jump to navigation

Remnant Comes out hard for Trump July 28, 2016

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, fun, General Catholic, secularism, Society, Tradition, Virtue, watch.

Riddle me this, Batman: Trump has been a consistent, lifelong liberal, until the last few years or less.  He has deviated from liberal orthodoxy on points, but, overall, he’s been very liberal. His campaign rhetoric has been improving, going from mostly conservative a year ago to almost always conservative today. But he has years of quotes that can be pulled identifying acceptance of all manner of liberal orthodoxy.

Romney, Dole, McCain, and others, were despised for being turncoats, RINOs, sellouts, wafflers, whatever, because of their many past departures from truly conservative stands on various matters.   I tend to agree very strongly with the derision those past candidates richly earned, which is why I am so strongly leaning towards standing on principle in this election, and voting for the best possible candidate in spite of odds of winning.

So here’s my question.  Why does Trump seem to get a total pass on this?  Because the elite establishment hates him? That’s a lot more about class aspiration and tribal signaling than policy, though.

Anyway, I know I said I was going to move away from this topic for a while, but the Remnant just put out a video that is a near perfect corollary for yesterday’s post, so here it is.  I will say it appears from the comments that Matt and Ferrara were either ignorant of, or ignored, the Constitution Party alternative.  I don’t think it would change their conclusions much, but I think it important to bring that up.

As the video goes along, they transition from “Yes it’s morally permissible to vote for Trump” (I’m in total agreeance) to “Dang  you really should be voting for him and it’s kind of bad if you don’t.” Early on, it’s made clear that voting for Trump is not and cannot be a moral obligation, due some of his non-Catholic positions, but by the end, I was sorta getting the impression it would be a really bad mistake not to vote for him.  With which I’m not in agreement, at least not at this point, anyway.  Apparently I’m in a small minority on that.

I was also kind of surprised when they said it was those having a hard time supporting Trump who were causing division between traditional Catholics/people of good will.  Hasn’t been my experience, but okayzers.

It’s a very good video with many good insights and I’m sure it will be a gratifying watch for the many Trump supporters who have been patiently putting up with me:



1. Tim - July 28, 2016

Mike and Chris are RIGHT. ON. THE. BULLS. EYE.

If you haven’t seen “Hillary’s America” GO! Especially the fence sitters!

2. Margaret Costello - July 28, 2016

At this point the only reason I’m voting Trump is to not give the Witch a vote in any way and avoid all out persecution:+) God bless~

Tantumblogo - July 28, 2016

And that’s fine. I can understand that, even if that’s not where I’m at right now.

Margaret Costello - July 29, 2016

Like Mike and Chris said, it’s a prudential judgement. I trust Our Lord will lead you to do what He wants:+) God bless~

Baseballmom - July 29, 2016

Dittos MC. Never Hillary.

3. Angelic Doctor Games - July 28, 2016

With all due respect, Mr. Matt does not adequately understand the principle of double effect. It has little to do with balancing the good versus the evil of an act. Still assuming he is right and I’m wrong, I still don’t trust Trump. He’s a Yankee, after all.

Tantumblogo - July 28, 2016

I’m biting my tongue. Not real impressed with some of the replies in the comments, either.

Brother I think much of it has to come down with how done you think these United States are. I think they’re burnt black, some others apparently think, medium rare. But a steak can’t be uncooked, and I don’t think this nation can be re-founded or fixed.

Which is why I think Texas needs to be moving towards an exit plan urgently.

Angelic Doctor Games - July 28, 2016

I could not agree more! http://texnat.org

I must say that I have lost a little respect for Mr. Ferrara. I am one of those who does have and is reading his book, too. Still, overall he has much great insight into the state of the Union.

Angelic Doctor Games - July 28, 2016

Oh, and to his credit, Mr. Ferrara has a better handle on the principle.

Mrs. Maureen Avila - July 29, 2016

I am inclined to also think we are “overcooked”. Rubio was the only candidate who came out and clearly stated that the only ‘fix’ for the USA would a moral conversion, a return to Christian roots on which the country was founded.
For this Rubio was dubbed “preacher in chief”.

