Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘stimulus’

Remember when we didn’t need to know the proper plural of the word “crisis”?  (Had to doublecheck I’d spelled that right.)

EWTN is running its usual “we’re down financially again” spot: Deacon Bill pleading with people to consider sending a donation so that they can keep running.  He pointed out that a financial crisis (either personal or national) is an opportunity (and a God-allowed opportunity, I would add) for spiritual growth.  Often this kind of painful prodding can get us somewhere we resisted going: we have to learn to rely on God.

Funny, but the Obama administration seems to think it’s an opportunity for everyone to be forced to rely on the government.

I guess we should’ve expected this; crises tend to flush people out who want to exploit a crisis for their own ends.

Remember the young girl in El Salvador several years ago who was allegedly raped while on vacation?  Except that the accused didn’t have the same STD’s as the ones she was supposed to have contracted from the rape.  And her step-father was the one loudly pushing for an abortion, when it was illegal.  Hmmm…  Well, instead of pursuing justice or even saying that the government should make an exception for such cases only (never mind actually helping the girl, instead of just dragging her through the additional horror of an abortion, or even keeping the baby’s remains for the DNA evidence), pro-abortion activists used it as an excuse to clamor for full abortion “rights” in the country.

Of course we all remember the clerical sex abuse crisis in the Catholic Church, in the U.S. particularly, a few years ago.  Almost all of the cases were decades old, adding to the horror that these problems had not been addressed swiftly and properly when they occurred (although, when the problems were caught and dealt with, many bishops followed the “expert” advice that said, “No problem, we can rehabilitate him and he can work with kids again.”).  Not only were the bishops railroaded into a knee-jerk mandatory-training-for-everyone response (useless, I would add; I attended the training, as required), but the main victims’ groups weren’t satisfied with that.  Nor were they satisfied with legal settlements.  No, some of these groups used the crisis to cry for the immediate ordination of women, the allowance of marriage for clergy, and lay oversight boards of parishes and dioceses.  Never mind that the Anglicans have all of these things and have still had sex abuse problems.  Or the factors of homosexuality, “loyal dissent” to the Church’s teachings on sexuality, or a number of other issues.  No, a good crisis demands some sweeping change.  Quickly.

Crises tend to elicit a gut-level emotional response: “Wow, that’s horrible, we must Do Something Now!”  As a mom, I can understand the desire to “fix” things, preferrably as fast as possible.  As I tell the kids, though, unless the house is on fire or someone is bleeding profusely or unconcious, it’s not a crisis, and I won’t act like it, no matter how much they fuss.  However, when a large group of people start clamoring for a “fix,” people in charge (especially politicians, who live by opinion polls) feel pressured to favor speed over careful fact analysis.

Which just begs for someone to come along, promise to fix everything, and use the Do Something Now impetus to do whatever he/she wants.

Enter Obama.

“Crisis… crisis… crisis… deepening crisis… unprecedented crisis… crisis… did I mention the crisis?”

Coordinating with this is the increasing push to silence critics.  The “fairness doctrine” is back, threatening to “level the playing field” for the overwhelmingly conservative field of talk radio.  (Suspiciously, there has been no mention if this will be applied to the overwhelmingly liberal field of network news.)  The conscience clause, strengthened by President Bush in his last days in office, is in the process of being removed (because we don’t want doctors or pharmacists exercising their “freedom of choice” not to do abortions, that might confuse people about the rightness of abortion… pesky Hippocratic Oath!  We should ban that, too!).  Republicans in the House were informed that their contributions to any bills were neither desired nor required.  After years of complaining about President Bush “acting like a dictator” by making Supreme Court nominations of people who *gasp* actually shared his views on how the Constitution should be interpreted… now Democrats seem to be in love with the phrase, “Shut up, we won.”

“Hey, this is a crisis!  No time for discussion!”  (what does forcing doctors to do abortions or funding overseas abortion advocates or funding the massive failure called embryonic stem cell research have to do with fixing the economy?)  “Silence!  Didn’t you hear the word CRISIS?”

The real problem with the “stimulus” bill was that much of it wasn’t about stimulating the economy.  It was about pushing all of the programs the Democrats wanted.  Sure, it wasn’t everything at once…  But the economic crisis was a wonderfully handy excuse to push the country in socialist directions.  “No, no, that isn’t what we’re doing!” went the denials at first.  “Well, ok, it is, but we’re justified in doing it!” is what we’re hearing now.  What’s next?  “Ok, we aren’t really justified in doing it, but we’re going to do it anyways because we won”?

Charles Krauthammer examined this with his usual sharpness here.

And yet with our financial house on fire, Obama makes clear both in his speech and his budget that the essence of his presidency will be the transformation of health care, education and energy. Four months after winning the election, six weeks after his swearing in, Obama has yet to unveil a plan to deal with the banking crisis.

What’s going on? “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” said Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. “This crisis provides the opportunity for us to do things that you could not do before.”

Things. Now we know what they are. The markets’ recent precipitous decline is a reaction not just to the absence of any plausible bank rescue plan, but also to the suspicion that Obama sees the continuing financial crisis as usefully creating the psychological conditions — the sense of crisis bordering on fear-itself panic — for enacting his “Big Bang” agenda to federalize and/or socialize health care, education and energy, the commanding heights of post-industrial society.

 

And yet, this could become a set of good crises, and not just for spiritual growth.

My brother (not a Republican by any stretch) is upset with the direction we’re taking; he says he doesn’t think the government should be getting involved in all these private companies, “too big to fail” or not.

Tax demonstrations have been breaking out, here and there.  Having organized one measley little demonstration last year, I can tell you that for everyone out there, demonstrating in public, there are probably at least fifty people who strongly agree but, “just don’t do protests,” or couldn’t make it.

Good grief, Whoopi Goldberg (definitely not a Republican) was fuming on The View about taxes going crazy to pay for all of this planned government spending.  As someone on Fox said tonight, “Obama’s problem is that he’s losing the American people.  And if you’ve already lost Whoopi…”

Someone much wiser than me on EWTN (I forget who) was preaching about God and how He deals with our sins and unsavory wanderings off the straight and narrow.  God, he said, sometimes gives us exactly what we thought we wanted.  Just long enough for us to realize how awful and self-destructive it would really be.  (also known as ”to give someone enough rope to hang themselves” in less theological circles)  Remember the Prodigal Son?  He got exactly what he wanted… and he realized, painfully, how fleeting what he wanted was compared to the benefits of obedience and honest work in his father’s house.  For many people, this kind of crisis has led to incredible conversions to lives of faith, reliance on God, and a cheerful embrace of the straight and narrow.

America is finding out, at long last, exactly what Obama meant when he said “CHANGE”… and a lot of Americans are beginning to think that they don’t really like getting exactly what they asked for.

Read Full Post »

Perusing a few of the blogs I read, I wound up at The Return of Scipio via Lindy’s Blog.

Scipio, like many of us, is deeply troubled by where we are headed.  (I highly recommend you go and read the whole post, “Our Fearful Master”.) 

A growing government will have greater power to intrude into the lives of citizens. If this process is not halted—and when has it ever been halted?—then the citizens will cease to be free. So much of their lives will become defined by some type of government largess that they will really only live at the behest of the state.

Some will enjoy this. Aristotle called such men “natural slaves.” …

They are men who have simply grown weary of the demands of liberty. Such men yearn for their every material need to be provided by government, and they vote into office those who promise to expand the role of the state. Their one desire is to collapse into the arms of the state. It does no good at all to remind these men that health care, education, housing, food and employment have been provided under every kind of government to every slave in history.

All nations have these “natural slaves” to one extent or another. When they proliferate in a Republic, there will arise a group of clever men who will promise once they are in power to provide security and safety to all citizens.

(In the comments, someone was complaining that if conservatives don’t like big government, then why do they want to ban gay marriage and abortion?  Isn’t that big government?  Um, no.  Banning abortion is defending the weak from the strong, which is one of the fundamental aspects of government.  Not recognizing “gay marriage” (and saying we won’t ever do it, either) is limiting government from re-writing what people are allowed to believe.  What perversions two consenting adults choose to practice in private is usually their business, misguided as it may be; insisting that the government sanction and honor that on the same level as real marriage (and insist that everyone else does, too; see what has happened in Canada) is something else entirely.  (although I think the whole argument for gay “marriage” is probably helped along by the fact that heterosexual marriage is such a mess right now.))

