Catholics For Romney v catholics For Obama

Some time ago, a Catholics for Romney committee formed to support the campaign of Mitt Romney.

WDTPRS would vote for the corpse of Millard Fillmore – a Know-Nothing member – if it meant the removal of the anti-Catholic, anti-constitution incumbent from the White House.

That said, Catholics For Romney group includes as their national chairmen six former Vatican ambassadors including Frank Shakespeare, Tom Melady, Ray Flynn, Jim Nicholson, Francis Rooney, and – and this is very important to me – Mary Ann Glendon, for whom I have great respect. They wrote the following letter supporting the former governor.

The Romney campaign has a section for Catholics For Romney on their page HERE.

Not to be outdone, the Obama campaign has started a “Catholics For Obama” group.

Who, you might ask, would be on such a committee?

Here are the names of the co-chairs, gleaned from a story from the Religion News Service:

Former State Representative Polly Baca, Colorado
Ambassador Elizabeth Frawley Bagley, Washington, DC
Representative Xavier Becerra, California
Nicholas Cafardi, Pennsylvania
Former Representative Kathy Dahlkemper, Pennsylvania
Representative Rosa L. DeLauro, Connecticut
Senator Dick Durbin, Illinois
Miguel Foster, Michigan
Thomas Groome, Massachusetts
Representative Marcy Kaptur, Ohio
Victoria Reggie Kennedy, Massachusetts
Victoria Kovari, Michigan
Sister Jamie Phelps, Louisiana
Governor Martin O’Malley, Maryland
Former Representative James Oberstar, Minnesota [Pretty good life record.]
Lawrence Parks, Washington, DC
Fred Rotondaro, Washington, DC
Representative Tim Ryan, Ohio
Stephen Schneck, Washington, DC
John Sweeney, Maryland
Mark Tuohey, Washington, DC

The Obama campaign said that state co-chairs will be announced in the coming weeks.

What a crew.

Rosa De Lauro?

Dick Durbin?

Thomas Groome?!?

If you want to know about Thomas Groome read Eamon Keane’s excellent and educational book A Generation Betrayed: Deconstructing Catholic Education in the English-Speaking World.

In the meantime, their bedfellow at the Fishwrap – Tom Gallahger – is hysterically comparing Rep. Paul Ryan to Dr. Kevorkian.

Let us now see if the Catholics For Romney group actually does something.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Catholics For Romney v catholics For Obama

  1. MarylandBill says:

    I know as a Catholic of Irish Descent, I have felt betrayed by O’Malley and other so called “Irish Catholic” politicians who have basically ignored the Church on life issues for years and now are ignoring it on marriage issues.

    I haven’t decided whether I will vote for Romney or a third party candidate yet (in Maryland, unless Obama really is going to loose by a land slide it is doubtful my vote will make any difference either way in the campaign), but unless I see drastic changes in the democratic party, I think I probably have voted democrat for the last time in a general election.

  2. Supertradmum says:

    MarylandBill, since 1999, the Democratic Party Platform online for all to see has held unequivocal support for Roe v. Wade. Now, the platform supports civil marriage for lesbians and gays. An independent vote is a waste of a vote.

  3. Papabile says:

    Rosa… Rosa…. Rosa…. Upo on the Hill we commonly referred to her as the Wicked Witch of the East.

    I am originally from right outside her district in Connecticut. Every two years like clockwoork, we get a picture of her kneeling at the Communion Rail for her First Communion in he campaign lit.

  4. frjim4321 says:

    I wonder if Dennis Kucinich might be recruited for Catholics for Obama? I think I read that he is a Catholic.

    I really don’t care much about either group, but if either of them shows up to leaflet cars in our parking lot we’re kicking them out.

  5. frjim4321 says:

    LOL, guess that proves I’m a pastor – who else cares about litter in the church parking lot.

  6. flyfree432 says:

    Groome is no surprise. Catechetics students at Franciscan study his dissident teachings as part of the curriculum.