Trump seems to be open to learning, but I think he is still quite confused about the averosexual issues among some other important topics, while Clinton is obstinate and aggressive with liberal her agendas. So, given these are the only 2 viable candidates, I will most probably vote pro-life ,that is for Trump, and pray for the best re the other problems our nation suffers.

I have stopped ruminating about the 3 Trump marriages because Trump is Protestant so probably never had a properly formed conscience re divorce. From a Catholic perspective , the validity of his first marriage might be questionable, since she had already been divorced. I do not know whether his second wife was
previously married, but she was caught in adultery in a much publicized situation and this seems to be the reason for the divorce. Again, Trump has a Protestant perspective toward divorce. Trump’s third wife had no previous marriage.

Tim - July 28, 2016

While the choice of Trump and Hillary is less than appealing, realistically one of them will win. How any Catholic who knows the absolute evil that is Hillary Clinton can either not vote or vote 3rd party(both of which help this satanic woman) is beyond comprehension. Please name me ONE past president that was ideal by Catholic standards.

Tantumblogo - July 28, 2016

Perhaps because, after 1992-2012, I’m sick of holding my nose and voting for people who don’t represent my views very well. Because I’m sick of being forced into the “anyone but” paradigm.

Tim - July 29, 2016

I generally agree with your statement, heck, I voted for Perot in 1992. But this one is different. If Trump were running against a “run of the mill” democrat I could sit out or go 3rd party. But Hillary IS THE SINGLE MOST DIABOLICAL CANDIDATE EVER. Reality dictates that she MUST be defeated. The last time I voted with any enthusiasm was 1984. I’m sick of it as well but Hillary is an absolutely known evil. I’ll take squishy over absolute evil every day and twice on Sunday.

4. Kathleen - July 28, 2016

Trump hasn’t been at all consistent in his party support.

He has been back and forth constantly.

He gave about the same amount to both sides – almost a half million each (452 GOP, 476 Dem).

Yes, he is certainly not a mainstream republican.

But defining him as a consistent liberal is inaccurate.

Tantumblogo - July 28, 2016

Ummm…..perhaps. I could perhaps say, prior to 2006 or so, he was a consistent liberal. Or liberal more often than not. He has gradually drifted right. But in some of that time he’s also considered running for president, which should be kept in mind.

My primary point is, however, irrespective of how often he’s espoused left-wing views, why does he get the pass, while others, like Romney/Bush/Dole/McCain were castigated for deviating from conservative opinion even less than Trump has? Not that I think that criticism of them was wrong, in the least.

Janet Baker - July 28, 2016

No one is giving Trump a pass. He has his warts, true. But to claim that he and Hillary are moral equals is quite frankly so simplistic as to be dishonest. We do have a moral obligation to mitigate evil, even if we cannot eliminate it altogether. Given the fact that one of them will win the White House, how on earth does one, before God, justify not voting for Trump, seeing that it’s the only way to keep Hillary out?

NickD - July 28, 2016

I don’t have the energy to make in-depth response on the castigation of Romney/Bush Dole/McCain, but I imagine it has to do with claims like being “severely conservative” while being purple in politics, at best, whereas Trump doesn’t try to say things like that. I think it also has to do with RBDM claiming that their neoconservatism was true conservatism, while Trump’s brand of nationalism and conservatism aren’t nearly as opposed as neoconservatism and conservatism are

5. Brian Springer - July 28, 2016

I don’t think there is any strict moral obligation to vote, but it would be imprudent not to.

I also agree that it is wrong to suggest that he and Hilary are moral equals. Yes, Trump has his warts, but he at least is erecting a platform friendly to conservatism. He’s the only politician I know who will repeal the Johnson amendment which would be spectacular and he’ll appoint pro-life judges. He also won’t criminalize homeschooling.

Many of these things are issues near and dear to us, and if we end up with a politician who will take all of it away, than we have no one to blame but ourselves.

I have no comment on the three previous Republican candidates from prior elections though.

