Why Black Lives Matter More in North Carolina than Oklahoma September 27, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, It's all about the $$$, pr stunts, rank stupidity, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, unbelievable BS.
Another title I considered for this post: Black Lives Matter (BLM) actually means GHE – Get Hillary Elected.
A writer at American Thinker noted what many others have, that the BLM movement, which has had profound overtones of racial supremacy and naked bigotry from the start – seems to be, much like the Occupy Wall Street movement of 2011, primarily a vehicle to support demonrat electoral prospects, especially for the office of president. Otherwise, why would protesters be making such a major play in Charlotte, where a black man was shot by a BLACK police officer under slightly questionable circumstances (when you have a group of cops pointing guns at you, who reaches for something, anything, especially when carrying a handgun in an ankle holster?), when in Tulsa a black man was shot by a white officer under what appear to be, or have appeared to be, much more dubious circumstances?
Could the answer be that North Carolina, unlike Oklahoma, is very much “in play” in this election, with Clinton and Trump in a close race? Is that why there was also such a major outbreak of rioting in Missouri and other hotly contested states? Is that why George Soros has put $33 million behind the Black Lives Matter organizers? Is that why paid professional leftist protesters are being bused in from out of state? Think about the more outrageous assaults on those attending Trump rallies, too – they have almost entirely occurred in states that are either solidly democrat, or which are being contested in this election.
Some interesting thoughts to consider:
Charlotte is the latest Ferguson. The facts of the event, still unknown, do not matter. It does not matter that since Obama took office, over three thousand African-Americans have been killed in Chicago by other African-Americans. No one outside their immediate family and friends knows their names. [Which fact shows the prevarication at the heart of the BLM movement, it is entirely about political and economic power, only expressing outrage at certain, politically charged killings. When it comes to black on black violence, which kills almost an order of magnitude more blacks than white on black murder, they are totally silent] Obama does not speak out about their murders or the fact that Illinois’s strict gun laws have done nothing to reduce the number of shootings in Chicago. So, curiously, Charlotte is the scene of riots, looting, and more violence like Ferguson, Baltimore, and Dallas. Many of the protesters are being bussed in and paid, quite possibly with dollars donated by George Soros. He was behind the paid protesters in Ferguson and is most likely behind the chaos in Charlotte. Last night, seventy percent of the people arrested were not from North Carolina.
So why are there riots and demonstrations in Charlotte and not in Tulsa? Could it be because Oklahoma is a conservative state? The citizens of Tulsa know that the law will prevail. North Carolina is, according to the polls, split between Trump and Clinton. Is it possible that the Clinton campaign thinks that rioting and chaos by the Black Lives Matter crowd will help her in that state?
Why on Earth would she think that? Because she is the racist who assumes that black people watching black people destroy their businesses will blame Trump and vote for her? Might those black citizens be more likely to want some law and order in their communities like everyone else in this country? And if that is the case, won’t they be more likely to vote for Trump, who is the law and order candidate, endorsed by the police union? That would be the logical conclusion if the left were ever logical. But the left is diabolical. Anything for power and control, no matter how sleazy and truly, revoltingly racist. Soros and his acolytes like Clinton are well and truly vile. Our African-American citizens mean nothing to them but voters to be beguiled.
For inexplicable reasons, leftists believe that the violence wrought by angry minorities will benefit them, so they encourage it. They subsidize it. Obama has given his not-so-tacit permission to riot every time one of these tragic events occurs, from the Henry Louis Gates minor incident to the killings of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, and the Dallas officers. And now BLM is rolling in money, $100M from “social justice” organizations. Soros gave them $33M.
What we see in Charlotte is what they pay for. They are not wasting their money in Tulsa because Oklahoma is in the bag for Trump………[That’s as good an explanation as I’ve heard]
……..In Charlotte, as in Ferguson, Baltimore and Dallas, the rioters/protesters shout their anger and hatred for white people. White people, in their view, are responsible for all their problems. As one protestor said in Dallas, “They have all the money and won’t give us any.” [They said a lot worse than that. On that satanic night, my wife and I watched in stunned disbelief as a local BLM leader expressed zero remorse for the killing of multiple officers and petulantly blamed police for the massacre that happened here, saying, in almost these words, they got what was coming to them. I’ve never been able to find that clip online, though both my wife and I saw it clear as day]
…….That Trump won the Republican nomination was a shock to the Beltway establishment on both sides of the aisle and to many conservative voters. How could this thoroughly unacceptable jerk ever be considered for the office of the president? Charlotte pretty much answers that question.
Interesting conclusion. A lot of people found Richard Nixon unacceptable, and yet elected him in another time of serious social disorder of a racial nature, after two terms of unprecedentedly liberal leadership at the federal government level and a similar collapse in respect for the views of the self-anointed elite. Nixon was, of course, far more accepted by the “establishment” of the Republican party than Trump has been, but he certainly had numerous enemies dating back to the late 40s, within the party and without. That anti-government sentiment, simmering since the early 60s (and with the Goldwater nomination in ’64 as an early reaction sign of it) coalesced in the late 70s around Ronald Reagan and the most conservative American president since the 1920s.
