Cleverest Remark on DNC and Clinton

Yesterday, the DNC had to pretend it had a 2/3 vote to assert that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and for the inclusion of the phrase, “God-given gifts” into their national platform, because three attempts to vote couldn’t bring it. Whether it was the “God” language or the “Jerusalem” language they resisted more is hard to say. But the nays seem to have it it.

And then, of course, the mob boo’ed, jeered and hissed.

Later, Bill Clinton came out and did what Bill Clinton does better than almost anyone.

This morning, appeared on my Facebook wall the cleverest remark about it all:

“So, after they denied God three times, the cock crowed; what next?”

Well, what comes next is an ending and a beginning, as we all know.

What? In 2008, the Democrats loved this biblical/messianic stuff. Some still do!

It’s a clever remark, and I admit I laughed — the DNC got all biblical and they didn’t even know it!

But don’t get too cocky. After all, Peter may have made three denials, but he still ended up with the keys.

God’s ways are not our ways, his thoughts are not our thoughts, and we do well to remember that, every day, in every situation. God’s view is the longview, which we are not privy to.

Which is precisely why I will never despair; even if it all “goes wrong” I will never entertain the notion that God’s hand has gone missing in anything, or that a greater purpose than we can imagine isn’t behind so much that confounds us. And because I will not entertain that notion, I will never fall into the trap of thinking that our own efforts, alone, will be the ultimate solution to anything.

I keep thinking of the French Revolution, and how things tumble, and it seems like all is at a loss, that cultures and civilizations must end, and they do.

But then I remember what brings them around again.

Crows and Magpies: yesterday was a wild ride for the DNC, and they will be battered by it. Bill Clinton started strong and then grew weaker even as he found his longer-wind. And then Barack Obama hurried out, stepped on Clinton’s chance to bask in applause, in order to get the photo-op.

It’s all illusions and stage management. There is a long-game in progress. Best we can do is do our very best to live in obedience to what we know is True, and trust in that Truth.

About Elizabeth Scalia
  • Kim Whelan

    Thank you for the reminder that God’s view is the long view.

  • Chris

    Absolutely right. There’s no reason to despair. Catholics will have to get used to the notion that God’s justice calls for chastisement of our nation, but there is mercy mysteriously wrapped up in that justice. And God, throughout history, has punished nations by permitting the empowerment of evil men and women. That time is here for, so perseverance is non-negotiable for us.

  • http://thebowandthestring.tumblr.com Christina Dirkes

    Amen. Perspective is so vital right now.

  • Diane Slater

    How many times did Blessed John Paul II tell us “Be not afraid”. He knew what was happening and where things were headed. A real mystery is that we do much better in adversity…..we seek God through His grace to give us that desire…..when we are living in complacent satiety, God seems so often to take a back door or out of the door altogether.

  • http://decentfilms.com SDG

    “But don’t get too cocky. After all, Peter may have made three denials, but he still ended up with the keys.”

    And the Messiah died…but three days later he was back.

    [Yes, and end, and a beginning! -admin]

  • Ray Bones

    After yesterday, I have to believe that there are some Democrats who are wondering what has happened to their party. I watched the video of that “vote” several times, and there’s no way you can hear anything other than a 50/50 split. The bosses must have known that would be the case and so just jammed it through. The big question is: Why are the Democrats so conflicetd about God and/or Jerusalem?

  • Marianna

    Thank you for this comment. As I agree that there is no reason to despair, I do believe that my grief for the loss of my country and her ideals, and a way of life that has disappeared is ok.

  • http://theraineyview.wordpress.com Serena

    Most Democrats aren’t as extreme as the ones at the convention. Many are third-generation party members and it’s cultural for them to vote Democrat. I hope and pray that the normal Democrats will wake up because of yesterday’s display of the Party’s attitude, and leave the Democratic Party in droves.

  • http://jscafenette.com Manny

    Well I don’t despair but it is sad what we in this country (and frankly the western world at large) have evolved to. It’s been evident for some time now that we are evolving to where one party in our system is the secularist (another name for atheist) party and one party is the traditionalist party, and traditionalism incorporates, however imperfectly, religious values.

  • dnb03

    Be Not Afraid as in sit back and let everything unravel as it will, or Be Not Afraid to speak up to the catholic hierarchy and ask, ‘where do you stand?’ Last election, it was (to paraphrase), ‘yes, abortion is bad, but … (peace and justice, social justice, etc.)’ Where did that get us? Stupaked on Obamacare. Protection of life is listed first in the seven pillars of catholic social justice. Does that mean something? The democrat platform (50/50) has voiced their rejection of God and their acceptance of abortion (always and for whatever reason). What say my bishops?

  • Rob B.