6. CTCatholicCorner (@CtCathCorner) - July 28, 2016

I’ve been on the “TrumpTrain” for months mainly because I want him to “blow up” the GOP establishment for refusing to listen to voters for decades.
One thing that will come out of this election, is that the GOP establishment will be paying closer attention to what voters are saying they want and need from the government.
Aside from that, its all about the Supreme Court (and the Federal courts to some degree). Trump has given a list of who he will likely pick from- we know Hillary will have liberal progressives who will further rip out what little morality we’ve got left. We simply can’t allow that woman that sort of power for 4 or 8 years. To stop her, we must support Trump. Its really as simple as that for me.

7. Richard M - July 29, 2016

I think some of it is the white hot disdain the Remnant guys have for establishment neo-cons, with Trump standing as the total repudiation of same. Some of it is Buchanan’s endorsement. And some of it is terminal fear of what a Hillary presidency would look like.

I understand these motivations and even share them in some real degree. But it is not enough. Not for me.

Tim - July 29, 2016

What is enough? Satan himself as Trump’s opponent?

Richard M - July 29, 2016

Someone who’s not running a nakedly white identity party. And maybe someone who doesn’t confiscate the homes of elderly ladies to build a casino. Someone who doesn’t go on national radio to describe which women he would or would not sleep with based on sexual attributes in ways that I could not allow my children to listen to. Someone who can find a way to avoid characterizing Planned Parenthood as an organization that “has done very good work for millions of women.” Someone with sufficient self control not to make impulsive statements likely to force us into accidental wars abroad. For starters.

Donald Trump is not a guy with a few warts and few mistakes. He really is a despicable human being, and unfit for any high office.

Having said all that: I really do get why some trads are voting for him anyway. The thought of a Hillary presidency is very scary. We know she’s our enemy, and will ratchet up the attack on us and our children. I do get it. What I don’t get are those who are actually *enthusiastic* about him as a candidate and a possible president.

Tim - July 29, 2016

Who here is “enthusiastic” about any of them? Like Margaret has said Hillary will bring all out persecution to us. I don’t see that with Trump. Also, as Rush says…..”I live in Real-ville”….it’s going to be Trump or Hillary. We gotta do what we gotta do. All of Trump’s faults…..granted. Care to make a list of Hillary’s? How about a list for all past elected officials? Care to see my “past”…..how about your list? I understand your disgust of the menu but we are all backed into a corner with a “madame president” on the door step. I simply believe her and her agenda are simply too dangerous to ignore and we must do our part to prevent this grave evil from befalling on us. Also, people can change. I was a baptized heathen for nearly 30 years, then God guided me back by His grace. Is not the same possible for Mr. Trump?

8. (still a) Trump voter - July 29, 2016

Everybody who thinks Trump isn’t good enough to vote for — how many of you voted for someone in the primary (ever) who seems to try to live their faith. Santorum comes to mind. I usually vote what I really feel in the primary, and my candidates don’t seem to get the nomination. Years ago I really liked Buchanan, another conservative Catholic and truly hoped he would become president. The first and only time I almost volunteered to work for a political campaign was for him. This time around I voted for Trump in the Texas primary because I really did want him, and he’s the nominee. Go figure.

9. Angelic Doctor Games - July 29, 2016

The principle of double effect states that an act that is good (or at least not evil, i.e. morally neutral), but that has an evil side effect, may be done only under the following conditions:

1. The good must be willed. The evil must NOT be willed, but merely tolerated.
2. The good must NOT be the result of the tolerated evil (the good is the direct result, the evil is the indirect result).
3. The good desired must equal or outweigh the evil effect (CCC, section 1737) <–Perhaps this is what Mr. Matt was attempting to convey though a bit clumsily. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.
4. There must be a proportionately serious reason to do the act. <–Perhaps this is what some Catholics, including some here are using to justify voting for Trump. "After all, he isn't the Beelzebub that is Clinton!" I am not sure I'd go that far, after all there are alternatives to Trump that do not violate the conscience.