Will a similar outcome occur now? It still seems to remain in doubt, but I have a sneaking suspicion that as much as people are frequently unnerved and even disgusted by Trump, there remains a majority in this country that simply will not be ruled by that vile, corrupt, always self-seeking woman. Trump seems to have a similar capability in preventing attacks from sticking to him (remember Reagan as the “Teflon president?”), and he has a similar capability to cut through leftist shibboleths like a buzzsaw, undermining the always tilts left cultural narrative of the past 100 years or so. Reagan was hated and despised by the Left and many within his own party, but he was able to rise above all that. That’s where the similarities end, Trump has shown himself always willing to get down into the mud, to get bogged down in minor, meaningless spats. Perhaps he’ll finally outgrow that.
But Trump won’t just have to win, he’ll have to win decisively, to overcome what will surely be several million votes worth of demonrat voter fraud.
Win or lose, we can expect the BLM movement, like the “war on women” movement and the “Occupy Wall Street” movement to wither away and be disposed in the memory hole, once this election is complete. They’ll move onto something else for 2020, most likely.
Dallas Pastor Named New Bishop of Lubbock September 27, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, Francis, General Catholic, huh?, priests, the struggle for the Church.
And the influence of the Diocese of Dallas – once a relative backwater – continues to grow. I think this makes the 7th or 8th diocese with a bishop with strong ties to the Diocese of Dallas. That weren’t the case even a few years ago, when Dallas used to be the kind of diocese that received bishops from elsewhere, rather than being a “breeding ground” for them. Perhaps this is yet another of the effects of Bishop Farrell’s rather short tenure, a significant increase in the Diocese of Dallas’ profile.
At any rate, Msgr. Robert Coerver of Saint Rite parish in Dallas has been named by Francis as the third Bishop of Lubbock, TX, replacing retiring Bishop Palacido Rodriguez:
Pope Francis has named the pastor of St. Rita Catholic Church in Dallas, Reverend Monsignor (pronounced Mon-senior) Robert Coerver (pronounced curve-er), to serve as the new Bishop of Lubbock. The appointment was announced today in Washington, D.C. by the papal nuncio to the United States, Archbishop Christophe Pierre, followed by the announcement in the Diocese of Lubbock.
With the appointment, Reverend Monsignor Coerver will become the third bishop of the Diocese of Lubbock. Monsignor Coerver says he was very surprised by the news but grateful to the Holy Father for his confidence in him. He says that while he looks forward to serving Lubbock, he will miss Dallas. “I was born and raised here in Dallas; my family roots are here and my ancestors were among Dallas’ first Catholics. I have developed so many fantastic relationships over the years and it will be difficult to have them take on a different nature. I have cherished my work among my brother priests and upon hearing of my appointment a slight pang of sadness came upon me. But, as a priest, I have always known that I must follow wherever the Lord leads me, and so when asked if I would accept the appointment I did so immediately because I have promised to serve wherever the Church needs me. I happily look forward to this new role as chief shepherd of the Catholic faithful in Lubbock and pray that God will assist me in leading the Catholic people there. I ask the prayers of the people of the Diocese of Dallas as I prepare to assume my new responsibilities.”………
………Bishop-elect Coerver has served at numerous parishes in the Diocese of Dallas, including St. Elizabeth of Hungary, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton, and as pastor at Our Lady of the Lake in Rockwall, and since 2010 at St. Rita in North Dallas. He will be ordained Bishop of the Diocese of Lubbock at a special Mass of Ordination on November 21, 2016 at 2 p.m. at Christ the King Cathedral in Lubbock.
Is it just me, or does Bishop-elect Coerver seem a little less than thrilled to be headed to the dry, flat plains of West Texas? I much prefer Amarillo, myself.
No, I don’t know anything about Bishop-elect Coerver. I’m all ears if people have some knowledge of his liturgical, doctrinal, and pastoral sensibilities. Saint Rita is one of the larger, more prosperous parishes in the Diocese, for whatever that’s worth.
Well, good luck and God speed to both Bishop-elect Coerver and the people of the Diocese of Lubbock.
Here’s a video showing the official press conference introducing Bishop-elect Coerver to the Diocese of Lubbock:
His episcopal motto: “Suscipe Domine” – the beginning of Saint Ignatius Loyola’s famous prayer on self-surrender to the Grace of Jesus Christ. Perhaps a good sign?
Frightline Friday: Lockheed to Develop Mach 20 Strike System September 23, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Flightline Friday, fun, history, non squitur, silliness, technology.
DARPA has been working on this for over a decade, with not exactly stellar success. Called originally Prompt Global Strike, as people began to wrap their heads around the “Global War on Terror” in the early 00s, they began to comprehend how useful a weapon system that could be launched from CONUS and hit a target anywhere in the world within 30-40 minutes.
Some bright folks at the Air Staff exclaimed: “Why, we have ICBMs that can do that! We just need to put a conventional warhead (or not) on an ICBM and, voila!, capability created!” Someone then said……how would the Russians or Chinese feel about an ICBM launch from the US, even if told about it in advance? How would they feel about ICBM warheads sailing overhead in route to a target in Afghanistan or Yemen? Back to the drawing board……..
So began what has turned into a long-term effort to develop what amounts to a sort of hypersonic cruise missile, launched from a bomber or perhaps a sub and carried aloft to a high, but nowhere near orbital, altitude, and flying to the target at speeds between Mach 5 (3500 mph) and Mach 20 (14,000 mph).
