SOTU: What Pres. Obama should say, will say, won’t say

The President’s State of the Union address is tonight.

People are musing about what the President will say or ought to say.

As I see it…

What the President ought to say:

“Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice-President, Members of Congress, the Cabinet, Honorable Justices, my ‘fellow’ Americans, I hereby resign the Office of President of the United States.”

What the President will say:

百花齊放,百家爭鳴… (bǎihuā qífàng, bǎijiā zhēngmíng) … “Let a hundred flowers bloom; let a hundred schools of thought contend”

What the President won’t say:

“hope…. change”

What do you think?

What should he say?
What will he say?
What won’t he say?


From CNSNews:

Can you imagine… if he uses the pronoun “I”?

We’re doomed.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, Pò sì jiù, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Cantor says:

    Making room for Joe Biden? Hmm. Frying pan? Fire?

  2. Bea says:

    Who cares,
    He’ll probably be lying anyway.

  3. RobW says:

    What he should say…”I quit.”

  4. Domnall says:

    Well, I think he should say “Mr. Speaker, Mr. President.” hehe He’s addressing Joe Biden as the President of the Senate, not as the vice president. Ok, enough of me being silly.

  5. acardnal says:

    Hopefully, Justice Alito will mouth some appropriately sarcastic riposte to Obama’s thoughtless remarks again!

  6. Unwilling says:

    Pro-lifers have no place in the USA!

  7. AvantiBev says:

    Whatever he says, he is really saying: “I have a pen, I have a bully pulpit, I have an ignorant populace, and I have NO respect for the Constitution or the limits it imposes on my omnipotence! So here is what I am going to ram down your throats with even more executive orders than I have issued so far. I am the Reich’s Chancellor!”

  8. frjim4321 says:

    Having lived through Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. I am can be genuinely sympathetic toward anyone who must watch the SOTU while it is being given by a person who she or he strongly dislikes. One suggestion that I might offer is this: Just don’t watch it. Texts will be posted on line tomorrow, and there will be all kinds of commentary on the ideology-driven fake news channels.

    Even though I voted for Obama I never saw him as perfect, just a better choice than Romney. I don’t seem him as a great president in the way Bill Clinton was, and he’s hardly the orator that Bill Clinton was. Frankly I’m planning on starting to watch “Homeland” tonight via Netflix.

    Anyway, seriously, if it’s going to be upsetting, just don’t watch it. Life is irritating enough without adding irritants.

  9. frjim4321 says:

    seem = see

  10. Phil_NL says:

    Frankly, should Obama resign (I have a better shot at becoming a millionaire within the next 5 seconds, I suppose) we would get Biden, which would be hardly an improvement. Worse, we might get Biden for 6 years, as he might then just squeak through in 2016.

    The US political system has it flaws, but the one real problem is simply the (D) platform and mindset. But I have equally little hope that that will ever change, as I have that the Republicans will get good PR .

  11. Geoffrey says:

    My prediction: Lowest-rated SOTU ever.

  12. Joseph-Mary says:

    Such a shame that a priest would vote for a person who totally supports the murder of the unborn and other intrinsic evils. The blood sacrifice to the demon that each abortion murder is also stains the souls of those who support it. Catholics who have voted evil administrations into office will be needing to face up to it before the Lord. I was just listening to a testimony from Dr. Gloria Polo who was struck by lightening and had a near death experience. Our Lord made it clear to her the evil of having an abortion and of supporting those who do.
    As to what the man in the white house will say—I will not be listening–but I would bet there will be lies. We know who the father of lies is–that one who was a murderer from the beginning.

  13. Austin Catholics says:

    I still don’t understand why people hate Obama so much or want him to resign. Twenty years from now we’ll all look back and the Obama-haters will have to concede he was never “liberal”. The policies they are most upset about exist mostly in the minds of the haters rather than in real life.

    [Thanks for the chuckle.]

  14. The Masked Chicken says:

    “I don’t seem him as a great president in the way Bill Clinton was…”


    You and I see history in totally different ways. Clinton was, arguably, the worst president since WWII, outside of Obama. In my opinion, he has done more to harm the long-term interests of this country than any other president of the last seventy years. A colleague at work once asked me to rank the presidents in order since WWII. He often asked people to do this, as he thought it was illuminative of their political stances. Of course, Eisenhower, was at the top, but I was not top-heavy with republican, as I consider Truman, in the whole, to have been a good president, whom, I doubt. would have supported Roe had it come up. Clinton is at the very bottom. He may have had a surplus when he left office (although that is not necessarily due to him, but Bush, senior), but he set in motion policies that would, eventually, almost bankrupt this country. I enumerated them in the comment box about three weeks ago.

    How about a limerick in honor of the address:


    There once was a pres named Obama,
    who caused a bit of a drama,
    when his Union speech caused a Republican,
    to stand in his seat and look up at him,
    and yell to the podium, “Yo mama.”