c matt - July 29, 2016

1. The good willed is keeping Hildebeast out; the bad tolerated is the Donald would be pres, and at least some of his positions vis-a-vis gay marriage, etc. are against RCC teaching.
2. Not sure how to apply this one – what does it mean that the good must not be the result of the evil? I guess Trump passes this one, because if he did not have the tolerated evil positions, he would be golden to vote for – it is not his tolerated evil positions that “cause” the prevention of Hildebeast. So I guess we are ok.
3. Stopping Hildebeast would put a serious dent in all of her evil agenda; true, Trump may still have some policies or fail to carry out others that would have put us in a similar position to Hildebeast being in, but the likelihood of 100% Hildebeast policies getting through in a Trump presidency is pretty slim – even if 50% less, that’s 100% vs 50%, which seems to at least equal, if not outweigh. So, ok here.
4. Again, not sure I understand this – seems to be very similar to 3. Maybe Hildebeast is not Beelzebub per se, but I find it hard to find a single policy she supports the ol’ B wouldn’t support. Seems a proportionate reason. Unless one subscribes to the position (not unreasonable) that the US is well done, and the sooner the steak is tossed and fresh meat put on the grill, the better. But that sort of smacks of seeking martyrdom, rather than simply accepting it.

That, for the most part is how I see it, although I do not necessarily convince myself. Would be interested in your (or anyone else’s) take AD.

Angelic Doctor Games - July 29, 2016

I am withdrawing from ‘national’ politics this year so this is largely a non-issue for me. As vice-chair of the Hunt County Libertarian party we will mainly focus on local and state elections. We have enough statists to deal with at home that affect us more acutely than those clowns at the federal level.

Angelic Doctor Games - July 29, 2016

Something else Leo taught was subsidiarity. As a Catholic and a libertarian, this will be my focus to help bring about in a more substantial way.

10. Edison Frisbee - July 29, 2016

The Remnant Guys are dealing in reality, the third party/ write-in folks….not so much.

11. c matt - July 29, 2016

The main, if not only reason Trump gets a pass is Hildebeast. Oddly, many of the same people who were saying hold your nose and vote McCain/Romney to stop Obama, and poo-pooed those who said no, are now saying they will not vote Trump even if that means Hildebeast. That, I don’t really get.

12. c matt - July 29, 2016

As an aside, I also don’t see how the Johnson Amendment is not a violation of the First Amendment. Not that things like logic and reading comprehension ever prevented the SCROTUS from reaching a result it wanted.

13. c matt - July 29, 2016

It all seems very surreal to me. The same arguments made for why it is ok to vote Trump (we are not voting for his bad policies/positions, e.g. on homosexuality) could be made for a typical pro-choice Dem politician (e.g., we are not voting for her pro-choice policies, but because she supports increased aid to the poor, or perhaps is anti-war, or something). I guess you could make the argument that being pro-choice is more grave than being pro-homo, but the latter is one of the sins that cries out to heaven. The problem with Hidlebeast, of course, is that she has no redeeming policy position.

Tantumblogo - July 29, 2016

Well I spoke with another priest last night and I feel much better about things. This election is a great deal more about emotion than logic.

Tim - July 29, 2016

This much is certain.

14. MichaelS - July 29, 2016

With the ultra-liberal agenda pushed forward at the Dems Convention I am leaning more toward voting for Trump. A Facebook ‘acquaintance’ chided me that Presidents can’t do anything about Roe v Wade it would take a Constitutional amendment. I don’t know about that BUT I do know that Hillary and her followers bring the culture of death along with them. Trump, on his own as POTUS, cannot overturn Roe v Wade, but if he nominates (and they get approved) truly pro-life judges to the SCOTUS then there is a chance. ALL Clinton wants is to remove ANY AND ALL restrictions to abortion and have taxpayers pay for it!

15. Saint Pelosi: “Those stupid blue collar white male homophobic gun nut God-botherers sure don’t know their own interest!” | A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics - July 29, 2016

[…] of that speech above were featured in the Remnant video yesterday, and formed sort of the centerpiece for why Catholics must oppose her by voting for Trump.  So you […]

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: