion Before I Voted Against It,’ [Kerry] Said.”(Glen Johnson, “Kerry Blasts Bush On Protecting Troops,” The Boston Globe, 3/17/04)

SIX: Said Americans In Iraq Not Dying For “Mistake.” PBS’ JIM LEHRER: “Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?” KERRY: “No, and they don’t have to, providing we have the leadership that we put – that I’m offering.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Earlier In Debate, Kerry Called Iraq War “Mistake.” “We can’t leave a failed Iraq. But that doesn’t mean it wasn’t a mistake of judgment to go there and take the focus off of Osama bin Laden. It was.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

“But The President Made A Mistake In Invading Iraq.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

SEVEN: Said Knowing What He Knows Now, “Would Not” Have Authorized Use Of Force. “What I think troubles a lot of people in our country is that the president has just sort of described one kind of mistake. But what he has said is that, even knowing there were no weapons of mass destruction, even knowing there was no imminent threat, even knowing there was no connection with al Qaeda, he would still have done everything the same way. Those are his words. Now, I would not.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Said Knowing What He Knows Now, “Would Have Voted For The Authority.” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “Yes, I would have voted for the authority. I believe it’s the right authority for a president to have. But I would have used that authority as I have said throughout this campaign, effectively. I would have done this very differently from the way President Bush has.” (CNN’s “Inside Politics,” 8/9/04)

EIGHT: Claimed “The President Says That I’m Denigrating These Troops. I Have Nothing But Respect For The British, Tony Blair, And For What They’ve Been Willing To Do.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Dismissed Coalition Partners As “Window Dressing” And Claimed They’re Not Sharing Burden Of War And Reconstruction. CNN’S BILL HEMMER: “The White House would say that dozens of countries are helping now in the effort on the ground in Iraq and they are engaged with the U.N., as well, how would more international involvement prevent the violence we’re seeing today?” SEN. JOHN KERRY: “Well, the fact is that those countries are really window dressing to the greatest degree. And they weren’t there in the beginning when we went in, and they’re not carrying the cost of this war.” (CNN’s “American Morning,” 3/2/04)

NINE: Claimed “I’ve Had One Position, One Consistent Position, That Saddam Hussein Was A Threat.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

Kerry Said, “We Now Know That Iraq Had No Weapons Of Mass Destruction, And Posed No Imminent Threat To Our Security.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks At New York University, New York, NY, 9/20/04)

TEN: Claimed “My Position Has Been Consistent: Saddam Hussein Is A Threat. He Needed To Be Disarmed.” (Sen. John Kerry, First Presidential Debate, Miami, FL, 9/30/04)

“Saying There Are Weapons Of Mass Destruction In Iraq Doesn’t Make It So.” (Sen. John Kerry, Remarks To Democrat National Convention, Boston, MA, 7/29/04)

“I Have Always Said We May Yet Even Find Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” (Fox News’ “Fox News Sunday,” 12/14/03)