    The Chicken

    Fr. Z's Gold Star Award

  15. StJude says:

    Im not sure what the first gay President will say.
    I wont be watching..

  16. ncstevem says:

    Anyone who knowingly votes for pro-abortion politicians is complicit in the murder of children. A Catholic who does so will be judged more severely. A Catholic bishop, priest or religious who does so is even more culpable.

  17. RANCHER says:

    From some of the posts it appears the fishwrap has sent trolls to post on this site. [] From the most anti-US, anti-Catholic president in our history we can expect only more lies and his promise to continue pursuing the Marxist goals of those who control him.

    As for frjim—you are a disgrace to the collar. [I don’t like this sort of thing around here.] There is absolutely NO WAY that a good Catholic can support the merchant of death who, in spite of his lies, has mandated the funding of abortion through the so-called ACA.

  18. frjim4321 says:

    Rancher, I’ve yet to see a perfect human being run for elective office. And with respect to the abortion issue if a case could have been made for fewer actual abortions during a Romney presidency I may have considered him. I don’t think prolifers should cast votes on the basis of abortion rhetoric but rather of the prospective number of abortions under specific socioeconomic conditions.

    Anyway, this is old territory … this is about SOTU and with regard to it, my suggestion is just don’t watch if you find it upsetting.

  19. Johnno says:

    He is going to tell you why the NSA spying, the HHS Mandate, socialism, drones killing children, homosexual ‘rights’, granting the President the powers of a king over some rubbish constitution, and following Israel’s example of offering free abortions, are good things, and you should always trust your government. He will also tell us to follow Pope Francis’ example of giving more money to the State, ending capitalism and not to judge and that we should look forward to his trip to the U.S.

    Katy Perry and Beyonce will have another ritualistic dance number. They will dedicate it to Pope Francis whom they admire for some reason.

    There will be applause when the light turns on that tells the audience to applaud. The national anthem will play.

    frjim4321 will be there day 1 to register and vote for Obama’s third term, because what else can he do? To whom shall he go? Obama alone has the words of hope and change and promises that you can keep what you have.

  20. Facta Non Verba says:

    Should say: Mr. Speaker, I apologize for my unwillingness to negotiate, lead, and work with Republicans. I realize elections have consequences, and the House of Representatives is controlled by the opposite party, so I should be working with them.

    Will say: Income inequality is causing too many divisions and hardships in our country. Let’s raise the minimum wage and extend unemployment insurance. Such actions will create jobs!

    Won’t say: My policies, from stimulus spending, to the ACA, to foreign affairs have been a dismal failure. I have been dishonest with the American people, and I have created a culture in my administration and Justice Department that feels free to use the power of the federal government to persecute my political enemies. I have learned from my failures, and I am sorry for the dishonesty and corruptness of my administration.

  21. RJHighland says:

    No American President would score perfectly on a Catholics principles test but to think that Romney would not have been better for this country and Catholic principles in general than Obama is to be blind to reality. Romney was more of a states rights guy in his thinking than a federalist, Obama is a agnostic communist with visions of leading a pagan empire.

  22. markomalley says:

    What should he say? What will he say? What won’t he say?

    What will he say? “It’s Bush’s fault. It’s the Congress’ fault. It’s talk radio’s fault. It’s conservative’s fault. The American people aren’t smart enough to understand me.”

    As for the other questions, well, although I don’t post here often, I value that privilege, so I think I’ll exercise due discretion and remain silent ;-D

  23. Phil_NL says:

    Masked Chicken,

    Clinton was bad, I grant that, but as for ruining the mindset of the country, I think Carter scores higher, and on degrading the office, I’m afraid Nixon (and Kennedy, for that matter) outrank Clinton.

    Anyway, I wager one more prediction: Obama will in fact use the words ‘hope’ and ‘change’, just with more nonsense in between. And the result will rank with Carter’s malaise speech.

  24. wanda says:

    He should say why he hates un-born children in their Mother’s wombs. He should explain why abortion is the sacrament of the Democratic Party. He should explain why he has been silent on the imprisonments and slaughters of Christians world-wide. He should explain why he hasn’t resigned before now.

  25. Robbie says:

    My prediction is Obama will give a shout out to Pope Francis. Obama will try to claim him as an ally in his fight against income equality. That will spark another round of stories on MSNBC about how Francis is shaking things up and turning 2000 years of tradition on its head.

  26. Fr AJ says:

    I won’t be watching, absolutely no interest in what this man has to say. Why anyone would waste their time watching this megalomaniac is beyond me (except maybe to count how many times he says “I”). His egotistical speeches make me ill.

  27. Chris Garton-Zavesky says:

    I can’t watch the speech (being possessed of neither a television nor a high-speed internet hook up).

    I can’t, probably, listen to most of it, because I’m trying to earn a living at the hour he will begin speaking, instead of preparing to rely on government aid.