There have been a number of programs – Hypersonic Test Vehicles HTV-1, HTV-2, X-43, X-51, and the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon. Their success rate has been around 50% so far. HTV really never quite worked and seems to have been cancelled. AHW seem to be ongoing. All of these follow a “depressed,” atmospheric trajectory deliberately, to prevent other nuclear armed powers from believing they are being attacked with ballistic missiles. How excited they will become at a Mach 20 scramjet coming in their general direction remains to be seen.
The US is hardly the only country pursuing this technology. China and Russia both are, and the Chinese program may be more advanced than the US at this time.
Perhaps to redress that, DARPA awarded a $150 million contract to Lockheed to develop a new Tactical Boost Glide weapon. $150 is probably chicken feed to develop something so radically advanced, but perhaps that’s just for starters:
Lockheed Martin just won a $147 million contract to build a vehicle capable of flying at speeds of Mach 20. The goal is to create a high-speed delivery system that could bomb targets thousands of miles away in an hour or less. It’s similar to what other countries, including Russia and China, are working on.
Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) will be an air-launched boost glide weapon system. The TBG itself is a aerodynamic, arrowhead-shaped vehicle fitted on the nose of a rocket. The rocket in turn is carried by a large aircraft such as a B-52 bomber, which would carry the rocket to high altitude and then launch it. The rocket boosts TBG to an evenhigher altitude, whereupon a scramjet or ramjet kicks in and quickly accelerates it up to hypersonic speeds. TBG then glides unpowered the rest of the way to the target.
How fast will TBG go? A nearly identical program concluded in 2011 reached speeds of Mach 20. At that speed, a hypersonic vehicle could travel from New York City to Los Angeles in 12 minutes, or London to Sydney in 49 minutes.
Hypersonic is the next frontier in weaponry. The super-fast speeds could make it possible to destroy a faraway but time-critical target—say, a North Korean missile fueling on the launch pad or a terrorist meeting in a remote location. Hypersonic speed also makes interception very difficult—and makes the actual vehicle a weapon when the kinetic energy of an object traveling at Mach 20 is transferred to a target.
Meh. Prompt Global Strike, like unmanned systems, is more of a politician’s dream than what I suspect will become a real military capability. Politicians love unmanned systems for the promise of being able to fight wars without much risk of loss of US life. I pray to God they never become really capable, or we’ll be killing people around the world without end at a far higher rate than we do now. There’d be no end to it.
Don’t get me wrong, hypersonics have great utility and I think they will eventually come along, but I think Mach 20 is quite a reach. The temperatures and pressures at that altitude (~200,000 ft) are fantastic – hundreds if not thousands of PSI, 3500 degrees F. Mach 5-8 seems much more reasonable, and the technology to handle those temps and pressures has been around a long time.
The earlier X-43:
A successful hypersonic weapon, whether an air-breathing scramjet powered vehicle, or one that glides after initial boost to terrific speed, can be much more difficult to intercept than an ICBM RV because they are not on a fixed ballistic profile, and will likely be capable of something like aircraft like maneuvers, albeit, at enormous speeds.
Long ago, the Air Force had a project for a replacement to the venerable B-52. The replacement was called the XB-70. It was killed largely due to McNamara’s inveterate dislike for bombers, which stemmed from several reasons, most of them faulty. The XB-70 was killed because it was designed to fly at Mach 3.2 at 70-80,000 ft. With the shootdown of Francis Gary Powers U-2 in 1960, some felt that high altitude was too dangerous, due to the proliferation of surface-to-air missiles that could reach the same or higher altitudes.
However, one massive bit of the equation McNamara missed was the difference in performance. At 70,000 ft, the U-2 cruised at about 400 mph. That’s all it could do. The B-70 would have been 5 times as fast. While the B-70 had a much larger radar cross section and could thus be detected sooner, 30 years of operation with the SR-71 proved that the high-altitude domain had not been rendered implausible due to surface to air missiles. Flying at the same speeds and altitudes, the SR-71 was targeted and fired upon by SAMs literally hundreds of times, but not one was ever shot down or even damaged.
The reason is that even very large SAMs have very little energy left when they get to that kind of extreme altitude, and the aircraft are often about as maneuverable (if not more) than the SAM way up there in the up there. Also, the enormous speed of the SR-71 (or B-70) means that even a slight change in course results in a displacement of the flight path on the order of miles within a minute or less. So, the SAM, targeted to a particular spot in the sky where the fast, high-altitude aircraft is expected to be, winds up missing by a huge distance when the aircraft turns to avoid. Really no air defense systems of the 60s-90s timeframe could react quickly enough, or had missiles with high enough flight performance, to hit a maneuvering target at those speeds and altitudes.
And that doesn’t even begin to factor in the very advanced electronic countermeasures an aircraft like the B-70 or SR-71 would have or did carry. An ICBM RV is simple to shoot down by comparison, being on a fixed ballistic trajectory – albeit very, very fast – it WILL be at a certain point in the sky at a certain point in time and there is nothing that can be done to change that. Get an interceptor to that same point at the right time, and you have a kill.
The Russians now purport to have “maneuverable” RVs (with attached rockets or lift devices to deviate from the fixed ballistic trajectory) able to defeat missile defense systems, but they a) drastically exaggerate their capabilities, and b) fail to note that they are so heavy and cumbersome that they have a huge negative impact on the ICBM’s limited payload/range capabilities.
The prototype XB-70 #2 reached a peak speed of Mach 3.07 and an altitude of 72,800 ft during it’s test program. The production B-70s would have been equipped with more powerful engines and able to fly faster and quite a bit higher.