 

Scipio reminded me of a recurring thought I’ve had throughout this whole argument over whether Barack Obama was trying to turn the U.S.A. into a socialist system (and all those who insisted he wasn’t during the campaign… you’re either deluded or were trying to delude others).  I kept remembering one of the few useful things I read during my “Philosophy of Religion” class.  The prof declared that, “Everyone knows what Christianity is, so we’re going to study everything else.”  My end-of-class critique complained that if you’re going to call it “Philosophy of Religion”, you really should have mostly studied something besides atheists and agnostics.  I don’t remember much of the class, frankly.  He was one of those profs who profess to know something, but can’t teach it, so he did most of the talking.

However, the one really useful thing we read  was “The Grand Inquisitor” by Fyodor Dostoevsky, a chapter from The Brothers Karamazov.  (I suspect the prof included it because it would seem to be a sharp denunciation of Catholicism, if you don’t take into account the unsympathetic character who’s telling the tale or the response of his brother, the monk, who insists that he’s taken it too far, or that the author himself was Russian Orthodox and apparently neither too well informed about nor too well disposed towards the Catholic Church.)

The basic premise of this parable within the novel is that Jesus comes back to Earth, is recognized and appreciated by the poor, and is promptly arrested by the nefarious forces of the Inquisition.  (If Dan Brown was better read, I’d expect to see this show up in one of his novels as historical fact.  It did show up in an X-Files episode, though.)  Most of the story is the Grand Inquisitor monologing at length, arguing with the silent Jesus about why Jesus was wrong and the Inquisitor’s “corrections” to Christianity were better.  (The brother telling the story, if you haven’t guessed yet, is a rationalist atheist upset by suffering in the world who insists that he’ll just commit suicide (“hand my ticket back”) when he isn’t having fun anymore, which he expects to happen no later than thirty.  Dostoevsky does not present him as a positive character.)  The picture painted of the “Romish Church” is a strange mish-mash of rationalists’ prejudices against the Church, Protestants’ prejudices against the Church, and some gross misreadings of Catholic doctrine.   Oh, and the Grand Inquisitor himself openly declares that he works for the devil, who he calls the “wise spirit.”

I look at The Grand Inquisitor the same way I view the “advice” of Screwtape, the head demon, to his nephew, a junior tempter, in The Screwtape Letters: the advice is all hellish, and meant as a “what not to do” from the author, but there are scraps of truth about human nature and weaknesses within it.  The Grand Inquisitor’s argument boils down to this passage (Dostoevsky apparently had something against paragraph breaks):

…and they will begin crying unto us: “Feed us, for they [the scientists] who promised us the fire from heaven have deceived us!” …  Oh, never, never, will they learn to feed themselves without our help! No science will ever give them bread so long as they remain free, so long as they refuse to lay that freedom at our feet, and say: “Enslave, but feed us!” That day must come when men will understand that freedom and daily bread enough to satisfy all are unthinkable and can never be had together, as men will never be able to fairly divide the two among themselves. And they will also learn that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, miserable nonentities born wicked and rebellious. Thou has promised to them the bread of life, the bread of  heaven; but I ask Thee again, can that bread ever equal in the sight of the weak and the vicious, the ever ungrateful human race, their daily bread on earth? … They will regard us as gods, and feel grateful to those who have consented to lead the masses and bear their burden of freedom by ruling over them–so terrible will that freedom at last appear to men! …

There exists no greater or more painful anxiety for a man who has freed himself from all religious bias, than how he shall soonest find a new object or idea to worship. But man seeks to bow before that only which is recognized by the greater majority…  For the chief concern of these miserable creatures is not to find and worship the idol of their own choice, but to discover that which all others will believe in, and consent to bow down to it [en masse].

In short, personal freedom is too painful and costly, so the overseers of humanity would take upon themselves all of the sins of the people, sucking the people in by promising them earthly bread and convincing them that slavery is better than freedom.  Or at least safer and easier.  The overseers will decide what is good and what is evil, and the people will accept it, happy to be free of guilt and responsibility, like “infants,” the Inquisitor says.

Yes, the sheep are safe… but only because they’re being readied for slaughter by those keeping them “safe”.

Traditionally, our country did not pride itself on an elite who would explicitly remove freedoms to grant personal security.  (National security interests are a different thing; we have frequently abridged rights during the course of wars, but those have generally gone back to normal after the war is over.)  We seem to be wandering in that direction, however.  We’re giving away our children’s future, our rights to be successful without paying half of our earnings in taxes, even our right to protest certain policies (“Yeah, fine, he wants to pass FOCA, and that would muzzle anyone who dared say abortion is wrong or tried to talk someone out of it or didn’t want to do one… what do I care?  Just pay for my health care!”), all in exchange for a perception of safety in the here and now.  It isn’t just Obama; we’ve been headed this direction for years, ever since the scare of the Great Depression started us down this road.