    I am genuinely interested in what he says — because a man who can torment the language the way he does (which is, admittedly, different from the way President Bush used to torment the language) has something worth listening to, reading and marking: the actual content of the speech will be hidden in the way he says things.

    My wife thought she should study Russian, years ago, to better understand our enemy, the Soviet Union. On the same principle, I think it behooves us to listen to, and read his speech.

  28. slainewe says:

    “[I don’t like this sort of thing around here. (ie, Rancher’s comment about frjim)]”

    So Rancher caused MORE scandal than frjim (who remains uncorrected by management)?

  29. iPadre says:

    I won’t be watching. As they say, “Words are cheap!”
    Matt 26:24

  30. The Masked Chicken says:

    “Anyway, I wager one more prediction: Obama will in fact use the words ‘hope’ and ‘change’, just with more nonsense in between. And the result will rank with Carter’s malaise speech.”

    An episode of the Patrick McNee/Diana Rigg Avengers from the 1960’s was entitled, ” The Incredible Positive-Negative Man.” Sometimes, it seems like that when listening to the President. When Obama says, “hope and Change,” he means, “despair and the same.” Oh, and tell me what hope and change children in the womb have, eh?

    “Clinton was bad, I grant that, but as for ruining the mindset of the country, I think Carter scores higher, and on degrading the office, I’m afraid Nixon (and Kennedy, for that matter) outrank Clinton.”

    Not in the effects they had on the Country. Carter was, largely, ineffectual; and the indiscretions of Kennedy and Nixon had no lasting effects, except as exceptional cases. Carter started the subprime mortgages as an option. It took Clinton to mandate them and set up the savings-and-loan scandal. Kennedy may have had the Bay-of-Pigs, but he was stellar in his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis. I doubt that Clinton could have done the same.

    The Chicken

  31. Rachel K says:

    frjim4321- you voted for Obama? Surely, aside from the prolife issue, isn’t Romney just a better human being? More Godly?
    I admit I am no expert on US politics, but one of these two makes my skin crawl and the other doesn’t.

  32. Kathleen10 says:

    I wish he would say what you suggested Fr. Z. One sentence with the word “resign” in it would be enough.
    Clinton diminished the presidency as no previous president had. By treating the White House like it was Fort Lauderdale at spring break, cavorting with a young woman young enough to be his daughter, and to whom he was not married, he humiliated his wife and daughter and shamed our entire nation. He made us all look like a joke. I believe he was the president who started the horrible trend of trying to incorporate “cool” into the White House. All those saxaphones and rock stars. Ugh. There’s a time and place and liberals don’t know the difference.
    Obama has accomplished the hope and change he wanted, so he can brag about that and be right.
    Why it is still shocking to me that people would vote for a man who was THE most pro-abortion senator is frustrating to me. Why a Catholic would vote for such a man is still astounding to me. Fr. Jim, you know the drill, so I won’t say it. If I understand you correctly, and I might not, you may be implying that you would vote for a rabidly pro-abortion person over a less pro-abortion person because you believe that economic conditions may be improved due to the latter’s economic policies? If that is what you are saying my suggestion is you are going to hurt your back contorting into that position. Anyway the way you vote is between you and God. We’re all just chatting. I’m going to take your suggestion and not watch him.
    What he’s going to say is something along the lines of “I haven’t been able to scare or control Congress into doing my bidding (enough), so I am going to increase my use of Executive Orders to bypass our Constitution. But you’ll like what I’m going to do because this week my focus is on economic inequality! Come back next week when my focus will be signing an Executive Order that mandates for every crime committed by an African-American two Caucasians will be sent to the penitentiary.”
    And the people will cheer and cheer…..

  33. rbbadger says:

    Thank you for using the traditional characters at not the simplified ones which the Communists have imposed on the populace.

  34. Kathleen10 says:

    Poorly worded sentence and I have drifted back into my bad habit of not reading my words until they are posted.
    I intended to say to you, frjim, that is you were saying you would vote for someone who would, by their economic policies potentially REDUCE the number of abortions because socioeconomic conditions might improve under that president, that would be a stretch. That is hard to fit in one coherent sentence.

  35. Phil_NL says:

    Dear Chicken,

    I’d say that neither the subprimes nor the S&L misery would really count in the very long run. Money is just that, money, and can be earned again. What I would hold against Carter (and, for full disclosure, by the time I could talk Reagan was president, and while i have a keen interest in US politics, I live on the other side of the Atlantic) is that it would be on his watch, and with his support, that people really began to buy into memes like “It’s going all downhill from here”, “We’re ruining the planet”, “Government should manage (decline)”. The mindset of the 70s is the father of many ills we see today (many, not all, some stuff goes back to the 60s, but the 70s cemented it in). Carter contributed to that, as I read history, and willingly.

    And for all his gifts, we can conclude that Reagan was capable of whipping up enough fighting spirit to overcome the Soviets, but it didn’t have enough staying power and failed in the long run to get the nation – and by extention the western world – back on track.