But I guess that’s a story for another day.
Just Another Day in the Church…… September 23, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, disaster, Ecumenism, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, the struggle for the Church.
……..silent support for sodomy and transgenderism, Church official praises pseudo-sodo-union, Jesuit James Martin awarded for his role in attacking the Faith, meanwhile, protestants make major inroads in Iran in spite of horrific persecution:
My doctor is an evangelical pastor and he has been to Iran and made a lot of converts. The lady who used to cut my hair is one of them. Her entire family is now Christian. This is a growing, silent threat to the mullah’s satanic regime, but they have been unable to do much to stop it.
Of course, the Church leadership would never want to do anything so crass as proselytize an infidel country. They’d rather pretend their false religion is equal to or superior to our own. Interestingly, left-wingers feel the same way generally, that exotic third world “others” are purer, better, more noble people than anyone in the benighted, Christian-based West. It’s almost as if most Church leaders are far more convicted left-wingers than they are Catholics.
h/t reader TT
Liberalism as Child Abuse…… September 23, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, paganism, Revolution, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, Society, unadulterated evil.
……..is it a growing phenomenon?
A few days ago in the Washington Post, a rabidly feminist mom of two teen sons declared her antipathy for her sons for insufficiently hating their nature (as men) and buying into radfem rhetoric. It was subsequently revealed that one of the sons of the thrice-divorced mother, who has also, hardly incidentally, had a history of tormented relationships and gives strong evidence of a borderline spectrum personality disorder, has struggled with suicidal ideation.
Thus, mommie dearest exposes a suicidal son to national humiliation. But I think we can rest assured there won’t be visits from the CPS to her in the near future, because some destructive beliefs and actions are approved, while others are most sharply disapproved:
On September 14, The Washington Post published what can only be described as a public display of child abuse. feminist writer Jody Allard chastises her sons for questioning the propaganda she feeds them.
“They’ve been listening to me talk about consent, misogyny and rape culture since they were tweens. They listened to me then, but they are 16 and 18 now, and they roll their eyes and argue when talk to them about sexism and misogyny.” [And atheists declare teaching kids Christianity constitutes child abuse. Reprobate sense, anyone?]
That Allard’s boys won’t take up their mother’s fight makes them “part of the problem,” writes Allard. They’ve “dipped their toes into toxic masculinity,” she adds. Toxic masculinity is a favorite feminist term. It means the more masculine a man is, the more vile he is. Nice, huh?
Fortunately for Allard’s sons, their mother’s efforts to indoctrinate them has failed. [Well, we can hope. It’s far from a sure thing] Unfortunately, her response was to publically shame them.
Yes, you read that right. One of Allard’s sons, the 16-year-old, is a known suicide risk—known to Allard and known to The Washington Post editors. And still they publically shamed him. [It’s called solipsism, and it is rife on the Left. It’s an inability to see anyone else as being really real, really human, really possessed of their own worth and dignity equal to one’s own. It’s a kind of narcissism run wild, and it is becoming more and more common as day care and participation awards turn young people into self-obsessed creatures]
……..She has been married and divorced three times—her exes, of course, were the problem; her biological father abandoned her; she has “divorced” her mother, who she says is “incapable of mothering anyone”; and she’s a victim of sexual abuse. [A huge number of feminists claim this. Being higher on the victimhood pyramid conveys greater moral authority, to them, so who knows] Oh, and she was born with one hand, not two; and her adopted sister, who liked to kill animals, tried to kill her. The list goes on.
How many of Allard’s stories are true (save for the physical impairment) as opposed to ploys for attention is anyone’s guess. What is clear is that Jody Allard is unwell.
What is also clear is that somewhere along the line, feminism became her lifeline.That’s typically how it happens: a childhood goes terribly wrong. As adults, , one that promises to heal the wounds of the past. [Or, perhaps, avenge the wounds of the past. Real or imagined] Rather than deal with problems on their own, they ban together with others who’ve been hurt and blame men and marriage for all things evil.
Jody Allard is one of these women. Upon having sons, she writes that she “had no idea how to raise a boy into a man who wasn’t an asshole.”
Speaking of child abuse, how about encouraging, even forcing kids into this nightmare “transgender” menagerie. It’s also a growing fad among a certain type of parent these days, though, tragically, it’s not only parents of left wing views who are falling into this rape of innocence and identity:
Socially indoctrinating young children toward accepting transgenderism is rampant today in public schools. In Washington state, public schools will begin teaching gender expression to kindergarteners in fall 2017, under newly approved health education learning standards. The gay advocacy network GLSEN received a grant from the federal Centers for Disease Control in 2011 for $1.425 million over five years to promote the LGBT agenda in public schools at taxpayers’ expense.
By infiltrating the curriculum in our nation’s public schools, LGBT activists can groom the next generation of participants. Young people are questioning their gender identity at an alarming rate that seems to be increasing, and are encouraged by educators and medical professionals to experiment with gender transition. Unfortunately, experimentation can cause even more confusion.
Then an interlude discussing adults who have attempted to change sex through the use of dangerous drugs and bodily mutilation, who later greatly regret it.