  7. Supertradmum says:

    Dick Durbin sold out years ago. NARAL and Planned Parenthood both list him with a 100% rating. National Right to Life Committee lists him with a 0% rating. He has an 100% rating from the Americans United for Separation of Church and State group. He has a 96% rating from NOW. Those of us from the area know how he backtracked and do not forget, he introduced Obama at the 2008 Dem Convention. He is an inside boy.

  8. ReginaMarie says:

    frjim4321,
    I don’t care for litter in the parish parking lot either, but I do believe it is within the 1st amendment right to free speech to leaflet vehicles in a church parking lot. As pastor of the church you do have the right to ask them to leave, but it is illegal to remove leaflets on vehicles once they are placed on there by anyone but the owner of the vehicle (as the piece of literature is now the car owner’s property).

  9. frjim4321 says:

    Groome is a dissident? Seriously . . .

  10. Supertradmum says:

    ReginaMarie, not so. Parking lots which belong to parishes are private property and therefore no one can leaflet. In the last election, the Catholics for Obama from the chancery office took away pro-life pamphlets, in my parish, and then told those in the parish who put them there that they had to have the bishop’s permission to do this.

  11. robtbrown says:

    Notwithstanding the question of his Catholicism, Dick Durbin is my least favorite pol,and it’s not because of his politics. Of the times I’ve seen him interviewed on TV, 99% of the time he makes no effort to educate the electorate, instead tossing out little propaganda items intended to manipulate the listener–Goebbels would be proud. Someone I know who works on the Hill says that DD is a demagogue and bully, so I feel vindicated.

    Kucinich is just the opposite–he always has something to say.

  12. asophist says:

    WARNING to all readers of Fr. Z’s blog:
    The webpage containing the Letter of Romney’s supporters has been identified by my software security system as being a cyber attack page. Don’t go there, you will be risking the integrity of your computer hard drive. The pro-Obama forces are at work there, apparently, doing the dirty on the webpage that contain the letter. Why did I almost expect that?

  13. Supertradmum says:

    robtbrown, as we say in the conservative Midwest, Durbin is “creeeepyyy”.

  14. MarylandBill says:

    Supertradmum, Maryland has not voted Republican in a national election for over 20 years. I seriously doubt it will go Republican this year either. Essentially a democratic candidate has to run a totally miserable campaign to loose this state (Michael Dukakis, Walter Mondale and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend).

    Now, if I am wrong, and it looks like Obama might loose Maryland, I will vote for Romney to help defeat Obama (Though if Obama gets to the point where he might loose Maryland, I submit he has no chance of re-election regardless of whether he wins the state or not). However, since Maryland likely will go to Obama anyway, I am going to choose the candidate I find least objectionable. I have too many concerns about Romney to endorse him unreservedly. He would be better than Obama, but that might be like preferring a fox in the henhouse over a wolf amongst the sheep.

    Now, if I vote for a third party candidate, I might not do anything to get anyone elected, but I might increase the legitimacy of a third party… one more in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church than either of the existing parties.

  15. Charivari Rob says:

    “An independent vote is a waste of a vote.”

    No, it is not.

    If a person is voting in a state where it is pretty much guaranteed that the pro-abortion candidate from one of the two major parties is going to win the popular vote by a significant margin (and therefore the state’s entire portion of votes in the Electoral College), what exactly is “wasting a vote”?

    Yes – whoever gets my vote needs to be truly pro-Life. That is an absolute prerequisite. Someone who is pro-abortion is not getting my vote. But, beyond that… how best to cast my vote?

    Cast it for a truly, sincerely pro-Life candidate from the other major party? Even if I think he or she has flaws on lesser issues? Even if he or she doesn’t stand a snowball’s chance of winning this state’s popular vote? Even if voting that way does nothing to encourage that party to do anything differently, to think, to (maybe) develop/recruit/support even a slightly better candidate the next time?