    As for Kennedy and Nixon, their indiscretions were tied to using the appartatus of the US government as an extention of their own interests. That corrupts the system far more than Clinton, who basically would have done just the same, in the same way, if he would have been CEO of a mid-sized company and a tasty intern came by. Clinton didn’t needed to government to do his dirty work for him, if anything, it was just in the way (many a CEO would have gotten away with it much more easily).

    As for the Cuban crisis and Bay-of-pigs: I’d say Kennedy was lucky on the former (and gave up US missiles in turkey as a quid pro quo, so it was less of a success as it was sold to be) and frankly ruined the latter. That was an Eisenhower setup, and had Kennedy made serious work of it, it just might have worked, after a fashion. Even with odds no better than 10-1 against you, it would have been worth it, especially since 50 years later, Cuba is still a communist dictatorship (and still causing trouble in latin America)

    Your characterisation of what ‘hope and change’ actually means, is spot on though.

  36. Robbie says:

    The Constitution only requires a President submit a report to the Congress on the state of the nation. In fact, it wasn’t until Woodrow Wilson that presidents began to appear before Congress.

    I don’t care who the president is now or in the future. This whole exercise has become a worthless spectacle and the lame responses make it even worse. I hope the next President just chooses to deliver a written draft to everyone by email.

  37. frjim4321 says:

    “frjim4321- you voted for Obama? Surely, aside from the prolife issue, isn’t Romney just a better human being? More Godly? I admit I am no expert on US politics, but one of these two makes my skin crawl and the other doesn’t.” – Rachel

    “Better human being?” On what basis? Can any of us know that?

    I used to believe in voting for the person. I don’t really buy that anymore. I think what is more important is to vote on what a person is going to DO. For instance there are some who thought that Carter was a bad president but he was an honest and virtuous person.

  38. Sonshine135 says:

    It’s my fault…..It’s all my fault…..Have mercy on me…..I am a sinner…….I have led the sheep astray….I have done harm to the people of God.

  39. Sonshine135 says:

    A friend and I were going to take a shot of our favorite whiskey every time Obama lied. We realized we would both be dead from alcohol poisoning in the first half hour.

  40. I fervently hope that every single person who has written in so far to excoriate frjim4321 for voting for Obama did, in fact, himself cast a vote in the last presidential election. All who chose not to vote are just as responsible for the present reprehensible mess as he is.

    [I have to agree, though I understand the disgust people have when no candidate is inspiring.]

  41. robtbrown says:


    Even though I voted for Obama I never saw him as perfect, just a better choice than Romney. I don’t seem him as a great president in the way Bill Clinton was, and he’s hardly the orator that Bill Clinton was.

    Bill Clinton a great President? What were his accomplishments?

    Re Clinton the speaker: He was and is a very good extemporaneous speaker–not so good, however, at giving a prepared speech.

    I think what is more important is to vote on what a person is going to DO.

    Who knows? Someone once said that the father of the contemporary Presidential campaign is Josef Goebbels. “Tell ’em what they want to hear, then do what you want when you’re in office.”

    For instance there are some who thought that Carter was a bad president but he was an honest and virtuous person.

    I didn’t vote for Carter or Ford. I agree that he was a bad President, but he doesn’t seem virtuous, just a self righteous liberal.

  42. mrshopey says:

    What won’t he say?

    I am an elected official and my job is to work with Congress and not on my own. I am dedicated to NOT taking matters into my own hands through executives orders although the temptation is great. There is a great divide that with God’s help, we can overcome and resolve important matters that need to be addressed in our country. I regret the hurt I have caused to the family in my support of SS “marriages”. I will do my best to undo the damage I have done……….

    That is what he will not say.

  43. robtbrown says:

    The executive order pertains to government contractors. It does not refer to federal employees, none of whom make less than $10 an hour. Very few govt contractors make less than $10 an hour.

    I wonder whether people are aware of how often legislation is passed that gives the executive branch the power to impose relevant regulations. For example, even though there is no federal law that prohibits discrimination acc to sexual preference, it is nevertheless prohibited in Civil Service via regulations imposed by the executive branch.

  44. What Obama should say:

    After examining my conscience, I believe that the nation deserves someone who will tell the truth about himself and the country. I believe that the nation deserves a better person, someone with more competence and humility. As thus, effective immediately, I, Barack Hussein Obama, out of my own free will, choose freely to resign from the office of president, effective immediately….All orders that I have issued are null and void effective immediately, and I will take residence in a local prison for crimes against the state. May God have mercy on me.

    What Obama will say

    “….blame bush, the product is good….buy healthcare now”

    What he won’t say

    Healthcare reform has been an abject disaster.