……..The activists who push this agenda in public school studies ignore the science regarding innate sex. An August 2016 review of the scientific literature finds no definitive evidence in research to suggest that transgender people are born that way. This 143-page report from two distinguished doctors from Johns Hopkins University finds there is not enough definitive scientific evidence to suggest gay, lesbian, and transgender people are born as such. More importantly, they affirmed that innate biological sex is fixed and unchangeable. Only gender persona—appearance and behavior—can be changed. [A huge and none too subtle distinction, apparently lost on all those gender-bending activists out there today, pushing people into shattered lives and unrecoverable misery all in the name of gaining a bit of a political advantage]
I was a kid who started cross-dressing with my grandmother at the age of four. I can tell you from first-hand knowledge that cross-dressing is a psychological indoctrination. It is sadistic to use the public school system, which holds a captive audience, to engage in a social gender identity experiment with the nation’s young people. [To which essentially no one, in the public, has given any kind of consent]
………Today, people write to me about their gender-change experiences. They consistently share how at the time of their transition they were told gender change was the only treatment for their condition. Parents write to me concerned about their adult children pursuing transition because they know no one is considering that trauma from the person’s childhood could be leading to this unusual desire. Parents report that gender therapists don’t want to know about childhood events. The therapist says if an adult wants transition, he or she can have it.
Here is one of those communiques the author received:
Help, my daughter is trying to live as a man and desperately wants gender re-assignment surgery.
Her father was a male to male pedophile. He abused our son. Years later my son became homosexual and is married to a man.
My daughter on the other hand was rejected by her dad. She spent her teen years hating men. She began to engorge herself so that guys would be repulsed by her. She developed obsessive disorders and made sure she looked unattractive to men. She accomplished being unattractive and men turned away from her. She decided to be a lesbian. She decided that wasn’t for her after a bad break-up. Now she wants to become a transgender.
And a closing note on the out-of-control narcissism that drives this kind of behavior, paradoxically self-loving and self-loathing at the same time:
She sees transgenderism as the fix to all this rejection. As a transgender, she can fall in love with herself and avoid rejection. Yes, it is psychologically unhealthy behavior, but it will provide a temporary reprieve from the rejection she has experienced so far in her life.
I’ve long suspected that early trauma and early addiction to porn and self-abuse serve as the psychological motivation behind most of those who purport a desire to become the other sex. Especially in men, the changes in brain chemistry that occur through long-term use of porn and self-abuse can develop a desire to literally become the “other,” the object of desire/emulation, permitting one to literally turn themselves into the real object of gratification they feel denied in real life. There is no possibility of rejection when one does so, adding to the attraction.
Whether I’m right or wrong, it’s a twisted, wicked stew. Whether parents agree or not, more and more of their kids are being propagandized into either accepting this unbelievably destructive lifestyle for themselves, or at least finding it absolutely natural and normal. As the author noted at the top, what this is really about is grooming the next generation of souls lost to perversion and self-degradation. From that comes more power, which is the ultimate motivation behind the Left’s support for this perversion.
Of course, after supporting all manner of perversions and attacks on natural, moral behavior in order to break down society according as they saw fit, the communists in Russia later turned savagely on their creation.
Perhaps that provides all the more reason for the Left’s support for unlimited muslim immigration to this country and so many others. A useful tool when it comes time to cull the herd.
The Wonders of Socialism: Oil-Rich Venezuela Importing US Crude September 23, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, rank stupidity, Revolution, scandals, silliness, Society, unbelievable BS.
1 comment so far
It is true that Venezuela has some of the world’s largest proven reserves. However, almost all of that oil is very heavy, sour (sulfur-laden) crude, that either has to be extensively (and expensively) refined, or blended with much lighter crudes to be acceptable on the market.
Crude oil in the US, in contrast, has tended to be largely light and “sweet,” the most desirable kind. It varies, of course – the US benchmark, West Texas Intermediate, is just that, sort of between light and heavy – but much of the oil coming from fracking is of this highly desirable kind.
Unfortunately, to prop up their failed socialist state, the Venezuelan government under Chavez and Maduro have raided “profits” from the state oil company to the extent that the organization has lacked money to conduct normal repairs and maintenance and much of their infrastructure has become very badly run down. As a result, production has plummeted, and the ability to refine the heavy sour crude has evaporated to a marked extent. At this point, Venezuela is now having to import US crude both to serve its own national needs, and to make what product it can sell acceptable on the international oil market:
To add insult to injury, the Venezuelan government has been forced to turn to its nemesis, the United States, for help.
“You call them the empire,” said Luis Centeno, a union leader for the oil workers, referring to what government officials call the United States, “and yet you’re buying their oil.”
The declining oil industry is perhaps the most urgent chapter ofVenezuela’s economic crisis. Oil accounts for half of the Venezuelan government’s revenues, what former President Hugo Chávez once called an “instrument of national development.” The state oil company poured its profits, more than $250 billion in all from 2001 to 2015, into the country’s social programs, including food imports……..
………Venezuela can’t even produce enough oil to meet their own demands, needing to import light crude so they can mix it with their own heavy crude for export.
Oil workers, due to inflation, are making about $1 per day, which is about enough to buy two loaves of bread.
“Oh, socialism will work, but we just haven’t seen it with the right people in charge yet,” someone will argue. [People that, after a century-plus of disastrous attempts, have never been found to exist. But this is not about evidence or fact, it’s about religious belief. It’s the temptation for men to pretend they can be god, deciding the fates of tens of millions, while heaping scorn and derision on the real God]
………..What will it take for the rest of the world’s power-hungry morons to comprehend that prices can’t possibly be assigned by bureaucrats without waste?
Nothing, because they don’t want to plan and direct the economy because they think they are so smart (though, that’s part of it), but because it’s the means to the end they want: absolute, unlimited power.
Of course, one only has to look at the fates of thousands of apparatchiks, “Old Bolsheviks,” early Maoists, leaders of the Khmer Rouge, or idealistic Sandinistas to see how well that works out for most. While a few utterly ruthless men, largely drawn from the criminal ranks (like Stalin) might “enjoy” power on a scale unprecedented in human history, for most, it’s a bullet in the back of the head in a dank dungeon.
Useful idiots, Lenin called them. They are legion today.
Pretty much just a link and a copy paste job, but look how he uses the very disconcerting new sex-ed standards Francis pushed last summer to justify his assault on the innocence of the children in his charge. Innocence is infinitely precious – once lost, it can never be regained. Anything that shatters the innocence of a child is gravely offensive to the moral order and should be fought tooth and nail. Parents have objected vociferously, but the bad bishop has basically told them to stuff it.
Look folks, while a bare handful of exceptions exist, if you want your child to keep the Faith for their entire life, Catholic schools are the last place you want to send them. Even 40 years ago Bishop Sheen declared that Catholic schools were the worst places to send your kids if you wanted them to grow up to be pious, devout, observant souls. I mean, if you’re going to instill a different religion, you kind of have to seize control of the education system at the start, haven’t you? And nothing insures indifference in religion than deep attachment to the sins against the 6th and 9th Commandments, which are what prompted Luther’s original revolt, after all. If you want someone to have a lifelong attachment to vice, it’s best to get at them when they’re young, no?
Bishop Choby has always been a disastrously liberal prelate. Misery loves company. Capiche?
A U.S. Catholic bishop has explicitly refused to allow parents to opt their kids out of a diocesan-run school’s sex-ed program deemed by parents to be “erotic” and “salacious,” calling the program a “legitimate requirement” for graduation.
Instead of listening to the parents’ concerns, the bishop has cited the Vatican’s newly minted and problematic sex-ed curriculum as a way to evaluate the school’s program.
In a letter dated September 2, Bishop David Choby of the Catholic Diocese of Nashville, Tennessee, told parents opposing the sex-ed program that while he “wholeheartedly support[s]” their right as “primary educator,” nevertheless, when they send their children to school, they no longer exercise that right when it comes to school “requirements.”………..
……….The “Human Sexuality” course taught as part of the Father Ryan High School’s theology course offers graphic images and erotic sexual details concerning male and female body parts, including highlighting the pleasure points of the male and female reproductive organs and describing the lengths of an “aroused” clitoris and penis. Students learn 10 different forms of contraception. An outline of the course’s problematic content as well as a link to the program can be found in LifeSiteNews’ previous coverage here. [On the basis of the promotion of contraception use alone, the course is contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith. There is no need to discuss different types of contraception unless there is a desire for people to avail themselves of them. To oppose contraception, you don’t need to discuss the different types, especially not in a class taught to teens who are still children]
Parents say the course could be spiritually harmful to their children, calling it a “near occasion of sin.” [Could be? It sounds like a certainty to me] James Bowman, whose stepdaughter [umm…] attends the school, has joined a coalition of parents opposing the program, telling LifeSiteNews that some of the material present in the sex-ed gives too much detail for so young an audience……….
………..Canon law expert Fr. Gerald Murray told LifeSiteNews in an earlier report on the matter that “any sex education program that is not in accord with the convictions of a child’s parents cannot be made mandatory without violating ‘the right and duty’ of the parents to control what their children are taught in this delicate and sensitive matter.”
Canon lawyer Philip Gray, president of the St. Joseph Foundation, also told LifeSiteNews in a previous report on the matter that competent authorities are “not in line with Church teaching” when they refuse to allow parents to opt their kids out of school programs that parents find objectionable.
Rather than listening to the serious objections to the sex-ed course raised by the parents, Bishop Choby in his letter instead pointed to the Vatican’s recently released sex-ed program, telling parents that it shall be used as an “instrument to evaluate” the school’s own course.
Hichborn noticed the implications of the bishop’s reference to the Vatican sex-ed in relation to parental rights.
“It seems that the publication of the Vatican’s new sex education is emboldening a radical departure from traditional means of educating children where parents played the part of primary educator. It appears that the Vatican sex ed is now being used to trump those rights,” he said. [Different religion, anyone?]
The Vatican sex ed, released in July during World Youth day in Poland, has been criticized by international life and family organizations and leaders for being contrary to previous Church teaching, for subverting parents, and for corrupting children…….
……….Bishop Choby concluded his letter by chastising the parents for raising their concerns and gaining “notoriety,” stating that it puts their children attending the school in an “awkward position.”
“Students, I am sure, will or have already seen news stories on television and the Internet about all of this. They will undoubtedly make the connection and conclude who among them is at the heart of this controversy. That will be unfortunate,” he wrote. [What is he, a mafioso? He’s pretty much saying, it’ll be a shame if something happens to the children of you rabble-rousing parents. Sheesh.]