“They who can give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

- Benjamin Franklin

Remember the Israelites in the desert with Moses?  “We had food in Egypt!  Why did you bring us out here to die?”  Don’t you remember slavery?  The slaughter of your sons by Pharoah?  “Yeah, but we had food!”  No wonder Moses hated his job sometimes.  We fall for the same lies, over and over.  It’s like most people want to be fooled most of the time, if only they’re promised safety.

How much do we want freedom?  For most people, not that much, really.

But the American Revolution did not begin with a majority.

Read Full Post »

1.  Lent has begun.  We went to the 6pm mass, so I wasn’t out in public with my ashes on my forehead.  I would like to make it more of a real season of preparation for Easter this year, but I always seem to get derailed.  I contemplated giving up my blog stats (not sure how to do that anyways; people talk about locking it… and I like to see what people read and looked for…), but settled on chocolate.  But chocolate milk doesn’t count.  Every time I would’ve reached for a bit of chocolate, I stop.  It’s a bit annoying, but isn’t that the point?  To think of all those suffering over greater temptations, and all I’m giving up is this measely piece of chocolate that I don’t really need.  Plus, Jen over at Conversion Diary said something about treating our bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit… which means no junk going in the mouth.  *sigh*  Dratted converts keep coming up with good ideas I should’ve known in the first place!

2.  Spring is almost here.  A wonderful reminder that God is an optimist, no matter what particular stupidities we have committed over the long, dark winter (and we’ve committed quite a few this winter).  The daffodils are blooming, it was in the upper 60′s today, and I was going to go out and do a bunch of gardening as soon as we got through with our homeschool lessons… which took much longer than usual and were extremely frustrating… and then the front came through, high winds, temperature dropped fifteen degrees.  Ah, yes, spring is also a wonderful reminder that God’s plans are not our plans.

3.  Government as ultimate charity.  On Glenn Beck’s program on Fox News today, he had some survey results about what people thought the government should be doing.  68% of the people surveyed thought that the government should provide food to people who need it.  66% thought government should provide health care.  52% said government should provide housing.  51% said government should make sure everyone has a job who wants one… I remember a government like this.  It was the Soviet Union.  And that guaranteed job and housing might be a useless job sweeping sidewalks by hand for a pittance of a salary and a barely heated one room apartment with a shared bathroom for the entire floor.  The standard of living did not improve under the Soviet Union, despite communism’s claims that they were going to provide for everyone.  When you try to mandate provision for everyone, you will impoverish everyone.

4.  On a related note…  EWTN’s news show tonight featured Fr. Robert Siroco of the Acton Institute discussing, among other things, the plans to end the Bush tax cuts on “the rich” (defined this time as “couples making $250,000 or more”) and eliminating tax deductions (mortgage and charitable giving, specifically).  Although it sounds good to “stick it to the rich” and make them pay for caring for the poor, the math doesn’t work.  Fr. Siroco was estimating that the tax changes would actually eliminate $179 billion in contributions to charity by removing some of the incentives to donate.  The president claims he’ll put $100 billion into similar government programs… except, of course, that that $100 billion will be filtered through the bureaucracy, so it won’t really be $100 billion worth of help.  And, more important from a Catholic perspective, if the government is doing the giving for us, then we aren’t… and charity is good not just for the recipient, but for the giver.

5.  Subsidiarity.  This is a wonderful, and highly pertinent, concept in Catholic social doctrine.  Basically, it says that problems should be solved at the lowest level possible.  If families can and/or should solve the problem, then it is wrong for the local government to do it.  If the local government can do it, it is wrong for the federal government to get their fingers into it.  Which, at this point, would require a massive restructuring of our government and the abandonment of half the buildings in Washington, DC.