  45. AdIesumPerMariam says:

    All I know as for Ethics class (at an ACTUAL Catholic university) We’re going to go through it line by line, look for the moral relativism and logical failings in it and pretty much pick it apart. Might take a couple classes to get through the entirety of the text…

  46. OrthodoxChick says:


    “Might take a couple classes to get through the entirety of the text…”

    That, and the biggest bottle of Pepto you can find.

  47. Anti-Relativist says:

    Discussing what the Dear Leader SHOULD say seems to be an exercise in futility – the president isn’t going to say what we (most of Father Z’s readers) want to hear. As for what he will say – I have had a horrible feeling all day that the President will mention the Holy Father and their “shared concern” about income inequality. This would allow him to give the appearance to Catholics of not being anti-Catholic, and it would allow him to capitalize on the Pope’s popularity with non-Catholics. I pray that I am wrong, however there is no limit to what this man will do to deceive low information voters and enhance his own power.

  48. RJHighland says:

    Fr. Jim4321,
    I must say you bring an alternative view point to the web site. I have yet to determine whether it is authentic or just playing the devil’s advocate, but entertaining none the less. Interestingly enough your justifying your view of voting for a canidate like President Obama is very common among the progressive priests and laity in my Dioceses also. That type of, in my eyes, inexplicable justification for voting for a candidate that promotes so many views that are contrary to Catholic moral teachings is one of the many reasons that had me search out a traditional minded parish. Mainly because the same type of logic and exegesis was used to interprete scripture and Church doctrine. However it is nice to have you voice your view point keeps things colorful.

  49. frjim4321 says:

    “I have yet to determine whether it is authentic or just playing the devil’s advocate, but entertaining none the less.” – RJ Highland

    Thank you. Yes I am a real person and a pastor someplace in the Midwest.

    I don’t think a troll would be interested enough in these topics to maintain a fairly consistent presence over a long period of time. I don’t think trolls would be as conversant in the range of issues that come to the fore here. At minimum such a person would have had to received several years of seminary education.

    Certainly the level of interest and investment in this range of issues would certainly be consistent with a person whose life is very much taken up with priestly ministry.

  50. Uxixu says:

    I despise the entire Imperial pageant and kabuki theater of the SOTU. Should just mail a letter like many other POTUS have instead of bloviating.

    That depends on what the definition of “is” is?

    I don’t believe that Obama is as… morally vacant as say Clinton, who simply lacked morals, who would say whatever he thought his audience wanted to hear and make himself popular (ala “triangulation). Unfortunately, I believe Obama is more diametrically to the vast majority of Americans. And unfortunately, far less qualified with no practical experience.

  51. Uxixu says:

    To TheMaskedChicken:

    The only reason for the ephemeral surplus of the Clinton Administration was the 104th and 105th Congress who had a shutdown over the issue. Some of us still remember that Clinton thought the Republican plan (to balance in 7 years) was “too extreme” and how he wanted to take between 12 and 14 to do it instead. It was effectively done in 4-5 but mostly due to the 1) dot com bubble 2) deferring Defense procurements, particularly the F-22, which had an incidental effect of increasing the per-unit cost. So yes, that surplus wasn’t quite real in the big picture and it only moved the spending later on. Amongst other specifics.

    I used to have Carter on the bottom of that list. Obama is there now. Clinton is just above Carter, for many of the same reasons.

  52. monmir says:

    If Biden dozes off
    I got scared, I thought I was supposed to go out on the balcony with the shot gun and shoot in the air! But it only involves whiskey…piece of cake.

  53. frjim4321 says:

    Duck dynasty? ROTFL!

  54. Maxiemom says:

    I think Biden’s should be changed to head bobbing – he looks like the dog in the back window of a car the way his head bobs at his master’s words.

  55. slainewe says:

    I knew a priest moral theologian who was comfortable with voting for pro-abortion candidates. I asked him, “What if we had a candidate who said we should have the choice to deny medical care to people over 80.” He replied, “Of course, we could not vote for him under any circumstance.”

    I continued, “What if there were only two candidates and one was for denying medical care to people over 80, but the other wanted to deny it to people over 70? Could we vote for the former as the lesser of two evils?” He replied, “No, we still could not vote for either candidate. It would be abetting evil”

    My only explanation for this is that there are many priests out there who simply do not really believe Man exists at fertilization. If they did, they would be more horrified by abortion than euthanasia.

  56. OrthodoxChick says:

    I’m trying to listen to POTUS but it’s only 13 mins. in and already the only sound I hear coming from my t.v. sounds like Charlie Brown’s teacher.

  57. yatzer says:

    I remember every president since Eisenhower and thought I had seen the worst under Carter. Now I am convinced I was wrong. I’m thinking Dear Leader will say the same stuff he always has, and just ask for more time and adjustments. Hah.

  58. Absit invidia says:


    How on God’s green earth was Obama a better choice than Romney? What. The. Heck. One of the non-negotiables for voters was defending the unborn. Yet you voted for this scoundrel anyway? I have 7 children and have been at all their deliveries cutting all their umbilical cords myself and to say that there are “other” issues than the crime of the century of abortion, can only be coming from the dark one.

