Monday, August 31, 2015

What these people want to put our poor country through next

From journalist Daniel McAdams:

One of the most depressing things about watching — even from a distance — the quadrennial race for the White House is seeing what passes for debate on the one area where the president does have some Constitutional authority: foreign policy.
Candidates who have spent little or no time studying or traveling to the rest of the world, and, in the fashion of many Americans in the age of Empire, see the rest of the world as just a series of US colonial outposts, apparently consider foreign policy unworthy of serious consideration.
So little do Republican candidates care about foreign policy that most of them have “outsourced” their foreign policy to a single neocon-dominated foreign policy shop called the “John Hay Initiative.”  If you wonder why most Republican candidates sound exactly the same on foreign policy, it’s because they are nearly all getting their advice from the same people.
When nearly all candidates look to someone like Eliot Cohen, a founding member of the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), to provide an off-the-shelf foreign policy, it should be no surprise that the “debate” in the Republican party is only over which country to attack first.
Any candidate who thinks so little about something so important as America’s place in the world should be automatically disqualified.
But the neocons love it! The “experts” who brought us the 2003 Iraq war and the Libya “liberation” are still in the driver’s seat when it comes to foreign policy.
“Jeb!” has John Hay Initiative members Michael Chertoff and Michael Hayden (remember those crooks?) on board as his advisors.
Marco Rubio reportedly draws from Hay Project member Roger Zakheim, the son of GW Bush administration “vulcan,” Dov Zakheim. Zakheim père, we remember, joined with his fellow neocons to lie the US into war with Iraq, enriching the military-industrial complex, before absconding to the “private sector” to make his millions from the same military-industrial complex. Zakheim quickly and quietly left his position as the Pentagon’s chief financial officer after a trillion dollars went missing and the Government Accountability Office was critical of his handling of matters.
Scott Walker, a soporific candidate who nevertheless still gives neocons like Bill Kristol the vapors, also shops the neocon Walmart of foreign policy, the John Hay Initiative. It should be no surprise, then, that at his big foreign policy coming out speech at the Citadel military college Friday, he unveiled an “aggressive” foreign policy — crying out “America will not be intimidated. And neither will I” — as he promised more war and vowed that “the retreat is over!”
Is this the retreat he is talking about?

Read the rest of the article here.

Sunday, August 30, 2015

First it was "ms" and now it's "ze"

Since everyone has so happily and unthinkingly accepted the ridiculous appellation "ms" to describe ladies married or unmarried, I'll bet that it won't be long until the same unthinking ones (including Catholics) will start using "ze".

What to do when someone uses these idiocies?  Give them the withering mockery they so richly deserve, as this blog has always done since it began in 2011 A.D. [Note to those in the Vatican: "AD" signifies "Anno Domini", marking the central historical event in all human history.  We know that many in Rome have now adopted the Jewish "CE", but we thought that perhaps you needed a reminder.]

The Hounds of Hell must be laughing themselves silly at the collective mindlessness of the world.

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Will Finland succeed in reversing the Poof "Marriage" Law?

Momentum is gaining in Finland to repeal the atrocious law that was recently imposed upon them. I wonder if little Finland will show the world the way to say "no" to Big Buggery.

The website Mass Resistance has the details.  From the article:

Late last year, as we reported, the Finnish Parliament narrowly passed a “gay marriage” law. As we’ve seen in so many other places, proponents used an aggressive, undemocratic strategy that allowed no parliamentary debate, discussion, or amendments to push the bill through its final stages. Within a week, over 12,000 people had resigned from the Finnish Lutheran Church over its Bishop’s pro-gay marriage remarks.
But last April’s nationwide elections changed the political landscape. A new Parliament was elected.  The top people in government are openly pro-traditional marriage. As a result, the Finnish pro-family movement has ignited across the country to get the bill repealed. Over 70,000 people have already signed a special petition to get it before the Parliament. And to counter the “gay” propaganda, they are out educating the population and the political leaders about the consequences of “gay marriage” for society.

Read the rest of this inspiring post here.

Pray for little Finland.

Dear lovely Finland, don't soil your beautiful land with that filth

Tuesday, August 25, 2015

Horse's Ash Carter Talks Tough

The Secretary of Defense???

Where do these idiots come from?  I really, truly, want to know.  Are they from Mars, or do they emerge, like all war profiteers, from the deep recesses of their own strange minds?

This clown wants to have a nuclear war with Russia.

Look at his views philosophically: being a mandarin of the military-industrial amalgam, which makes him immensely rich, lots of American dead bodies are not something that troubles him overmuch. US soldiers are a dime a dozen, so Mr Carter can live with a couple of hundred thousand body bags being sent home, presuming there is enough left of the soldiers' bodies to get sent back.  And since that doesn't weigh too heavily on his conscience, the sight of obliterated US cities probably wouldn't either.  He will, after all, be safely ensconced in his well-protected underground bunker while the rest of us, a la Hiroshima, are roasted to death.

Surely there is an asylum somewhere, with thickly padded cells, where we could find a place for Mr Carter?

An additional padded cell needs to be reserved for this guy:

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Church Music: The Balance Between Sound and Silence

I and my family have the great privilege of being able to avail ourselves of the beautiful, powerful, haunting Ancient Rite of the Mass on a regular basis, every day of the week.  It is the kind of privilege one would not trade for anything on earth.

The good priests who say this Mass do so with exceptional reverence and minute attention to the rubrics and there is no complaint that could possibly be made as to that.  Curiously though, the religious order to which these priests belong demands Masses, High and Low, to be adorned with wall-to-wall music, in the case of the High Mass a full choir and organist (understandably), and the Low, strangely enough, with virtually non-stop organ music(incomprehensibly).  We drown in music at this parish, especially at the Low Mass, a Mass in which one would normally expect a few moments of contemplative silence.  (We have discussed some of these issues on this blog before:

Can there be such a thing as too much music in an Ancient Rite Mass?

When is too much, then, too much?

A blogging colleague, the fabled Dad29, has offered some compelling thoughts on the subject of Church music, when it is right and when it is wrong.  With Dad's kind permission I reproduce here his essay.  ["Dad29" is the nom de plume of one of the state's most distinguished Church musicians, an artist in the front rank of his profession.  His thoughts are not those of the amateur and, therefore, are to be valued.]


There are dozens of Church documents which mention music in the liturgy.  Almost all of them give a nod--or more--to Gregorian Chant as the 'preferred,' 'first,' or 'primary' music of the Roman liturgy.  And that preference is, to one degree or the other, ignored.  Oh, yes, there is a movement afoot to restore (instaurare) Chant to its place as the principal song of the Church.  And yes, EF communities utilize Chant quite a bit.

We all know that Chant is sung, of course.  And we all know that Chant really should be un-accompanied.  And most of us know that Chant comes in two varieties:  the relatively simple, easy-to-sing, 'congregational' Chant of the Ordinary of the Mass, and the more elaborate, sometimes quite challenging, Proper chants.

But this is not really about what Chant is.  It is what Chant is NOT that is important here.

Chant is not accompanied.  Chant is not continuous--that is, each Chant has its place and has no more than just that place.  It is not entertainment; it is not bombast, it is not 'filler.'  Most important, it is not imposed upon the Mass--rather, it is PART of the Mass.

What can we learn from this list of 'nots'?  We can learn that the music most strongly recommended for use at Mass is part of the Mass itself.  Negatively, then, we learn that that's all the music that the Mass really  'needs.'

Uh-huh.  So what?

There is a tendency among church musicians to 'fill every hole with music.'  That's not surprising, I suppose.  It's probably related to the old saying about problems:  if you have a hammer, every problem is a nail.  And if you're a musician, music is the solution to every need, whether that need is real or merely perceived.

Therein lies the rub.  Chant teaches us simplicity, and about the value of silence.  It teaches us that the priest, congregation, and schola (or choir) have their own roles.  It teaches us where music MUST be, and where it does not HAVE to be, and it teaches us that music for the Mass is really quite subtle.

Little of that is understood in our time, where continuous music has been imposed on us by the psycho-motivators of Muzak, the commercialism of Itunes (and the multitude of competitors), and our own inability to exist comfortably with ..............silence.  It is somewhat ironic that "The Sounds of Silence" was not silent at all, and was played all. the. time. on commercial radio, no?

Locally, a misguided parish priest ordered his music-critter to "play something" for 10 full minutes before the beginning of each Mass.  That order was given in order to get deh pipples to shut up when they entered the church.  It was the right reason, but the wrong solution, for the music-critter's repertoire is largely drawn from hotel-lobby/bar entertainment stuff--French impressionist--and it cannot possibly convey the sense of "church."  Worse, it feeds the fire of Muzak-psych.   This is compounded when the music-critter stuffs the communion "space" with keyboard riffs on hymns, then with the official 'communion hymn,' and sometimes an additional choral or congregational piece.

(The priest himself should have told deh pipples to shut up, of course--but he has an overpowering need to be adored and liked, so he chose the wrong solution.) 

In the EF (Old Rite), the music-critter will impose music even more freely because in that Rite, the priest does not 'speak' the Canon.  Since silence is The Vacuum Which Must Be Filled, organ music will be heard, and the Vacuum At Communion will ALSO be filled, often right to the brim, with mo' music.

Please!  Shut Up!!  Take the un-stated but obvious advice of Chant!

Less is more, folks.  Silence is golden.  God's voice is still and small.  Maybe HE should be heard, eh?

The blog of Dad29, including an expanded version of the above, can be found here.