Disgust Anyone?

 I have rarely been so disgusted as I was when I saw a video of New York State legislators cheering wildly upon passage of the hideously misnamed Reproductive Health Act. The law codifies once and for all that in the process of human reproduction that begins at conception and concludes at birth, the unborn “thing” called a fetus has no rights whatsoever.

 Until the passage of this law, late-term abortions in New York were illegal. No longer. That “thing” in the mother’s womb can have its spinal cord snipped right up to the moment of birth, no penalty attached. That “thing” whose heart is beating, who can feel pain, who may be perfectly formed and ready in every way to meet life outside the womb, that “thing” is not a person and therefore has no rights. The only one who qualifies as a person with rights is the mother. She can decide to kill her unborn baby for any reason right up to its emergence from her womb. There are no longer any criminal penalties associated with abortion. In fact, if the abortion fails and the baby is born alive, it still has no rights: it can be allowed to die. To me, this is nothing less than infanticide, nothing less than the ultimate in moral depravity.

Is anyone disgusted by this? Certainly not Virginia's Democratic Governor Ralph  Northam who has publicly endorsed infanticide (he claims he was mischaracterized). Certainly not the Democrat party that has moved so far to the left that it no longer tolerates anyone who supports Right to Life within its ranks. Who can support a party that no longer believes in the rights enumerated in The Declaration of Independence: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, the first of these being Life. But the unborn and the just born, according to these Democrats, are not among those endowed with this right by our Creator.

 Anyone else disgusted?

The battle of ISMs

            As I see it, there are three major “ism” battles that divide us: 1. Nationalism vs. Globalism; 2. Capitalism vs. Socialism; and 3. Religionism vs. Secularism.

            The first is being fought on the world stage, with President Trump, right or wrong, our “America First” champion.

            The second Is being fought on the stage of American politics with candidates eyeing the 2020 elections lining up on the Democrat side. It should be won easily by capitalism: all we have to do is take countries like Japan, Germany, Switzerland, and South Korea where capitalism has created thriving economies and compare them to countries like Venezuela, North Korea, and Cuba where socialism has been a disastrous failure. And let’s not forget the biggest failure of all, the Soviet Union. Yet, socialism is growing in popularity among young people in this country because they don’t know any better, having been indoctrinated by leftists in academia and the media, and roused by abysmally ignorant radicals like Alexandria Octavio-Cortez.

            The first two may prove to be passing phases. At least I hope so. But the third is more troubling, because it is a battle for the soul of America. The left has long mocked evangelical Christians as zealots and middle Americans for clinging to their guns and religion. Now the left has taken the fight even further by accusing Christians, particularly Catholics, of bigotry.

            It was bad enough when Democrat senators Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Kamala Harris of California savaged judicial nominee Brian Buescher for his membership in the Knights of Columbus. It got worse when the media reacted in lockstep to falsely accuse Catholic boys of mocking Native-Americans at the March for Life in Washington. What bothers me even more, though, is the vilification of Karen Spence, Vice-President Pence’s wife, for wanting to return to teaching art at a private academy that just happens to support the biblical view of marriage as between one man and one woman. CNN, the ACLU, the Washington Post, the Guardian, Politico, and others have all voiced objections that amount to calling Mrs. Pence a bigot.

            Has the moral fiber of this country degenerated to such a degree that holding deep religious beliefs is now to be considered prima facie evidence of bigotry? 

No End to the Schoolhouse Brawl

            Speaker Pelosi disinvites the President to give his State of the Union address to Congress, and the President retaliates by cancelling her junket to Europe and the Middle East.  That, folks, is nothing more than a schoolyard brawl by two over-grown children who are making a mockery of the constitutional balance of power. With neither party willing to say uncle, there can be no end to this brawl.

            Pelosi holds the purse strings. As long as she keeps insisting “Not a cent for the wall,” the House will not give the President the money he wants.  If Trump doesn’t get his $5.7 billion, he will veto any bill to reopen closed agencies. So, how do we get these children to stop fighting? We can’t: their egos won’t permit it. Is there another way?

            Republicans appear to be willing to compromise. Some are even naïve enough to think that if Trump takes the first step by reopening the government, Pelosi will come to the table and negotiate. Not going to happen: she has already said she wouldn’t, no matter what the president offers.

            This fight isn’t about immigration or money for the wall. It’s about only one thing: Trump. Pelosi has never accepted the legitimacy of his election and will never be satisfied until he is forced out of office. That’s why her backers in Congress and the media get so hysterical when they hear yet another report of Trump’s collusion with Russia. They want him impeached in the worst way.

