Wednesday Oct 7: The situation in Venezuela plus other stories…….. http://t.co/0AIQKnLh8t
— Silvio Canto, Jr. (@SCantojr) October 7, 2015
Here is a little trip down memory lane. Let’s go back to the 1960 campaign:
“In the second of four televised debates, Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kennedy and Vice President Richard Nixon turn their attention to foreign policy issues.
Three Cold War episodes, in particular, engendered spirited confrontations between Kennedy and Nixon.
The first involved Cuba, which had recently come under the control of Fidel Castro. Nixon argued that the island was not “lost” to the United States, and that the course of action followed by the Eisenhower administration had been the best one to allow the Cuban people to “realize their aspirations of progress through freedom.”
Kennedy fired back that it was clear that Castro was a communist, and that the Republican administration failed to use U.S. resources effectively to prevent his rise to power.
He concluded that, “Today Cuba is lost for freedom.””
A few months later, The Bay of Pigs happened.
Bombarded by the 24-hour news cycle on the Popemania, I was moved to listen to Pope Francis’ address to a Joint Session of the U.S. Congress on September 24, 2015.
Having said this, I must admit that I was not favorably inclined to listen to this Pope for his failure to rise to the occasion during his Cuban visit. He refused to meet with the Ladies in White and with other human-rights activists who have been fighting the oppression of the Castro regimes and religious persecution. He invoked “reconciliation” to the Cuban people — ignoring the fact that what they need is FREEDOM. The Pope’s demeanor in Communist Cuba was not that of a man of courage. His continued criticism of capitalism and his silence on communism show his biases and his preferred ideology.
When asked why he had not met with human-rights dissidents during his stay in Cuba, Pope Francis responded that “”It was very clear I was not holding private audiences in the nunciature — not even with other heads of state.” And, yet, Pope Francis did meet with Kentucky County Clerk Kim Davis at the Vatican Embassy in Washington, DC. This provides more evidence where Pope Francis’ loyalties are – definitely not with democratic forces.
There are signs that Pope Francis offered us to let us know where his sympathies are. By meeting with Fidel Castro, the Pope gave a pass to the former Cuban dictator who closed all Catholic schools and universities, as well as expelled 131 priests, brothers, and a bishop on a freighter bound for Spain in 1961. According to the church’s statistics, the number of priests in Cuba decreased from 723 in 1960 to 220 in 1965. By reaching out to Fidel, Pope Francis betrayed the sacrifices of many Catholic youngsters who died at the hands of firing squads at La Cabaña prison to shouts of “Viva Cristo Rey.” Pope Francis sided with the key enemy of the Catholic Church in Cuba.
And here is yet another clue as to why I don’t trust Pope Francis. When he visited Bolivia, he accepted as a gift a Marxist crucifix from President Evo Morales — one shaped with the Communist hammer and sickle. It was Karl Marx who called religion the opium of the masses. Religion and communism are incompatible with each other, and, yet, Pope Francis said that he was not offended by Evo’s gesture. You see, Pope Francis remembers to talk about “politics” only when he is away from totalitarian-run countries. To him, the enemy of the people is capitalism, not communism!
Getting back to Pope Francis’ speech to Congress, I was glad when he mentioned leading civil-rights champions in our Nation’s history, like former President Abraham Lincoln and the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. Both of these were Americans whom I have always admired.
But then, the Pope threw me a curve ball when he mentioned Dorothy Day. At first, I thought that the Pope’s lack of proficiency with the English language had triggered a mispronunciation of a famous American. I was certain that the Pope meant to recognize the popular actress of the 1950s and 1960s Doris Day. She was a favorite of mine, too.
On second thought, I thought that Doris Days did not belong next to the names of Abraham Lincoln and Martin Luther King, Jr., unless, she had done some momentous acts in our history that I was unfamiliar with. So, I went back and checked Doris Day’ biography, and I could not find any. Her fame was mainly in the film industry.
My first clue that helped me to solve my dilemma came when I heard that U.S. Senator and self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders had left the House chamber beaming because the Pope had cited an American Catholic whom Sanders had plenty of praise of. The Senator indicated that the name “Dorothy Day has not been used in the United States Congress terrible often.” Sanders went on to say that “She was a valiant fighter for workers, was very strong in her belief for social justice, and I think it was extraordinary that he cited her as one of the most important people in recent American history. This would be one of the very, very few times that somebody as radical as Dorothy Day was mentioned.”
Now that I had the correct name, I did a bit of research on Dorothy Day. And I came up with one of Day’s famous saying during the 1970s:
“The two words [anarchist-pacifist] should go together, especially at this time when more and more people, even priests, are turning to violence, and are finding their heroes in Camillo Torres among the priests, and Che Guevara among laymen. The attraction is strong, because both men literally laid down their lives for their brothers. “Greater love hath no man than this.””
And, now, I am more convinced than ever as to why I admired Pope John II. Regarding Pope Francis, I am not a fan. Anyone who mentioned an American who looked up to Che Guevara cannot be a friend of mine or of freedom-loving Cuban-Americans.
Why is anyone surprised? President Obama will welcome Pope Francis with a rather interesting receiving line: an activist of the transgender movement, a gay Episcopal bishop, and a nun at odds with the church’s position on abortion and euthanasia.
Just curious: how can that nun still be a nun? Where is Mother Superior when we really need her?
As my mother said this morning of President Obama’s invitations: Coño!
On one hand, this is utterly disrespectful and in your face. It’s childish, too.
On the other hand, it really shows where Obama’s heart is. My friend Ed Morrissey wrote this:
“When the Saudis visited the White House this month, did Obama invite women’s-rights activists to dinner with them? Did Obama invite Ayaan Hirsi Ali to discuss the need for reform in Islam? No? Which entity has more need for openness, inclusiveness, and tolerance?”
We know what side Obama is on. He is certainly not on the side of respecting other religions or our Judeo Christian heritage.
According to the Wall Street Journal — “Vatican disputes White House guest list for papal visit,” by Francis X. Rocca: “On the eve of Pope Francis’s arrival in the U.S., the Vatican has taken offense at the Obama administration’s decision to invite to the pope’s welcome ceremony transgender activists, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop and an activist nun who leads a group criticized by the Vatican for its silence on abortion and euthanasia…According to a senior Vatican official, the Holy See worries that any photos of the pope with these guests at the White House welcoming ceremony next Wednesday could be interpreted as an endorsement of their activities.”
Where was the Vatican rage when Bolivian President Evo Morales gave him an image of the crucified Christ featuring the Communist hammer and sickle?
Now that Pope Francis has become a buddy of President Obama, he’s finding out that worst thing anyone can do is become a friend of the President. Obama is kinder and gentler with his enemies than with his friends.