Catholic League Warns Obama to Start Speaking Out Against Church Ills

[Nate Peele]

Following a week in which Barack Obama was both praised and attacked from the pulpit by Catholic Priests The Catholic League is now attacking Obama for which priests he associates with. In the invocation at the New YorkState Republican Party Dinner, Monsignor Jim Lisante mocked Obama. On the same day video surfaced of Father Michael Phleger preaching at Obama’s church mocking Hillary Clinton. Obama immediately condemmed the remarks and Phleger apologized, however the Catholic League sees things differently.

The Catholic League who is sort of the Catholic equivalent of the Justice League, but without superpowers. “Why is it that of all the wonderful Catholic priests in the Chicago Archdiocese, Obama long ago chose Pfleger to hang with?” Catholic League President Bill Donohue said in a statement. “Truth be known, Pfleger has a very troubling history.”

With such a troubling history it almost seems like there should be some kind of authority that could discipline and remove bad priests. Unfortunately, if you’re looking for discipline or a hierarchical structure the Catholic Church is the wrong place. Obama should have personally attempted to get Phleger defrocked since it was clear nobody in the Catholic Church had that kind of authority.

Members of the Catholic League also found it troubling that in his public life Obama has done nothing to tackle issues of Canon Law such as the ordination of women or married priests. Obama likewise has a lackluster record on doing anything to prevent the church sexual abuse scandal of recent years. Nor has Obama distanced himself from controversial church practices of the past such as indulgences, the inquisition, and perceived anti-semitism.

With Obama clearly unwilling to take on issues such as these which are important to Catholics there can be no doubt he will be stung hard by their votes in the Fall. I have never been a big fan of Papists myself, but I find myself totally agreeing with them in this case.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

We're electing a President, not a Pope.

 

[Gunny]

Following a week in which Barack Obama was both praised and attacked from the pulpit by Catholic Priests The Catholic League is now attacking Obama for which priests he associates with. In the invocation at the New YorkState Republican Party Dinner, Monsignor Jim Lisante mocked Obama. On the same day video surfaced of Father Michael Phleger preaching at Obama’s church mocking Hillary Clinton. Obama immediately condemmed the remarks and Phleger apologized, however the Catholic League sees things differently.

The Catholic League who is sort of the Catholic equivalent of the Justice League, but without superpowers. “Why is it that of all the wonderful Catholic priests in the Chicago Archdiocese, Obama long ago chose Pfleger to hang with?” Catholic League President Bill Donohue said in a statement. “Truth be known, Pfleger has a very troubling history.”

With such a troubling history it almost seems like there should be some kind of authority that could discipline and remove bad priests. Unfortunately, if you’re looking for discipline or a hierarchical structure the Catholic Church is the wrong place. Obama should have personally attempted to get Phleger defrocked since it was clear nobody in the Catholic Church had that kind of authority.

Members of the Catholic League also found it troubling that in his public life Obama has done nothing to tackle issues of Canon Law such as the ordination of women or married priests. Obama likewise has a lackluster record on doing anything to prevent the church sexual abuse scandal of recent years. Nor has Obama distanced himself from controversial church practices of the past such as indulgences, the inquisition, and perceived anti-semitism.

With Obama clearly unwilling to take on issues such as these which are important to Catholics there can be no doubt he will be stung hard by their votes in the Fall. I have never been a big fan of Papists myself, but I find myself totally agreeing with them in this case.

Dude, I'm starting to wonder if you are actually conservative. Your thread all have that "Bush lied ..." theme to them.

Don't get me wrong ... I'm all for beating on Obama. I will not however lower myself to the tactics of the opposition by fabricating shit.

Who is the Catholic League and who gives a shit what they think?

I can see questioning Obama over HIS church and HIS pastor. But for which particular Catholic priest he talks to?

Do you think there is some significance to choosing checkout #10 as opposed to checkout #9 at WalMart? I think it's a conspiracy designed by Obama to allow WalMart to take over the government.

 

[TheGoodShepherd]

Just wondering when Catholic Obama critics are going to quit the Catholic Church. Zany preachers do not even compare to Priests who not only molest little children, but an institution that throughout the decades covered it up.