  59. frjim4321 says:

    Hmph. Well I listened anyway.

    The text is available at NYT.

    Just sitting here prepping tomorrow’s deposits.

  60. Johnno says:

    frjim4321 –
    “I think what is more important is to vote on what a person is going to DO.”

    So you voted for the guy who if given the choice, would watch a baby die on the operating table. Lovely… No doubt he approaches running your country with the same view of you all – for you are nothing but cattle and statistics that need to be culled and managed.

    RomeontheRange –
    “All who chose not to vote are just as responsible for the present reprehensible mess as he is.”

    So if given the choice between a blue Obama or a red Obama. You would simply pick the colour you liked best. Like a sheep deciding which wolf he’d rather get eaten by. There were other candidates far better in quality despite having a faux-mainstream establishment press censoring them, and a phony election where both candidates duties and agenda were predetermined by the forces that be, and you just get to pick your favorite face. If a big segment of informed people made it know why they were not voting, you’d think that one of the two parties would be interested in finding out why and trying to get that pool of votes. But they won’t, because every 4 years you simply have a 2-party establishment circus and magic show that pretends to get into fisticuffs when they’re really the same, and where both use illegal means to keep genuine candidates off the ballot. Your two-party elections won’t change anything, and apathy is setting in, because the other option requires exercising the purpose of the right to bear arms. But don’t worry, in due time, whichever guy gets into office, he/she will take that option away from you too at the perfect opportunity.

  61. benedetta says:

    Apt caricature Fr. Z given POTUS’ last line…something about “collective” and “putting our shoulders to the wheel of progress”. Very Chairman Mao.

  62. writer728 says:

    His waste of words are probably already over, but as I do not subscribe to cable let alone possess a TV it doesn’t matter anyway. Almost for certain he will NOT have said: “Please God, send me an army of traditional Catholic exorcists to get rid of these demons tearing at my soul and blinding me from the truth.”

    There may only be a small percentage of truly faithful Catholics left in this country, who believe abortion and contraception, and all forms of unnatural relations are always intrinsically evil, or that the Catholic Church is absolutely superior to every other false religion on the planet because it is the only religion capable of saving souls by virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, and will say so publicly if asked, or who are unswerving in their fidelity to all things traditionally Catholic both liturgically and morally and consistently attend Holy Mass (depending on whose statistics you consider), but it only takes an even smaller number of Catholics who with love for God unite together outside of Holy Mass – whether via membership to an online organization or face-to-face prayer groups – to pray the Divine Mercy chaplet for all our civil authorities, from the lowest even to the highest office. Some may wonder why I comment about prayer on a topic concerning politics, but there is good reason to do so:

    “By me kings reign, and lawgivers decree just things; By me princes rule, and the mighty decree justice. I love them that love me: and they that in the morning early watch for me shall find me” (Prov. 8:15-17).

    More importantly must we pray for all bishops whose duty and obligation it is to teach, to govern, and to sanctify, and in so doing defend the sheep from the demons that lay behind the persecutions afflicting the Church and which come from an increasingly hostile world. But like the faithless Jews whom God delivered into the hands of the Pharoah, Catholics too have tempted God through manifold infidelities to His superabundant grace, and we too are being delivered into the hands of our enemies for having forgotten that this world is not our home, for Our Lord chastises those whom He loves.

    Please: Pray for all them without whom Christ is not made present upon the altar, because our battle is not against flesh and blood, and howsoever angry I may become at the mere thought of that “man” in the “White” House, no matter how seemingly apt be satirical cartoons of Obama dressed like a Chinese Communist, he too is a victim manipulated by our common enemy.

    God bless Fr. Z and God bless you.

  63. incredulous says:

    FrJim4321 Said:
    “I don’t think prolifers should cast votes on the basis of abortion rhetoric but rather of the prospective number of abortions under specific socioeconomic conditions. ”

    Really? Abortion is caused by “specific” socioeconomic conditions? Abortion is not caused by poor catechesis? Poor understanding of God? Poor choices? Lack of respect for human life and dignity?

    I’d like to see your proof which demonstrates socioeconomics are responsible for changes in rates of abortion one way or another. Let’s not even get into how one would predict the impact a Romney would have on the rate of abortion versus a person on record as facilitating partial birth infanticide and other leftist sacraments such as those Obama cheerleads. It takes quite a distortion in thinking to rationalize voting for Obama. But here FrJim is…

    I must say, I find justifying voting for Obama at the same level as those who justify voting for Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Nancy Pelosi, Chuckles Schumer, and Alan Grayson to name a few. If Catholicism does not suggest that there is no justification to vote for Obama over Romney, then perhaps Catholic teaching isn’t worth the space it takes up. And frankly, I’m appalled that a priest could possibly support Obama. But, if Voris’ statistics are to believed, Catholics support things like homosexual marriage and abortion at a rate higher than the general population. So, perhaps FrJim is right in one respect. The proof of the pudding is in the taste. FrJim reflects the church body. As FrJim is a teacher and responsible for catechizing the sheep, maybe we have a small piece of the puzzle on what went wrong right here. We can preach for the pulpit Humanae Vitae and then vote for Obama.