    “It’s all illusions and stage management. ”

    One can say the same thing of the convention in Tampa…

    [Yes, of course. But I was traveling and didn't watch that convention, so I can only speak to this one. - admin]

  • Fiestamom

    I said a Litany of the Holy Name after yesterday’s boo fest in Charlotte. It really upset me. I am also praying for Mitt Romney’s conversion to pro life view. I am always glad I’m a Catholic, but at times like these the Church has given us ways to pray….and I’m thankful for that.

  • Pingback: The cleverest remark on Wednesday's fiasco at the DNC... - Christian Forums

  • Pingback: They Denied Him 3 Times - Page 2 - Christian Forums

  • David, Chicago

    The Holy See does not recognize or advocate Jerusalem as the capital of the modern state of Israel. Why should the Democratic Party? And I would prefer that none of the current political parties speak of God. There’s little hope of them getting any thing they say about God correct.

  • mrp

    Cardinal Dolan is scheduled for tonight’s closing prayer? If so, I hope it is televised.

  • http://medpedia.com/users/110 Larry Weisenthal

    I have been reading your blog for several months now. There are times when you make good, defensible points and make them in a constructive fashion, without an attempt at demonization. Sometimes, however, you can come across as petty and inflammatory as Rush Limbaugh.

    You describe the delegates as a “mob.” However, you fail to draw the obvious parallel with the GOP platform and the GOP convention.

    The GOP platform calls for the total criminalization of abortion, with no exceptions for anything. This is an extreme position, which is certainly not supported by more than a minority of voters within the GOP, much less the nation. Why was this platform plank adopted? Because the people who attend both political conventions represent the most extreme, hard core membership of the respective parties.

    Romney himself has stated his own position clearly. To wit:

    “My position has been clear throughout this campaign,” Romney said. “I’m in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest, and the health and life of the mother.”

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57501172/romney-my-views-on-abortion-rights-are-clear/

    I’ve heard Nancy Pelosi describe her own position in precisely the same words. Note — not just “life” of the mother, but “health” of the mother, with “health” including mental health, which, as we all know, can mean anything.

    Now, is Romney happy with the GOP abortion plank? No way; he knows that it will be used against him (playing into the “war on women” narrative), which is why he took such pains to repudiate that plank. Why didn’t he try to get it removed at the convention, the way that Obama did with regard to inserting a plank that he didn’t like having been removed (which was removed for precisely the same reasons that the GOP plank was inserted, that being that the delegates at a political convention represent the most extreme hard core membership of the party)? Because, had Romney dared to try, he’d have been met with total rebellion from what you call “the mob!” So he just let it go and personally repudiated it — OUTSIDE of the GOP convention hall — i.e. away from “the mob.”

    Why is it so necessary to attempt to look for gotcha moments like this, which only serve to perpetuate the politics of hate? The political process should be based not on portraying as depraved those with whom you disagree, but upon persuading the electorate that one’s own positions are superior to those of one’s opponents.

    I’m a formerly non-religious person, who’s been faithfully attending mass since last January, with a completely open heart, trying to see how much of it speaks to my heart. What decidedly did not speak to my heart was a homily from a senior priest which began “this President is the most anti-Catholic President in history. He’s just like Hitler.” I got up, walked out unobtrusively without making a scene, and wrote a letter to the parish Pastor. He wrote back with a friendly reply, but I changed to a parish with a Vietnamese priest who’s heavily accented English homilies seldom rose to the level of intelligible. I’ve found that the Holy Spirit gains access to my heart much more readily, without being seasoned by political venom.

    - Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

  • s graham

    Watch CSPAN and I am sure the prayer will be shown.It was at the RNC convention.

  • Roderick Alvernaz

    I had to laugh, too, when I read that line -very cleaver! In the end I think there are those within the Democrat Party who will feel that the Committee bowed to pressure from the right. Truth is the question was simple enough; Why was “God” and “Jerusalem” removed from their platform when they had been mentioned before? Instead of answering the question there was angry vitriol, all avoiding the question, thrown back for daring to ask question! It was there before. You deliberately removed it this time. There had to be a reason. What was it? Simple.

  • David

    “There is a long-game in progress.”

    Forgive my snarkiness: At first, I thought you speaking of the NY Giants-Dallas NFL game that seemed taking too long to be played. I caught on when I re-read this post more seriously.

    BTW, I enjoyed your post, “The Darkling Rain”. Beautifully written. If I may add, whenever you see a yellow-green pall in a dark sky, that’s usually a sign of tornado weather.

