Rush Limbaugh, Sandra Fluke And True Misogyny

Rush Limbaugh, Sandra Fluke And True Misogyny — Sandra Fluke is a 30-year-old activist who testified before Congress that the Catholic Church should be made to pay for the birth control of the women of Georgetown — which believe it or not is a Catholic school. She said this commodity costs the poor women of Georgetown $1,000 a year.

 
Talk show host Rush Limbaugh has been innocently wondering what kind of a woman would need $1,000 a year for birth control.
 
This has outraged — the word should probably be all caps but for aesthetic reasons I’ll leave it lower case — the usual suspects who have demanded in their tolerant open-minded fashion that Limbaugh be silenced forever.
 
Now ladies, before you start throwing around words like “misogyny” think real hard about this: 
 
Larry Flynt and Al Goldstein are pornographers who have influenced our society far greater than most can imagine. Their publications have featured the vilest and most degrading images of the female sex. They have horribly abused the women in their personal lives, which in Flynt’s case includes his daughter.
 
Whose side would they take in this debate? Limbaugh’s or Ms. Fluke’s?
 
Whose side would Bill “Better Put Some Ice On That” Clinton take? 
 
Do you really want to be on the same side with this type of men?
Rush Limbaugh, Sandra Fluke And True Misogyny

Credit Republicans If Refineries Are Saved

Credit Republicans If Refineries Are Saved — A state cabinet member told the House Appropriations Committee, Feb. 27, that there is a strong likelihood that two of the three Philadelphia area refineries scheduled for shut-down may be saved.

C. Alan Walker, secretary of Department of Commerce and Economic Development, told the legislators that an angel in form of United Refining Co. of Warren, Pa. may be interested in buying the Sunoco ones in Philadelphia and Marcus Hook.
Apparently a lot of work has been going on behind the scenes. Note the work appears to be being done by the Republican Corbett administration.
Hopefully, someone can be found to find save the idled ConocoPhillips plant in Trainer.
It might be bargain. If the administration changes in Washington, relief would be expected from the regulatory burdens largely responsible for its closure that had been imposed by the religious zealots who have taken over the Obama-run EPA.

Interesting Fact Of The Day


L.L. Bean still sells wooden snowshoes.

Power Plants To Close In Pa. And Life Gets Harder

Power Plants To Close In Pa. And Life Gets Harder — Put this in the life gets harder file: Houston-based GenOn Energy Inc. will be closing five power plants in Pennsylvania which are in Portland, Shawville, Titus, New Castle and Elrama.

The plants provide 3,140 megawatts of electricity. They are fired by coal, however, and that is why they are closing. New environmental rules make them unprofitable for them to operate.
GenOn is also closing two coal-plants in Ohio and one in New Jersey.
Now there is nothing wrong with trying to wean ourselves off of coal for electricity and on to something else, but if that something else is windmills or solar panels just expect our lives to get harder unless of course you are one of the privileged few in government who will find ways to exempt themselves from the suffering they cause.
The combined megawatts from the plants to be close is about what a larger nuclear plant would generate.
Of course, nobody is talking about building one of them in Pennsylvania.

More Honors For Joe Martin

Joe Martin, the Havertown, Pa. resident who is the associate director of engineering management at Drexel University, has been named Philadelphia Civil Engineer of the Year for 2012.

On Feb. 16, he was feted by the Delaware County Chapter of the Pennsylvania Society of Professional Engineers as Delaware County Engineer of the Year.

I hear he’s a pretty good teacher too.

Interesting Person Of The Week

Pat Farmer is a runner. 

But that’s not what makes him interesting. What makes him interesting is that he is running from the North Pole to the South Pole. He’s averaging 50 miles a day and the trip should take him 10 months.

Last report had him being in Peru. So, what happens when he reaches the Straits of Magellan? Water wings?

Some people think he’s crazy.

Pat is a former member of the Australian Parliament.

Hat tip Outside magazine.