    - or -

    Cast it for a truly, sincerely pro-Life person – perhaps a third-party candidate, perhaps a write-in – who doesn’t have that flaw. Who might actually bring some positive quality or crucial experience to the job? Who doesn’t stand a chance of winning, either, but does have that slim chance (if enough people asserted themselves this way instead of simply staying away) of getting parties to notice?

    The national parties have people who do polling and demographics, crunch these numbers, and pay them some heed. The lobbyists and PACs have people who do polling and demographics, crunch numbers, and the parties definitely pay attention to them! Maybe, just maybe – a light will dawn with party leaderships. If they start to see that there’s some little block of people willing to say “ANYBODY but (pro-abortion incumbent)” or “You want me to pick column A or column B? Sorry – NONE OF THE ABOVE!” – maybe then we’ll have that snowball’s chance of better candidates.

  16. Cathy says:

    How did Paul Ryan vote on ENDA? How did Paul Ryan vote on NDAA?

  17. pfreddys says:

    No Nancy Pelosi?!?!? I’m shocked the biggest small c catholic wasn’t all over this!!!!

  18. jeffreyquick says:

    Oh boy, my Congressdroid Timmy Ryan and the probable soon-to-be Congressdroid of Cleveland West (Kaptur, who beat Kucinich in a redistricting race.). I don’t know the state of Kucinich’s Catholic practice, but if you spend that much time with Shirley McLaine, it can’t be good. Catholyks for Obama, indeed.

  19. JimGB says:

    Maryland Bill, I live in New York, which is a very blue state like Maryland and will no doubt be in Obama’s column again. Yet I intend to vote for Romney as an affirmation of my personal intention not to participate in the demise of our nation, or allow it to go forward without my registering my voice through my vote. I don’t think that any of us can just say “oh well Obama will win my state anyway so what’s the point.” Also, those in the blue states who would vote for Romney but adopt an “oh well” attitude need to turn out to reduce Obama’s overall margin of votes. Consider this nightmare: Obama loses the electoral college vote but wins the popular vote because his margins of victory in the blue states exceeded Romney’s totals in the red states. Given Obama’s history of complete disregard for the Constitution (e.g., HHS mandate, immigration non-enforcement and other Hugo Chavez-like examples of “rule by decree”), does anyone really think he would follow the Constitution and relinquish his office? Not happening. We will have a crisis in this country that will make Bush v. Gore pale in comparison. That is why I believe that all of us who refuse to go down without a fight but live in a deep blue state cannot afford to sit it out, or vote for some irrelevant third-party candidate.

  20. Legisperitus says:

    asophist: Apparently all the pages at LifeNews.com are getting flagged as attack sites today. I don’t know what it takes to get something flagged– perhaps just a mendacious report to Google?

  21. wmeyer says:

    “…does anyone really think he would follow the Constitution and relinquish his office?”

    I for one, do not. When I hear someone say we may just have to wait for the 2016 election, I ask what 2016 election? Even if he steps down, in accordance with law, the economy will be toast. Our borders will be meaningless, and our military will be so reduced as to be laughable.

    He has set a frightening precedent with all his executive orders. Congress and the Supremes have set the even more frightening precedent of failing utterly in their roles to check and balance.

  22. Patrick Augustine says:

    I read the Fishwrap article and the comments. For the first time ever, in my experience of reading Fishwrap article comments, most of the comments made sense and called the author of the article to task for his gross misrepresentations and his apparent lack of understanding of Catholic Social Teaching. In fact, the comments make so much sense, I will recommend reading the article and the comments to friends who have a similar view point as the author of the article. And several of the comments very effectively and charitably point out the flawed coverage that Fishwrap offers. There is hope,

  23. robtbrown says:

    frjim4321 says:
    Groome is a dissident? Seriously . . .

    The question of women’s ordination doesn’t appear his strong point.

  24. frjim4321 says:

    The question of women’s ordination doesn’t appear his strong point. – robtbrown

    Oh . . . I don’t want to beat that dead horse again, but think he’s in rather good company with respect to that issue.

  25. Dismas says:

    Mitt Romney may have made many mistakes and choices along the way of his career but I truly believe he continues to prove himself a reasonable man of good will. Although imperfect, as we all are, I truly believe he has the best interests of all citizens at heart, that he continually reexamines, reconsiders, and re-reasons his choices and actions in the light of faith and natural law what’s in the best interest of all.

    [13] And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly army, praising God, and saying: [14] Glory to God in the highest; and on earth peace to men of good will. [Luke 2:13-14]

    Please view this Romney Townhall in Ohio (link below). I beg anyone who is going to disparage and detract from Romney’s campaign, and tempt others to vote independent as well, to stop using the ambiguous and nefarious ‘too many concerns’ card and state what those concerns actually are and why they are immoral. We’re to close to the election for nefarious ambiguity.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AwSk9vlUrDc&feature=player_embedded

  26. MarylandBill says:

    If Obama looses in the electoral college, he will be forced to step down as required by the Constitution. The reading of the Constitution is too plain and the precedent too strong for him to ignore that. Further, I would say voting for a third party candidate is registering my vote against Obama. It is also registering my vote against the fact that Romney’s support for the pro-life movement has hardly been consistent or particularly strong.

    I am also trying to figure out how our military will be reduced to the point that it is laughable? The United States has one of the largest armies in the world, the largest navy (by far), we are directly responsible for 41% of all military spending in the entire world. And spend 5 times more on our military than the next largest spender (China). Even with drastic cuts we will still have the most powerful military in the world. I would also argue that neither Democrats or Republicans have any real differences in how we relate with the rest of the world. Should we be the world’s policeman or its beacon?

  27. wmeyer says:

    I was speaking of a 2016 election.

  28. chcrix says:

    Deceive yourself if you will, but there is no reason to vote for Obama-lite.
    Remember George Herbert Walker Bush.

    Remember that the Republicans will do nothing about abortion and the Democrats will do nothing about the wars of the Empire.

  29. wmeyer says:

    chcrix: Would you, then, fail to fulfill your responsibility to good citizenship, by not voting?

    An excellent reason to vote for Romney is to vote for Obama’s removal. To waste your franchise would be sinful.

  30. Midwest St. Michael says:

    Off topic, I know, but this will give readers a good idea about Thomas Groome’s ideas:

    http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7716

    MSM

  31. PA mom says:

    I wish faithful Catholic colleges could use this to get Cong. Ryan a full speaking schedule at their institutions. However gratifying it may have been to see him address Georgetown, youth more likely to be open to his ideas could have big effect over time.

  32. Maynardus says:

    re: that catholicsforromney.com link, there is definitley something fishy about it. The syntax is atrocious – it appears to have been written by an apprentice third-world internet scammer – and it refers to the 2008 election. My recollection is that the original post about the Catholics supporting Romney linked to a page on the candidate’s website.

    Father – perhaps it would make sense to link to this URL instead: http://www.mittromney.com/coalitions/catholics-for-romney

  33. PA mom says:

    Further, I do not understand how anyone can compare Paul Ryan to George H W Bush.

    Seriously???

    I really think that if elected, Romney is going to have no doubt that it is Ryan and his supporters who put him there. Think that will go a far step in crafting his policy.

  34. dominic1955 says:

    On the issue of Groome, it might be helpful to some folks to remember that Catholicism is not compatible with Modernism.

  35. wmeyer says:

    Amen, dominic. The man’s teaching leaves no doubt of his Modernism.

    I do think that every teacher, every catechist, ought to be required to take the Oath Against Modernism. I spent two years in RCIA in a parish which teaches with little or no reference to the Catechism, but prefers to give students essays from Sr. Joan Chittister, FR. Richard Rohr, and other dissidents.

  36. ReginaMarie says:

    Supertradmum,
    The distribution of political material is protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Thus, a person may freely distribute political flyers on public sidewalks & streets as long as traffic is not disrupted. In addition, as interpreted by some state courts, political flyers may be distributed on private property as long as that private property has been opened to the general public for its use. Thus, leafletting may take place in shopping center parking lots, church parking lots & sidewalks, when this property is open for public use. It isn’t always welcomed, but I do believe it is legal.