            President Trump has one weapon Pelosi doesn’t have: the Bully Pulpit. He can give his State of the Union message from the Oval Office if he chooses to. He can appeal directly to the people to put pressure on the Democrats. He can try to get congressional Democrats to withdraw support for the Speaker and force her to compromise. As much as I would like to see that work, I think it would be an exercise in futility.

            What else? If Republican senators begin to abandon ship, that would signal that impeachment is not only possible, but conviction is as well. Could it possibly come to that? Would the republic survive?

France--for Better or Worse

            As someone of French ancestry I have mixed feelings about what is going on in France these days. As we’ve all seen, things can get ugly when feelings of oppression result in spontaneous uprisings by the people. The yellow vests (gilets jaunes) are not the first to revolt in France; it seems part of the nature of Frenchmen to take to the streets in protest. The country’s history is punctuated with scenes of guillotines and barricades replayed spectacularly by Hollywood and Broadway (ex. A Tale of Two Cities, Les Misérables). That’s a pity, because the French can be so charming and lovable. Here are two examples.

            On my last visit to Paris I was walking along the Quay d’Anjou one day on my way to Notre Dame when I decided to cross the street to get a better view of the Seine. But my foot caught on the edge of the curb and I fell headfirst into a stone wall. I lay there stunned, when out of nowhere came two ladies to my aid. They knelt by my side, worried I was badly hurt. They offered to call for help. I said I was OK, but they waited until I was able to get back on my feet before leaving me. I’ll never forget their eyes: they were the eyes of angels.

            A few days later I was coming out of La Madeleine, the vast neo-classical church dedicated to Napoleon’s glories, when I saw two policemen across the street. Not unusual in Paris, except that these two were armed with automatic weapons. I didn’t know what was going on, so I asked them, half expecting to be told to mind my own business and move on. Instead I ended up having a pleasant conversation with smiling law-enforcement officers who were part of a detachment anticipating a demonstration by a group of bikers. These officers may have been among those wielding batons and arresting looters on the Champs-Elysées last month. But to me, they are just one of the many memories I have of my favorite city and its wonderful people.

Bigotry Resurfaces

            Religious bigotry has always run under the surface of the Senate’s leftist agenda, especially in Democrat opposition to Christian views on such matters as abortion and gay marriage. It burst to the surface last year when Senator Dianne Feinstein questioned Notre Dame Law School Professor Amy Barrett’s qualifications to be a judge on the 7^th Circuit Court of Appeals on the basis of the nominee’s religious beliefs.  “The dogma lives loudly within you, and that’s a concern,” said the senator in undisguised contempt for the nominee’s Catholic faith.  

            Senator Feinstein was roundly condemned for her bigotry by both liberals and conservatives. But at least two other Democrat senators weren’t paying attention. Last week Mazie Hirono of Hawaii and Kamala Harris of California took turns savaging judicial nominee Brian Buescher not only for his Catholicism, but also for his membership in the Knights of Columbus. These bigots questioned the nominee’s qualifications for a judgeship on those grounds, signaling that they would not approve his nomination because he failed their religion test.

            It was refreshing to see Democrat Senator Tulsi Gabbard condemn her colleagues by declaring that she stood strongly against those who are fomenting bigotry by citing a nominee’s religion as disqualifying, even as Gabbard said she opposed Buescher’s nomination on other grounds.

            Disqualifying any nominee on religious grounds is a clear violation of constitutional rights under the First Amendment. But bigots Hirono and Harris have no respect for the Constitution. And, recalling their outlandish performance at the Judge Kavanaugh hearing, they have no sense of fairness either. Or shame. Voters ought to remember that when Kamala Harris announces her candidacy for the presidency.

Help! We're Stuck!

            Washington is like a hotel elevator that’s been stuck between floors. It can get going again, but the passengers in it can’t agree on whether to go up or down. Meanwhile, hotel business has come to a halt.

            To resolve the impasse, one of the parties has to give in. But Democrats have taken such a hard stand against The Wall (an immorality, insists Speaker Pelosi) they cannot bend. President Trump knows he can’t back down either because, as Senator Graham has warned him, it would be the end of his presidency. Is a compromise possible that would give both parties a reason to claim victory?

            As I write this, there is no such compromise on the horizon. What I do see is a possible constitutional crisis in the making. The president has already hinted that he has the authority to build the wall as matter of national security. If he goes down that road, the courts will stop him. Or try to. The courts have already overstepped their bounds several times by preventing the executive branch from exercising its constitutionally defined authority on immigration. On those occasions the president chose to appeal and let higher courts resolve the issues. But this time the president may just choose to defy the courts and proceed to build the wall, the courts be damned. And that would provoke a constitutional crisis and an immediate cry for impeachment from the Democrats.

            I hope I’m wrong about this. There has to be a better way. Governments, like hotels, can’t function when their elevators are stuck between floors.