Schools Stay Open But Church Must End Choice Hypocrisy

I always try to check my emotions at the door when I begin a column. That’s why I rarely write in the first person. But, hey, I’m also human and a Philly Catholic, so I shed a few tears of joy when it was recently announced that four diocesan high schools and 18 elementary schools were reprieved from their death sentence and would remain open.
I didn’t go to Bonner (mine was the other Augustinian school, Malvern), but a brother, an uncle and a bunch of my friends did. (In fact, my uncle was a member of Bonner’s first graduating class and has three Prendergast – yes, Prendergast – football letters. How’s that for trivia?). And I have an aunt who’s a grad of the school that has, perhaps, the greatest tradition of all – West Catholic.
(Quick tangent: I’m a graduate of Annunciation BVM grade school in Havertown, which a niece and nephew presently attend. Despite meeting or exceeding all of the thresholds laid out by Bishop McFadden in 2009 to remain open, Annunciation is nonetheless being closed. Ignoring the wishes of his congregation, the pastor refused to appeal. Scores of parishioners, encouraged by the 75 percent success rate of the schools that did appeal, as well as West Catholic remaining open even though it did not appeal, have taken their case directly to Archbishop Chaput. You can read their detailed appeal on PaWatercooler.com
Now that a short-term victory for many schools has been achieved, it’s time to push emotion aside and take an objective look at the situation, where more questions than answers remain. What changed? What transpired in 30 days that allowed almost half of the schools to stay open? Was it “faulty information” that the Blue Ribbon Commission received, as some readers allege? Or was it a few deep-pocketed donors stepping up to the plate? And if so, is relying on a handful of wealthy individuals really a sustainable financial solution?
It seems quite a stretch that bad information could be the reason for the turnaround. For that to be true, many schools must have submitted data painting a very negative picture – information subsequently determined to be incorrect (hence the reversals). Outside of a few pastors who lack the desire or energy to further the mission of Catholic education, that scenario doesn’t stand up to the common sense test, since most schools would obviously put their best foot forward in their quest to stay open.
So either the Commission did not request the right information, or completely dropped the ball in analyzing the documents it did receive (as referenced in last week’s column). Either way, given that the Commission’s decisions affected the lives of so many, Philadelphia Catholics had every right to expect more, especially given the composition of the Commission. Its members included former top executives of some of America’s largest banks and insurance companies who were familiar with making tough financial decisions. Something just doesn’t add up, and, fair or not, that is fostering cynicism and fear that future closings are inevitable.
Of course, there is another possibility – that the Commission simply never bothered (or wasn’t allowed?) to contact many of the schools in question. Since more than a few pastors confidentially enlightened me to that situation – why would they lie about something so easily verifiable? – it tends to further cloud the entire decision-making process, both closures and reprieves. And why on earth, if the Commission/Archdiocese realized that the data was incomplete and/or their methodologies flawed, would they not postpone the original announcement in January until they got their house in order?
As a result, many faithful are rolling their eyes (again), wondering how the Archdiocese could look so foolish, while still not communicating any long-term solution. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that, since enrollment has decreased sharply over the last decade while costs have risen, a viable plan must be enacted quickly, or the same situation will arise in the near future.
With that distinct possibility looming, how can the Church avoid it?
1) Start talking about the positive aspects of the Church, restoring the credibility that has been shattered by years of sex scandals, shredded documents and cover-ups. The Roman Catholic Church is the largest provider of social services in the entire world (and second in America behind only the U.S. government) and administers the world’s largest nonpublic school system, yet most people are unaware of those phenomenal achievements – a massive failure in public relations.
The Catholic mission is perhaps the most noble on the planet, and the Church’s history, while certainly not without its darker moments, is a storied one. From its humble beginnings as the church of a fisherman named Peter, Roman Catholicism became the most benevolent and impactful force the world has ever known. It’s time to tell that magnificent story and educate the world – again – on what it really means to be Catholic, while purging every aspect of the scandals which have rocked the church to its very foundations. Unequivocally, pride in Catholic identity leads to fuller schools.
2) The newly created Faith In The Future Foundation – charged with fundraising and being a guiding force on marketing and recruiting for the 17 archdiocesan high schools and assisting parish elementary schools – is a good idea, but only if it offers membership to rank-and-file Catholics with ears to the ground.
Much criticism directed at the Church is that it is too insulated from the pressing issues, and too isolated from the parishioners themselves. If the Foundation is comprised only of millionaires and politically-connected Catholics, it will fail. That is not to invoke “class warfare,” for having intelligent business leaders is imperative, but by definition, most would not be able to relate to the concerns of the masses (no pun intended). If “average” Catholics are not given a dedicated platform to offer their perspective, the rigidness, bureaucracy and stagnation that has come to define the Archdiocese will only worsen. And the exodus of Catholics will accelerate.
3) The Church needs to fight. If you want a true long-term solution to keep schools open and thriving, and believe the best way is by returning to parents some of their tax money (vouchers and tax credits) so they can make the best choice where to educate their children, you are absolutely correct. But it doesn’t happen by itself.
It only happens when political muscle is flexed. It only happens when you play hardball. It only happens when you unabashedly make school choice the Church’s Number One issue in the primary and general election. And it only happens when you make it crystal clear to all legislators who doubt the ferocity of a newly awakened tiger – one that has shed its paper skin – that they will reap the whirlwind for that miscalculation.
Seems common sense, yet the church has been doing the complete opposite. For over a year, Freindly Fire and others have been successfully battling clueless church factions who have been pushing “educational reform” legislation (Senate Bill 1) that would neither educate nor reform. It’s such a worthless bill – written while Ed Rendell was still governor and not amended to include the middle class (at all) despite an infinitely more favorable Legislature and pro-school choice Gov. Tom Corbett – that, had it been passed a year ago, virtually none of the schools slated for closure would have been saved. School choice bills affecting just low-income families are born losers; only when the middle class is comprehensively included will there b
e light at the end of the tunnel to help Catholic schools survive and prosper.
Ironically, the Church – through its lobbying arm, the Pennsylvania Catholic Conference – hurt itself by backing the wrong bill and not being truthful that the middle class was excluded from that legislation. Upon learning that the bill would never affect them or help keep their schools open, many Catholics reacted with palpable anger, setting off another wholly preventable firestorm. One step forward and three back is not the way to achieve political success.
What can be done immediately? Make an extremely aggressive push to have the Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) expansion bill pass the Senate, where “school choice advocate” Sen. Jeff Piccola is selfishly letting it languish (calling it “DOA”) because he can’t pass his low-income voucher bill. Making the sin mortal is that the EITC bill, sponsored by Montgomery County state Rep. Tom Quigley, passed the House by an unheard-of bipartisan vote of 190 to 7 – a year ago! The biggest tragedy is that some of the schools that have been ordered to close might have been saved if this bill had passed last spring. But because of misguided legislative priorities and a total lack of political pressure by the Church, Catholics – and their schools – continue to suffer.
All of the suggested solutions will be for naught if the hierarchy doesn’t learn one lesson very quickly. You cannot grow the church by being inconsistent, and yes, hypocritical, especially to your own people. The Archdiocese has thus far refused to grant school choice to many in elementary schools, instead dictating what schools children must attend. That policy has created an immense backlash, with thousands feeling betrayed since they correctly see the Church pushing school choice for others, but denying it to them. And no amount of spin or enrollment explanations will change that bitter sentiment. Charity starts at home.
Of the countless emails received in the last week – most from loyal Catholics – one message was most common: Keep the faith but fight the corruption.
If grounded church leaders and reinvigorated rank-and-file Catholics keep that in mind while preaching a positive message and a wielding a political sledgehammer, then prayers for keeping Catholic education alive far into the future will undoubtedly be answered.

Lights Back On Windsor Circle

A fallen tree at 101 N. Rolling Road knocked the lights out on Windsor Circle, Springfield, Pa. at 1:46 p.m., today, Feb. 29.

The came back on at 6:05 p.m.
PECO said that only 18 homes were affected which corresponds to the number on the circle.
Hat tip Margaret Lawrence
Lights Back On Windsor Circle

Fannie Mae Wants More $$$

Fannie Mae Wants More $$$ — The government-sponsored Federal National Mortgage Association i.e. Fannie Mae requested this morning, Feb.29, $4.6 billion more in government aid after a $2.41 billion four-quarter loss.

Where are Chris Dodd and Barney Frank when you need them?
Don’t sweat, this font of corruption is still going to get the money.

 
 
 

The Ebb Of Freedom

Ricky Palinko submitted The Ebb Of Freedom about the continuing decline of the loss of our freedom. 

H.R. 347 certainly sounds reasonable until you remember that we have gone 236 years, which have included a Civil War, world wars and various domestic turmoils, without it.

Just when you thought the government couldn’t ruin the First Amendment any further: The House of Representatives approved a bill on Monday that outlaws protests in instances where some government officials are nearby, whether or not you even know it.

The US House of Representatives voted 388-to-3 in favor of H.R. 347 late Monday, a bill which is being dubbed the Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act of 2011. In the bill, Congress officially makes it illegal to trespass on the grounds of the White House, which, on the surface, seems not just harmless and necessary, but somewhat shocking that such a rule isn’t already on the books. The wording in the bill, however, extends to allow the government to go after much more than tourists that transverse the wrought iron White House fence.

Under the act, the government is also given the power to bring charges against Americans engaged in political protest anywhere in the country.

Under current law, White House trespassers are prosecuted under a local ordinance, a Washington, DC legislation that can bring misdemeanor charges for anyone trying to get close to the president without authorization. Under H.R. 347, a federal law will formally be applied to such instances, but will also allow the government to bring charges to protesters, demonstrators and activists at political events and other outings across America.

The new legislation allows prosecutors to charge anyone who enters a building without permission or with the intent to disrupt a government function with a federal offense if Secret Service is on the scene, but the law stretches to include not just the president’s palatial Pennsylvania Avenue home. Under the law, any building or grounds where the president is visiting — even temporarily — is covered, as is any building or grounds “restricted in conjunction with an event designated as a special event of national significance.”