  37. cjcanniff says:

    Thomas Groome is a BC professor. Yet again, I find myself overwhelmingly embarrassed by the faculty at my school…

  38. Charivari Rob says:

    “…as interpreted by some state courts, political flyers may be distributed on private property as long as that private property has been opened to the general public for its use. Thus, leafletting may take place in shopping center parking lots, church parking lots & sidewalks, when this property is open for public use. It isn’t always welcomed, but I do believe it is legal.”

    Well, I think “during Mass” is not “open for public use”. During Bingo in the parish hall or a basketball game at the school gym would be a different case, probably.

  39. Michelle F says:

    Midwest St. Michael,

    Thanks for posting the link regarding Thomas Groome. I don’t think it was off topic since I, and likely others, have not heard of most of the people on the list in Fr. Z’s post, and Groome’s name was not hyperlinked to more information.

    I read the whole article at Catholic Culture. I can’t remember the title of the book series used for my RCIA class – it was a series of workbooks keyed to the Sunday Mass readings – but I recognized the ideas discussed in the article as being the foundation of the workbook we had to use. Getting an explanation of Groome’s philosophy and influence was a big help to me.

  40. Southern Catholic says:

    Oh . . . I don’t want to beat that dead horse again, but think he’s in rather good company with respect to that issue.

    So…does this mean that you support women ordination?

  41. Massachusetts Catholic says:

    Thomas Groome has a very long pdf file defending against Keane’s charges on his home page at the Boston College website: http://www.bc.edu/schools/stm/faculty/groome.html
    If anyone can poke holes in his defense of his works, I’d be very interested in reading it. He is a local luminary in Catholic circles in the Boston area, showing up to applause all over the place, and a favorite of the chancery.

  42. wmeyer says:

    Massachusetts Catholic: You may wish to read the analysis of Groome’s refutation here. In two parts, it does a fine job of showing both the veracity of Keane’s claims, and the deflections and falsehoods in Groome’s refutation.

  43. wanda says:

    Maryland Bill, I am so ashamed, but not surprised in the least, that Gov. O’Malley is on that list.
    Yes, I’m in MD, too. His ‘c’ in catholic is so small that it has become non-existant. His entire term this go round has been to pass same-sex (not) marriage and more gambling. Oh, by the way, Mrs. O’Malley called those of us who were against ssm (not) marriage ‘cowards’. Anyway, don’t give up, Obama must be defeated, he must be. I’m voting for Romney/Ryan and so are many more of us.

    I understand that Gov. O’Malley has higher aspirations – remember his name and turn around and run in the other direction.

  44. Massachusetts Catholic says:

    @wmeyer

    Many thanks.

  45. Supertradmum says:

    ReginaMarie, Catholic or Lutheran or other church parish parking lots in Iowa are not public. Neither are hospital or school parking lots. There are signs everywhere against leaflets and such in some of those. If the parking lot is not owned by the state or city, it is private. There were not signs in the parish parking lot, but the chancery people stopped pro-life pamphlets. The situation I described was real and I was there. The diocese had to approve all leaflets on cars and at that time, did not approve the pro-life voters guide ones, only the Obama ones.

  46. irishgirl says:

    MarylandBill-I’m sure you meant to say ‘lose’ and ‘loses’ instead of ‘loose’ and ‘looses’. The difference of one letter means a lot. (I apologize-it’s just that spelling errors drive me nuts!)
    Back on topic: I’m from New York, and I sure as heck didn’t vote for Obama in 2008, and will not this year. Even though New York is labeled a ‘blue state’, not every New Yorker is going to vote for Obama. It’s only ‘blue’ because of New York City-I sure wish it could be broken off from ‘Upstate’ and be made the 51st state!
    I’m going to vote for Romney and Ryan!
    I don’t want to see Obama get another four years! And especially that nimcompoop of a running mate of his! He’s a disgrace to the office of vice president, not to mention being a ‘little c catholic’!