The bishop suggested that parents standing up for their rights could have the “unintended consequences” of compromising the “spiritual, academic, and social formation” of their children in the school. He also suggested that if parents could not agree to let their children take the sex-ed course that they could choose to opt out of the school. [SAVE YOUR MONEY. Homeschool. If 100 kids dropped out over this policy tomorrow, I can guarantee there would be major panic and he would fold. But few, it seems, have the gumption for such bold action in today’s Church.]
Hichborn called the bishop’s closing words to the parents “disturbing.”
“He suggests that the parents will be to blame for causing difficulties for their children by fighting against the school’s mandatory sex-ed program when, in fact, it is quite the opposite: It is the school backed by the bishop which is forcing parents to either violate their consciences or to leave the school. The parents are not being the bullies here.”
The revolutionaries in the Church have always been the bullies, since they seized power in a bloodless coup 50 years ago. No one is more enamored of his power, more willing to use it, nor more annoyed at having in questioned, than a progressive churchman. Having encountered more than a few of these guys, they are all the same: bullies. But like a lot of bullies they are not nearly so strong or powerful as they like to pretend. They’re rather like cheap Chinese vases, one good blow will cause them to shatter.
Well, I guess I’ll go home and look forward to another evening’s entertainment of rioting and looting.
How much do you want to bet that both the Black Lives Matter’s movement, and all these riots and uprisings, will come to a screeching halt the day after the election. Like the “war on women” in 2012, this has always had the smell of a demonrat electoral tactic.
Saint John Vianney on Finding Sanctity in our Daily Crosses September 22, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, catachesis, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Interior Life, mortification, reading, Saints, sanctity, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, Virtue.
A couple of excerpts from The Sermons of the Cure of Ars, on how to practice sanctity on a daily basis, and finding joy in suffering. There was a time when at least observant Catholics would have no compunction at crossing themselves in public, or stopping what they were doing to pray when the Angelus bell was run. I can’t imagine how beautiful it would be to live in a place that is sufficiently Catholic and devoted, to have towns built within earshot of a church, and to have everyone stop and pray at the appropriate times. I don’t know if that was ever much the case in this country, being so spread out and with huge intermixed populations (maybe in the old Irish and Italian ghettos?), but it was in Europe and other places.
I think there is a lot of good in these excerpts. I have people ask me frequently how they can witness to the Faith. One simple way is to say grace in public before meals. Another is to go around always praying when not doing something that really preoccupies you. I have a Rosary in my hand much of the time in public.
Before beginning your work, my dear brethren, never fail to make the Sign of the Cross. Do not imitate those people without religion who dare not to do this because they are in company. Offer quite simply all your difficulties to God and renew from time to time this offering, for by that means you will have the happiness of drawing down the blessing of Heaven on yourself and on all you do. Just think, my dear brethren, how many acts of virtue you can practice by behaving in this way, without making any change in what you are actually doing. If you work with the object of pleasing God and obeying His Commandments, which order you to earn your bread by the sweat of your brow, that is an act of obedience. If you want to expiate your sins, you are making an act of penance. If you want to obtain some Grace for yourself or for others, it is an act of hope and of charity. [These last two sentences are such incredibly beautiful thoughts. Do not overlook the good that you do in you pious hopes and devout aspirations!] Oh, how we could merit Heaven every day, by dear brethren, by doing just our ordinary duties, but by doing them for God and the salvation of our souls! Who stops you, when you hear the chimes striking, from thinking on the shortness of time and of saying in your minds: “Time passes and death comes closer. I am hastening towards eternity. Am I really ready to appear before the tribunal of God? Am I not in a state of sin?”………
…….The Saints, my dear brethren, all loved the Cross and found in it their strength and their consolation.
But, you will say to me, is it necessary, then, always to have something to suffer?……….Now sickness or poverty, or again, scandal or calumny, or possibly the loss of money or an infirmity?
Have you been calumniated, dear friends? Have you been loaded with insults? Have you been wronged? So much the better! That is a good sign; do not worry; you are on the road that leads to Heaven. Do you know when you ought to be really upset? I do not know if you understand it, but it should be precisely for the opposite reason – when you have nothing to endure, when everyone esteems and respects you. Then you should feel envious of those who have the happiness of passing their lives in suffering, or contempt, or poverty. Are you forgetting, then, that at your Baptism you accepted the Cross, which you must never abandon until death, and that it is the key that you will use to open the door of Heaven? Are you forgetting the words of our Savior: “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily and follow me.” Not for a day, not for a week, not for a year, but all our lives. The Saints had a great fear of passing any time without suffering, for they looked upon it as time lost. According to St. Teresa, man is only in this world to suffer, and when he ceases to suffer, he should cease to live. St. John of the Cross asks God, with tears, to give him the grace to suffer more as a reward for all his labors.
What should we conclude, my dear children, from all that? Just this: Let us make a resolution to have a great respect for all the crosses, which are blessed, and which represent to us in a small way all that our God suffered for us. Let us recall that from the Cross flow all the graces that are bestowed upon us and that as a consequence, a cross which is blessed is a source of blessings, that we should often make the Sign of the Cross on ourselves and always with great respect, and, finally, that our houses should never remain without this symbol of salvation.
Fill your children, my dear brethren, with the greatest respect for the Cross, and always have a blessed cross on yourselves; it will protect you against the devil, from the vengeance of Heaven, and from all danger. This is what I desire for you.