It’s not just the president who would be spared from protesters, either.

Covered under the bill is any person protected by the Secret Service. Although such protection isn’t extended to just everybody, making it a federal offense to even accidently disrupt an event attended by a person with such status essentially crushes whatever currently remains of the right to assemble and peacefully protest. 

Hours after the act passed, presidential candidate Rick Santorum was granted Secret Service protection. For the American protester, this indeed means that glitter-bombing the former Pennsylvania senator is officially a very big no-no, but it doesn’t stop with just him. Santorum’s coverage under the Secret Service began on Tuesday, but fellow GOP hopeful Mitt Romney has already been receiving such security. A campaign aide who asked not to be identified confirmed last week to CBS News that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has sought Secret Service protection as well. Even former contender Herman Cain received the armed protection treatment when he was still in the running for the Republican Party nod.

In the text of the act, the law is allowed to be used against anyone who knowingly enters or remains in a restricted building or grounds without lawful authority to do so, but those grounds are considered any area where someone — rather it’s President Obama, Senator Santorum or Governor Romney — will be temporarily visiting, whether or not the public is even made aware. Entering such a facility is thus outlawed, as is disrupting the orderly conduct of “official functions,” engaging in disorderly conduct “within such proximity to” the event or acting violent to anyone, anywhere near the premises. Under that verbiage, that means a peaceful protest outside a candidate’s concession speech would be a federal offense, but those occurrences covered as special event of national significance don’t just stop there, either. And neither does the list of covered persons that receive protection.

Outside of the current presidential race, the Secret Service is responsible for guarding an array of politicians, even those from outside America. George W Bush is granted protection until ten years after his administration ended, or 2019, and every living president before him is eligible for life-time, federally funded coverage. Visiting heads of state are extended an offer too, and the events sanctioned as those of national significance — a decision that is left up to the US Department of Homeland Security — extends to more than the obvious. While presidential inaugurations and meeting of foreign dignitaries are awarded the title, nearly three dozen events in all have been considered a National Special Security Event (NSSE) since the term was created under President Clinton. Among past events on the DHS-sanctioned NSSE list are Super Bowl XXXVI, the funerals of Ronald Reagan and Gerald Ford, most State of the Union addresses and the 2008 Democratic and Republican National Conventions.

With Secret Service protection awarded to visiting dignitaries, this also means, for instance, that the federal government could consider a demonstration against any foreign president on American soil as a violation of federal law, as long as it could be considered disruptive to whatever function is occurring.

When thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Chicago this spring for the 2012 G8 and NATO summits, they will also be approaching the grounds of a National Special Security Event. That means disruptive activity, to whichever court has to consider it, will be a federal offense under the act.

And don’t forget if you intend on fighting such charges, you might not be able to rely on evidence of your own. In the state of Illinois, videotaping the police, under current law, brings criminals charges. Don’t fret. It’s not like the country will really try to enforce it — right?

On the bright side, does this mean that the law could apply to law enforcement officers reprimanded for using excessive force on protesters at political events? Probably. Of course, some fear that the act is being created just to keep those demonstrations from ever occuring, and given the vague language on par with the loose definition of a “terrorist” under the NDAA, if passed this act is expected to do a lot more harm to the First Amendment than good.

United States Representative Justin Amash (MI-03) was one of only three lawmakers to vote against the act when it appeared in the House late Monday. Explaining his take on the act through his official Facebook account on Tuesday, Rep. Amash writes, “The bill expands current law to make it a crime to enter or remain in an area where an official is visiting even if the person does not know it’s illegal to be in that area and has no reason to suspect it’s illegal.”

“Some government officials may need extraordinary protection to ensure their safety. But criminalizing legitimate First Amendment activity — even if that activity is annoying to those government officials — violates our rights,” adds the representative.

Now that the act has overwhelmingly made it through the House, the next set of hands to sift through its pages could very well be President Barack Obama; the US Senate had already passed the bill back on February 6. Less than two months ago, the president approved the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, essentially suspending habeas corpus from American citizens. Could the next order out of the Executive Branch be revoking some of the Bill of Rights? Only if you consider the part about being able to assemble a staple of the First Amendment, really. Don’t worry, though. Obama was, after all, a constitutional law professor. When he signed the NDAA on December 31, he accompanied his signature with a signing statement that let Americans know that, just because he authorized the indefinite detention of Americans didn’t mean he thought it was right.

Should President Obama suspend the right to assemble, Americans might expect another apology to accompany it in which the commander-in-chief condemns the very act he authorizes. If you disagree with such a decision, however, don’t take it to the White House. Sixteen-hundred Pennsylvania Avenue and the vicinity is, of course, covered under this act.