6.  Quote of the week:  “A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have.”  President Gerald Ford, but generally mistakenly attributed to Thomas Jefferson (yes, I thought it was Jefferson, too, until I checked)

7.  Weird excitement.  Also on EWTN’s news show tonight, Raymond Arroyo, the anchor, mentioned that the pope has a new encyclical coming out.  The British press are rumoring that it’s about tax havens.  Arroyo pointed out that the British press are famously unconcerned with facts and love chasing rumors… and are usually wrong.  But, yes, there is a new encyclical coming that has been somewhat postponed; something about making it speak more directly to the concrete realities.  So, apparently, it is something about economics.  If you’d told me in high school that I’d be this excited about a new papal encyclical coming out, I would’ve told you that you were absolutely crazy.

Thank God that we don’t stop changing in high school!

And, as usual, remember to go check out Jen at Conversion Diary.  Her 7 Quick Takes includes some truly eye-opening stories about the rapidly escalating violence in Mexico.  But don’t expect any more info from her on the subject any time soon; she’s due to be induced on Monday for child #4!

Read Full Post »

Yes, I have been in and out on the blog (mostly out), because I’ve been sewing like crazy.  Evidence of said sewing and why it took so long is below.

As I was revelling in not being behind the sewing machine tonight, I was admiring the fan I bought (along with a hat and some wonderful bayberry soaps) in Williamsburg today.  The fan (a reproduction of a colonial era one) was meant as an instructional aide to young ladies.  It admonishes, “Keep within compass and you shall be sure to avoid many troubles which others endure.”  Above, sketches illustrate the virtues of prudence, virtue, honesty, patience, charity, and industry.  In the middle of the scenes is a happy, serene, and lovely young lady standing within a compass, i.e. keeping her behavior within the bounds of morality.

Isn’t this how we got into this whole mortgage-meltdown and stimulus mess?  (Can’t avoid it; it keeps coming up, especially since they’re already talking about another one.)  Good grief, if we’d managed to get three out of the six virtues on the fan right, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad as it is.

If we’d been more prudent with our money, instead of overleveraging our buying power…

If we’d practiced virtue, instead of wantonly creating single-parent families, the most at-risk for financial problems…

If companies had been honest about their financial stability (or lack thereof)…

If we had had more patience, instead of looking for quick gratification through spending and unsustainable housing and stock appreciation…

If we valued industry (in the old sense of “hard work”) more than flashy trappings…

And, finally, if we showed more charity, instead of giving a measely 2% of our income on average, we wouldn’t need the government to do charity work, because the groups in the community (churches, especially) would have the money to help, and almost any other organization is both more effective and more efficient than government at charity.

Our Founding Fathers said that this country would fail if we lost our morals.  Now that we’ve tested and proved that hypothesis, can we pull back from the brink before it’s irreversible, please?

 

On a lighter note, twice a year, Colonial Williamsburg holds Home Educators’ Week.  February and September are definitely not their busiest months, so all of us homeschoolers get a really cheap admission and they get some visitors (who then, of course, buy hats, food, drinks, souvenirs, etc.).

After being up to 2:30 am last night, I finally finished everything.  Middle son’s vest took a while; in keeping with the style of the colonial era, I decided to embroider the vest (vines, leaves, and eagles) and trim out the coat (including buttoning oversized coat cuffs, pocket flaps, and buttonholes on the coat purely for show).  The picture doesn’t do him justice; he looked so handsome!

wmburg22

And then, at 2 am, I remembered that my dress, which was supposed to be a la polonaise, was not yet polonaised, since the skirt was not pulled up into decorative swoops.  I decided to cheat and use safety pins.  (As a former costume mistress for the high school drama club, the rule is: if you can’t see it, it doesn’t count!)  A few quick modifications, and I finally made it to bed.  We got to Williamsburg uneventfully, and started looking for a good spot for a few photos.

wmburg11

Things were going pretty okay.  The kids liked watching the print shop make fake (and cheaper) marbled-look paper.  And then the youngest decided she was just going to pout big time, for no apparent reason.  And it was so pathetic.

wmburg3

Finally, one of our favorite photo spots: the stream running under the cabinetmaker’s shop.  Yes, it goes under the building.  Something about getting a real deal on the land, then making do with what you got.

wmburg4

I’m obviously doing something wrong when I shrink my pictures, since they come out looking like a paint-by-numbers thing.  When I figure it out (i.e. not tonight, since I want to go to bed at a reasonable hour for once), I will try to remember to come back and fix this post!  But, at least, you get to see the outfits: one doll, one cow, one toddler dress, one vest and coat ensemble, and a little rework on the oldest’s red dress.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 29 other followers