    Nah, it’s socioeconomics…

  64. Uxixu says:

    I can sort of buy the economic angle and even the health care fiasco… even if they’re entirely ignorant of basic economics and counterproductive zero-sum game class warfare to say nothing of contrary to federalist and Constitutional principles. But the amorality of the Democrats (remember this is the party that booed the inclusion of God in it’s platform to the consternation of the fool Villaraigosa at the DNC) on not only abortion but the homosexual mockery of family never continues to descend to new depths.

    I did see a rather witty photoshop recently that showed a pair of forceps with the unfortunately all too true caption that it has millions of more victims than the AR-15 above it. And we all know Obama never met any bill to even moderately discourage much less prohibit abortion he wouldn’t vote against.

    But hey, it’s a year for action. Finally five years into his administration.

  65. Muv says:

    I have just read through all these comments and feel heartily grateful that during the Great Famine my Irish forebears didn’t end up on the boat to America. If you need a bit of post Mr. O therapy, try this. For all the rubbish that happens here, at least our Head of State is a thoroughly good egg.

  66. ncstevem says:

    To those commenters who take issue or scandalized with what RANCHER wrote about the priest who regularly comments on here, I say we need more of the same.

    Leftists are the same regardless of their position in life. They’re ideology is anti-God and when implemented in society result in untold misery for mankind because it is counter to the Natural Law. Just like gravity, this is universally true. Catholics who promote leftist ideology will be harshly judged. Catholic religious who do the same will be judged most harshly of all because they should know better.

    I believe orthodox Catholics need to speak out against leftists when they say or do things harmful to their own souls and the good of mankind, regardless if they’re cardinals, bishops, priests or religious. My wife’s immediate family lost everything they had and my father-in-law had to relocate the whole family to a different country to save their lives because of leftists. Most in the extended family had to do the same. Some family members were killed as were many in their circle of friends. These leftists were abetted by liberation ‘theology’ type bishops and priests – several of whom have apologized for the harm they caused 30 -40 years ago.

    I think the priests opinion above that Clinton was a ‘great’ president says it all. Just another priest abetting evil.

  67. Lin says:

    I NEVER watch this person speak. To do so, jeopardizes my salvation! I pray for those that vote for any pro-death candidate. May GOD have mercy on us!

  68. Jim of Bowie says:

    What the President ought to say:

    As of Noon tomorrow I will resign the office of President of the United States and Joe Biden will resign as Vice-President and John Boehner will become the 45th President of the United States.

    Otherwise I don’t care what he says.

  69. incredulous says:

    LOL Jim,

    Boehner is one of them. Classic game of good cop/bad cop or three card monte. Watch how badly the Weeper of the House sells you out on shamnesty for illegal aliens.

  70. Kerry says:

    Regarding the upset with frjim4321’s comments. Weren’t we asked about what the ‘o’ might, would, should, will or won’t say, and not 4321..?
    On the occasion of “O’s” second inaugural, it might profit on to reread Lincoln’s 2nd Inaugural. Or maybe the Declaration of the Causes and Necessity of Taking Up Arm, of July 6, 1775.
    Or Churchill’s Munich speech.
    Genuine oration.

  71. LarryW2LJ says:

    I didn’t watch it. I spent the evening on the Ham bands chasing the FT5ZM DXpedition that is on Amsterdam Island, 10000 miles away from New Jersey in the Indian Ocean.

    For those of you who are not Amateur Radio operators, a DXpedition is when a group of Hams go to a very distant and rare location that has no, or very little Amateur Radio operators. They set up camp (and radios) and spend days or weeks on the air, handing out as many contacts as they can to Amateur radio ops world wide. This DXpedition to Amsterdam Island involves over a dozen Hams of multi-national flavor, and they will be on the air until mid-February. They stay that long, because no one knows when this island will be activated again in the future.

    I was not successful in making contact with them last night, but it was, IMHO time that was well better spent than watching the lies being spouted on TV. Also, I didn’t get sick while watching our sycophant press corp lap up and spin every word that was spoken.

    I apologize for harboring these uncharitable feelings towards the man – guess I need to go to confession again.