And btw, this story helps the Obama campaign a lot more than it hurts him.

How?

Easy...just another chance to play the race card again in reaction to those who would play the race card and think they can beat the black man - again.

This is a story all about race, and anytime its made about race the minority candidate wins nine times out of ten.

The McCain campaign has figured this out and has tended to reserve fiery rhetoric towards this issue. I think the McCain camp realizes pastor problems - especially concerning the black church - is a fight thats not wanted at all and can only hurt the Mav.

 

[midcan5]

Obama has also been reluctant to call for an end to English masses. No where have we heard him invoke Latin in his talks to Catholics. Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccáta mundi, miserére nobis.

 

[Toro]

I understand that Obama was a confident of Cardinal Ximenes.

 

[Larkinn]

Dude, I'm starting to wonder if you are actually conservative. Your thread all have that "Bush lied ..." theme to them.

Yah think?

 

[jreeves]

Yah think?

I pegged the guy for a troll from his first post.

 

[Dirt McGirt]

I pegged the guy for a troll from his first post.

I doubt he's a troll. He's got his own blog site with like zero traffic. He probably just doesn't know how bad he sucks at this blogging stuff and is trying really hard to come up with something of substance.

 

[Larkinn]

I pegged the guy for a troll from his first post.

He isn't a troll. His posts aren't exactly honest, but they are fairly amusing and on point satire. He is making rational points, even if he is doing so in an indirect way and you don't realize them.

 

[jreeves]

He isn't a troll. His posts aren't exactly honest, but they are fairly amusing and on point satire. He is making rational points, even if he is doing so in an indirect way and you don't realize them.

He is a troll, if he wasn't he would deal with issues head on not indirectly.

 

[Larkinn]

He is a troll, if he wasn't he would deal with issues head on not indirectly.

Satire isn't the same thing as trolling.

 

[jreeves]

Satire isn't the same thing as trolling.

troll
An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or other (electronic) communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their minds.
(1994-10-17)


troll - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Sounds pretty much what he tries to do.

 

[jillian]

He is a troll, if he wasn't he would deal with issues head on not indirectly.

He's far from a troll...

Satire:

the use of ridicule or scorn, often in a humorous or witty way, to expose vices and follies
ww2.aps.edu/users/apsedumain/CurriculumInstruction/glossary.htm

A manner of writing that mixes a critical attitude with wit and humor in an effort to improve mankind and human institutions. Ridicule, irony, exaggeration, and several other techniques are almost always present. ...
www3.telus.net/eddyelmer/Tools/litterms.htm

 

[Gunny]

troll
An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or other (electronic) communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their minds.
(1994-10-17)


troll - Definitions from Dictionary.com

Sounds pretty much what he tries to do.

That is a very limited definition of an internet troll. I don't see that it applies to Nate. Nate is just enthusiastic about his cause.

 

[Nate Peele]

Imagine my surprise to see one of my threads highjacked by discussion about me. Like my conservative pundit inspirations I simply detest the spotlight, but I will do my best to answer some of these accusations. To my defenders, you have my thanks. It is ironic to me that in some cases it is the liberals of the board who are rallying to my defense. No Gunny, that was not intended to slur you by calling you a liberal.

I pegged the guy for a troll from his first post.

You define my posts as intentionally incorrect. I have credible news sources for all information and of course I supply my own analysis. I do admit that since the sources tend to be from the mainstream media they are dubious, but Rupert Murdoch has only so many reporters on his payroll. This particular piece was written from infomation gleamed from CNN.com and Catholic Citizens.org

I doubt he's a troll. He's got his own blog site with like zero traffic. He probably just doesn't know how bad he sucks at this blogging stuff and is trying really hard to come up with something of substance.

My blog That’s Right Nate has been around for less than 3 months. In March I had just over 4,000 hits. In April I had about 7,000 hits. In May I had about 16,500. Currently I'm at about 750 readers per day and should be considerably over 30,000 hits by my 3 month anniversary. I understand this is considered decent growth by political blog standards. My blog is acknowledged one of the first to break the Obama Hamas connection and my coverage of the Obama Rezko trial was picked up by several very important pro-Hillary blogs. My blog has become very important in the race for the Texas 18th District House Race with both Republican candidate TJ Baker Holm and Libertarian Mike Taylor directing their supporters to my site. For a new site, I feel we've done OK.