The Catholic embrace of suffering has always been one of the aspects of the Faith that has most scandalized, even enraged, the world. Worldly people cannot comprehend what good there could be in joyfully willed suffering. As so much of Western society has become so rich, so addled with constant comfort, so used to having every whim satisfied at the flip of a switch, the notion of desiring suffering has gone from being alien and strange to perverse and offensive. Just the other day, I saw an evangelical protestant “Catholic outreach” site that used images of pious souls doing things like processing on their knees or wearing a cilice as a demonstration of the perversity of the Catholic Faith. After all, protestant divines have declared that faith alone is necessary for salvation, even if James ii:24 and Matthew xxv:31-46 totally contradict this.
Unfortunately, protestantism told the world exactly what it wanted to hear: salvation without works, Heaven without suffering! No wonder it has proven such a persistent heresy (in its always metastasizing forms).
But I’m wandering a bit from the purpose of the post. I pray you found it edifying.
Most Convincing Ad For Trump I’ve Seen Yet September 22, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, asshatery, disaster, foolishness, Revolution, scandals, self-serving, Society.
I guess we can write off all those “Robert Downey Jr. is a secret Catholic/conservative” memes now:
Of course, Hollywood has never, ever before pretended that failure to vote for their preferred left-wing candidate would result in national disaster:
So couple the first few seconds of this one (don’t recommend going beyond about 20 seconds, because gratuitous, lazy use of vulgar language ensues):
And basically the same message was conveyed in 2008. Vote for Obama or America dies.
I think more and more people, however, have had more than enough of being told what to do by high school drop outs with beautiful faces who can read a teleprompter (marginally well). A lot of Trump’s rise, for good or ill, has to do with telling off this segment of the population, which is why their endorsement this time is all the more desperate and apocalyptic-sounding. If Trump wins, it’s a massive shot at their credibility. They are not the only ones, however.
For someone like me, who choked on Hollywood’s smug superiority and sneering condescension about age 19, the more they freak out, the more the BLM types and all the other leftist’s, genuine and otherwise, lose their minds over Trump’s rise, the more I think…….maybe there is something to this guy. I am far from alone.
Or, if brevity is the soul of wit, I could simply say to Downey Jr and the others……….your ad is your failure. There’s no better ad for Trump than these sorts of messages.
Liberals Clutch Pearls at Thought of “Super-Gun Owners” September 22, 2016Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, family, firearms, fun, General Catholic, manhood, secularism, silliness, Society.
I’d like to own a super gun. Isn’t that what got Dr. Gerald Bull killed by the Mossad, building the Baghdad Gun for Saddam Hussein?
Seriously, gun control advocates are now collectively hyperventilating – we are supposed to believe – over the fact that, it turns out, a relatively few people own an awful lot of guns. Even more shockingly, a fair number of those are women. Don’t these women know it’s their job to be helpless victims, after which they can be “empowered” by raging feminists demanding vengeance for their brutal rape-murders by getting federally-mandated child care?
Americans own an estimated 265m guns [I had read several places it was more like 350 million?], more than one gun for every American adult, according to the most definitive portrait of US gun ownership in two decades. But the new survey estimates that 133m of these guns are concentrated in the hands of just 3% of American adults – a group of super-owners who have amassed an average of 17 guns each. [Oh goodness, how terrible, head for the hills, we must have a federal gun ban! Actually, any serious hunter could easily run into that number of guns and not have anything but bolt actions and pump or single-action shotguns. 4 or 5 bird guns, maybe a turkey gun, one or two each for deer, varmints, elk, bear/moose, a revolver or two, and you’re at 17 quickly with just a hunting hobby. These numbers are meant to scare, but don’t mean anything. Also, I’m again saddened to learn I’m way, way below average. If only I had the money to buy another 5 guns and come up to spec……hint hint]
The unpublished Harvard/Northeastern survey result summary, obtained exclusively by the Guardian and the Trace, estimates that America’s gun stock has increased by 70m guns since 1994. At the same time, the percentage of Americans who own guns decreased slightly from 25% to 22%.[Do you think fewer Americans own guns now than before? The biggest decrease seems to be among young men, fewer than ever seem interested in owning guns. Of course, fewer than ever also seem interested in having a job, getting a married, raising a family, or doing anything other than playing video games, watching porn, and wasting time on 4Chan in mom and dad’s basement. Kidding aside (or was I?), the steady transition of populations from rural to urban tends to explain a lot of the overarching firearms ownership trends]
While there are an estimated 55 million American gun owners, most own an average of just three firearms, and nearly half own just one or two, according to the survey results. [Truth be told, before Obama came along, I only owned 3 guns. Now I have lots more]
Then there are America’s gun super-owners – an estimated 7.7 million Americans who own between eight and 140 guns. [Yay, I’m a super-owner!]
This kind of concentrated ownership isn’t unique to guns, firearms researchers noted. Marketing experts suggest that the most devoted 20% consumers will typically account for 80% of a product’s sales.
You know what they really wanted to say…….You filthy mouth breathing bitter clingers. Don’t you know NO ONE needs 8 or 11 or 27 or 55 of 112 guns?!? How dear you invade nice liberal dreams at night with the knowledge that people like you, people different from us, exist! Just crawl under a rock and die, Trumpistas.
Turning the snark around, perhaps they could fix this horrible awful gun inequality by getting the federal government to “even the playing field” by distributing a hundred million or so firearms to the “underserved” public?
Can you spot the reasons this guy is my (secular) hero of the week?
All real men……..all. real. men.