  72. Rachel K says:

    RomeontheRange says:
    “I fervently hope that every single person who has written in so far to excoriate frjim4321 for voting for Obama did, in fact, himself cast a vote in the last presidential election. All who chose not to vote are just as responsible for the present reprehensible mess as he is.”
    Erm, sorry, can’t help there, I am a Brit!
    But I have voted every time here in both local and national elections. I also explain to my children how important it is to use your vote and what a privilege it is that not everyone in the world has.
    I am not sure , theologically speaking, that if one did not vote one is “responsible” for what happens next. Surely material co-operation in evil involves an action not a lack-of-action? It may be that with no “good” candidates some feel that they cannot cast a vote in good conscience?…
    I once used my vote by writing on my ballot paper- all the candidates were anti-life and I registered my dismay at this. These papers have to be shown to all the candidates. That was a difficult decision and I am not sure I would do it the same again.
    Do you think the word “excoriate” here is a bit strong, by the way?

    ‘ “Better human being?” On what basis? Can any of us know that?’
    Well, even as a complete outsider and just glancing in at the elections run-up, I could see all kinds of signs with which to make a careful judgement about how to vote, not just on policy, for example; family life, past voting record, body language, religious practice, career history etc…
    I would be interested to know what the positive reasons were that you voted for Obama?
    I thought as Catholics we were not supposed to vote for politicians who have by their actions and voting positively promoted abortion and other crimes against life?
    Looking from the outside, it appears that economic factors drive peoples’s voting practice in the US, please correct me any of you who think this is an unfair conclusion!
    Over here, voting is still very much class -based ( I know, it’s crazy!), with party politics divided along socioeconomic lines.
    I would draw everyone’s attention to n70 in Blessed John Paul’s Evangelium Vitae, which expresses the limitations on Democracy:
    “Democracry cannot be idolised…It’s “moral”value is not automatic, but depends on conformity to the moral Law to which it, like every other form of human behaviour, must be subject: in other words, its morality depends on the morality of the ends which it pursues and of the means which it employs.”
    Very interesting stuff, the whole encyclical is excellent.

  73. Facta Non Verba says:

    Scott Johnson at the Powerline blog this morning perfectly captured my reaction to the speech:

    “I found the speech mind-numbing and soul-killing. The thought that Obama and a team of speechwriters devoted weeks to the speech…you’ve got to be kidding. The incoherence. The anecdotes. The thrice baked, still phony statistics. The pallid rhetoric. The false bravado. The rank dishonesty. The fake sincerity. The reiterated threat of a veto…in deference to the sensibilities of Iran’s murderous mullahs. The sheer boredom of it all (or almost all, if you stayed awake for the salute to Sergeant Remsburg.). . . . And, lest we forget, “climate change” is real. “The debate is settled.” It was settled over the last 15 years during which temperatures failed to rise as predicted. “

  74. majuscule says:

    MSW at the Fishwrap says:

    President Obama may still inspire the Democratic base. He did nothing to really persuade this disillusioned former supporter.

  75. Elizium23 says:

    The problem is not merely voting for a murderer by a cleric and I do wish people would stop denigrating this poor priest who doggedly comments in so many threads with a refreshing alternate viewpoint that counter-balances that of Fr. Z and his adherents.

    The problem is on both sides. This is a problem of political polarization and partisan politics. Those of us on the right who are too blind to see that the left makes some good points, NOW AND THEN… and those of us on the left who are too willing to follow liberal causes and politicians all the way down the primrose path, and those who refuse to seek unity among Catholics and vote in a bloc, which would be absolutely formidable if there were not so many schisms and divisions within our very own faith. It is sad to see liberals and conservatives bickering so much and so little actual work being done when Congress and the Executive Branch are at odds. It is, however, even more disconcerting to see a consolidation of power into that latter branch, and the slow but steady drum beat of fascism and police state being played not just by liberals but by anyone who happens to be in a position of power.

    The only checks and balances we have for this kind of thing is divine intervention and the might of the Holy Catholic Church against such temporal aggressors. Your civil liberties are being whittled away and the fault is not merely on one side of the political spectrum. Stand up now and act. Don’t stay in this combox. Get out on the streets, and: “¡Vaya lío!”

  76. robtbrown says:

    majuscule says:

    MSW at the Fishwrap says:

    President Obama may still inspire the Democratic base. He did nothing to really persuade this disillusioned former supporter.

    Winters is discovering that Obama has little in the way of political skill. Whatever the warts of the pusillanimous Clinton, he was nonetheless a practiced politician.

    Obama doesn’t understand that he is the product (and victim) of the new political star making factory. If a politician, no matter how inexperienced, unaccomplished, or incapable, looks good on TV and makes a decent speech or two, the promotion begins–the portrayal by the powers that be (incl the media) that a new political star is rising. A similar thing is happening with Wendy Davis. After three years in the Texas legislature, TV has given her national status, and now she is being promoted as a candidate for governor.

    Chesterton said that democracy is having two coal miners run a foot race, and the winner gets to be the Duke of Norfolk. The updated version is two people audition for a TV show, and the winner gets to be nominated for President–or at least, governor.

    NB: TR didn’t become a trust buster for moral reasons but rather because certain trusts that were in restraint of trade were causing high prices and low quality services.

Comments are closed.