A manner of writing that mixes a critical attitude with wit and humor in an effort to improve mankind and human institutions. Ridicule, irony, exaggeration, and several other techniques are almost always present. ...

While I do my best to improve mankind and human institutions through my enlightening conservative perspective, I try not to ridicule anybody. I have not personally attacked anybody regardless of some people calling me a troll. The Republican party is a big tent party that welcomes people of all types who wish to see a strong America and believe in conservative principles. I wish some people on this board could adopt a similiar stance. Once again to Gunny, Jillian, and Larkinn I appreciate your support.

 

[jreeves]

Imagine my surprise to see one of my threads highjacked by discussion about me. Like my conservative pundit inspirations I simply detest the spotlight, but I will do my best to answer some of these accusations. To my defenders, you have my thanks. It is ironic to me that in some cases it is the liberals of the board who are rallying to my defense. No Gunny, that was not intended to slur you by calling you a liberal.

I pegged the guy for a troll from his first post.

You define my posts as intentionally incorrect. I have credible news sources for all information and of course I supply my own analysis. I do admit that since the sources tend to be from the mainstream media they are dubious, but Rupert Murdoch has only so many reporters on his payroll. This particular piece was written from infomation gleamed from CNN.com and Catholic Citizens.org

I doubt he's a troll. He's got his own blog site with like zero traffic. He probably just doesn't know how bad he sucks at this blogging stuff and is trying really hard to come up with something of substance.

My blog That’s Right Nate has been around for less than 3 months. In March I had just over 4,000 hits. In April I had about 7,000 hits. In May I had about 16,500. Currently I'm at about 750 readers per day and should be considerably over 30,000 hits by my 3 month anniversary. I understand this is considered decent growth by political blog standards. My blog is acknowledged one of the first to break the Obama Hamas connection and my coverage of the Obama Rezko trial was picked up by several very important pro-Hillary blogs. My blog has become very important in the race for the Texas 18th District House Race with both Republican candidate TJ Baker Holm and Libertarian Mike Taylor directing their supporters to my site. For a new site, I feel we've done OK.

A manner of writing that mixes a critical attitude with wit and humor in an effort to improve mankind and human institutions. Ridicule, irony, exaggeration, and several other techniques are almost always present. ...

While I do my best to improve mankind and human institutions through my enlightening conservative perspective, I try not to ridicule anybody. I have not personally attacked anybody regardless of some people calling me a troll. The Republican party is a big tent party that welcomes people of all types who wish to see a strong America and believe in conservative principles. I wish some people on this board could adopt a similiar stance. Once again to Gunny, Jillian, and Larkinn I appreciate your support.

Your own analysis is flawed, hence my calling you a troll. If you want to use humor to shield you from a legitimate debate, that's fine by me.

 

[Shogun]

I wouldn't call you a troll, dude... But, I think you need to pay Stephen Colbert royalties for your schtick.

 

[Gunny]

No Gunny, that was not intended to slur you by calling you a liberal.

Not sure where you got this idea. While I am not a "liberal" by current definition, I was most certainly classified as one back in the pre-Carter days, and was a registered Democrat.

What someone is labelled is determined by their stance in the political spectrum in comparison to the labeler's stance in the political spectrum.

I don't consider being called a liberal a slur, and it always makes me wonder what those called liberals by today's definition think when someone to the right of me calls me one since they're usually busy labelling me some kind of right wing extremist.

I believe what I believe -- some things are defined as conservative, some liberal, and some libertarian. I don't need a political party nor political label to decide what I believe is right.

 

[MsWikia]

Following a week in which Barack Obama was both praised and attacked from the pulpit by Catholic Priests The Catholic League is now attacking Obama for which priests he associates with.

Would it be rude to say Obama shouldn't hang out with any considering how many of them have been accused of molesting a child?? They need to be more worried about the reputations of their priest instead of who Obama associates with; talk about priorities… ...