  • bsfurg

    No it was not a 50/50 splirt it was more 65/50 .. listen to it… was it the muslims who yelled the loudest…

  • C. Hall

    Responding to Larry Weisenthal: “The GOP platform calls for the total criminalization of abortion, with no exceptions for anything. This is an extreme position, which is certainly not supported by more than a minority of voters within the GOP…” I beg to differ with you, sir; moreover, if you are faithfully attending Mass, it should be your position, as well. Abortion– taking the life of an innocent child–is against the God’s law. It is your duty as a practicing Catholic to defend the lives of the innocent. Mr. Obama’s record is clear on this matter–he believes in the extermination of children in their mother’s wombs. The abortion situation in this country has long been referred to as a holocaust — this is not new terminology. I think it noteworthy, too, that what you describe as “political venom”, I call the truth. Perhaps you need to think again about how “completely open” your heart is. — I know you’ll, no doubt, think I am full of hatred, too. Rest assured I am not–just concerned about your eternal soul.

  • Ted Seeber

    I hope Cardinal Dolan has the good sense to use *exactly* the same prayer he used at the RNC, word for word. *both* sides need to hear right now that their place is as servants, not rulers.

  • TerryC

    I fail to see how a total ban on an act which is intrinsically evil in some way is extreme. Let’s address the subject using logic. Once conception occurs the being produced is either human or it is not human. If it is human it is an act of homicide to kill it. If it is not human it is not an act of homicide. So abortion is either always wrong or it is never wrong. Any other stand is inconsistent.
    As for how anti-Catholic the president is. The United States has existed for over 200 years. During that time it has had presidential candidates who supported the anti-Catholic Know-Nothings, the KKK and Protestants who believed that Catholics were not Christians. Not one of them has attempted to force the Church and its hospitals, businesses and individual members to support chemical abortion of babies or the immoral practice of contraception. Until this president.
    Best line I’ve heard about last night was from Jay Leno. “The Democratic Convention had a huge lighting problem in the convention hall. They worked all day on it and they still couldn’t get President Obama out of Bill Clinton’s shadow.”

  • Pingback: Transterrestrial Musings - The DNC Got All Biblical Yesterday

  • Bob

    I was filled with anxiety when Bush was running against Gore. I of course was supporting Bush, but the news of the ballet issues in Florida was upsetting to say the least. So I prayed, and as I prayed a voice entered my head. Don’t put your faith in man.

    I like Romney/Ryan and I’ll still support whomever it is that believes in the sanctity of life, but I’m not going to expend too much energy worrying about it.

  • http://medpedia.com/users/110 Larry Weisenthal

    Hi C. Hall:

    I wasn’t in any way intending to argue the abortion issue. I was simply making a point.

    Ms. Scalia referred to the delegates to the Democratic convention as a “mob,” because there was a degree of vocal disagreement with the ultimate wording of the party platform. I was simply pointing out that Obama successfully changed the language of the platform with which he disagreed, while Romney didn’t try to change it inside the convention hall, thereby avoiding an incitement of the “mob.” And it is a fact that the language of the GOP abortion plank is extreme, in a political sense (i.e. supported by only a small minority of the electorate, which is why it was repudiated by Romney).

    I was specifically objecting to the portrayal of the event in such a way to demonize the political opposition, to wit: the characterization of the assembled delegations as a “mob.” The people at the Democratic convention were no more a “mob” than were the people at the GOP convention, and there was no reason to characterize them as such, except to demonize them.

    I’ve also read enough Catholic doctrine and teaching to know that one is “allowed” to take many factors into consideration in supporting a candidate and casting a vote. The legalized abortion/criminalized abortion issue is no exception to this principle. Pope John Paul II personally administered the eucharist to the mayor of Rome, whose position on abortion was the same as Obama’s (“personally against, but unwilling to impose my views on others through force of law”). I don’t find a huge amount of difference between the abortion positions of Obama and Romney (particularly considering the latter’s political dissembling and flip-flopping on this issue). Personally, I think that there are more important issues on which to base my vote in this particular election.

    - Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach CA

    [I actually used the word "mob" because it better-reflected the biblical joke. Because I was having a little fun, joking around. Don't read more into it than it was. I think the whole country needs to lighten up b/f it has a collective stroke. -admin]

  • http://medpedia.com/users/110 Larry Weisenthal

    Hi Anchoress:

    Oh, I get it now. Being at this point in this particular election season hyper-sensitized to such things, I took the language literally, rather than figuratively, as you had intended it to be taken. Thank you for the clarification. – Larry W/HB, CA

    [Don't mistake me for a partisan. I am more of a misanthrope where the parties are concerned, and would have had fun w/ the GOP last week, had I not been traveling and too busy to watch-admin]

  • Patt

    Good commentary on this creepy convention.

  • Deacon Jason Miller, Ph.D., M.P.A.

    We, who are unfailingly pro-life ARE extremists. We are LOVE radicals. We take the extreme position that ALL children are to be loved, protected, and cared for. We also take the radical position that we should love our enemies. Wear your badge proudly pro-lifers.

  • Peter Brown

    “So, after they denied God three times, the cock crowed; what next?”

    I’m praying for the same thing that came next for St. Peter. He went out (perhaps the Dems could go out in November?), wept bitterly, and repented.

    ObDisclaimer: I am *not* claiming that the GOP has any shortage of things they need to repent of. Neither am I positing some sort of moral equivalence between the evils espoused by the two parties (except in the cases where both parties are in fact promoting the *same* evil–torture, for example).

  • Brian English

    “I’ve heard Nancy Pelosi describe her own position in precisely the same words.”

    I am assuming you are speaking about a Nancy Pelosi other than the one who used to be Speaker of the House.

    “whose position on abortion was the same as Obama’s (“personally against, but unwilling to impose my views on others through force of law”).”

    When have you ever read or heard that Obama is personally opposed to abortion? He actually believes abortion should be legal up until the moment of birth, and as a state legislator vigorously opposed a law that would have required the providing of medical care to children who survived abortions. And he doesn’t believe in using the force of law to impose his views on others? Apparently you haven’t heard about something called the HHS Mandate.

    “I’ve also read enough Catholic doctrine and teaching to know that one is “allowed” to take many factors into consideration in supporting a candidate and casting a vote.”

    Not all issues have equal weight. You are only permitted to vote for a candidate who supports an intrinsic evil like abortion or euthanasia if (1) you don’t vote for the candidate specifically because of his or her support of that intrinsic evil; and (2) you have proportionate reasons for supporting the politician. What is a proportionate reason? With regard to abortion, Archbishop Chaput has described it as “a reason we could, with an honest heart, expect the unborn victims of abortion to accept when we meet them and need to explain our actions — as we someday will.” Page 230 of Render Unto Caesar.

  • Amatorem Veritatis

    @ Larry Weisenthal 8:10 PM
    You may have read what you characterize as “enough Catholic doctrine”, but you obviously fail to understand what you claim to have read. And you are disingenuous in claiming there is no great difference in the positions of Obama and Romney on abortion. Obama is the most radical “pro-abortion” politician in recent history, having voted twice against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act in Illinois (2001 & 2003), and he also opposed the Partial Birth Abortion Bill that passed congress and the SCOTUS. In 2007, Obama told the Planned Parenthood Action Fund that the Freedom of Choice Act would be the first piece of legislation that he would sign as president. The act would not only codify Roe v. Wade, but wipe out all current federal, state and local restrictions on abortion that pass muster under Roe, including the Hyde Amendment prohibiting federal funding of abortion. Romney’s position, while contrary to Church teaching, is hardly comparable to Obama’s barbaric attachment to, and promotion of infanticide. And your attempt at rationalization by using the example of Blessed JPII giving the Eucharist to Mayor Rutelli demonstrates confusion at best or willful ignorance at worst of Catholic doctrine. Without going into the complexities of Canon law, and questions of pastoral responsibility, suffice it to say that the Pope does not make judgments regarding an individuals state of grace regarding their ability to receive the Eucharist (that is up to the individual in actuality, or in extreme public cases of unrepentant disobedience, their Pastor), and to imply that offering the Eucharist to a politician is equivalent to voting for the candidate and by association endorsing his actions, is nonsense on stilts. You clearly misunderstand the meaning, purpose and reality of the Eucharist. However, your final statement was the “tell” in how you evidently value your vote. Perhaps continued subsidies to the solar energy industry or the UAW pension fund are more important issues for you than a million innocent victims of progressive social engineering? Not for me. In case you missed it during your extensive reading of Catholic doctrine, you might peruse The Five Non-Negotiables for Voters. Here is one of many excellent expositions on how Catholics should prudentially approach their responsibility to vote. http://www.politicalresponsibility.com/voterguide.htm

  • TeaPot562

    Will Rogers once commented, “No, I am not a member of an organized political party. I am a Democrat.”
    Watching L.A. Mayor Villarigosa trying to obtain a 2/3 vote of the delegates in favor of reinserting “God” and Jerusalem as capital of Israel reminded me of that. Typical parliamentary procedure would call for a roll call when the voice vote leaves the issue undecided; but doing that would have consumed a half-hour or more and put major delays into their schedule.
    Interesting but sad. TeaPot562

  • Patricia

    To Teapot 562:

    Teapot I don’t think it had much at all to do with the time. It was obvious that at best it was a tie, worst case, a no. Yes, a roll call would have been the democratic way to do it, but when is that party ever concerned about being “democratic?” We have Obama Care to prove that point.

    They are the party that always knows better than “we the people”, what is best for us and what we need, be it God or a Big Gulp. Lastly, Obama had it taken out, and after it didn’t poll well, wanted it back in; enough said.

  • c matt

    No it was not a 50/50 splirt it was more 65/50.

    Makes sense, the Dems usually inflate their votes by about 15%. Must have been all those dead voters.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X