Final Post.

It's becoming ever more apparent to me that this particular blog has outlived it's usefulness. It has become quite a burden for me to come up with something even remotely interesting to say. I scour the Internet daily for something to pontificate upon but, as one can see, I haven't been very successful of late.

I think, perhaps, the problem is one of too much "diversity".....or, rather, lack of focus, if you prefer. I have forty nine labels listed on the lower right side of this page; I've been jumping from pillar to post, writing on anything that suits my fancy. At first, this method seemed to work - I was posting frequently. I could write on any subject I saw fit.

Over time, however, the flaws in this way of blogging have become ever more obvious. Without any particular subject area or limits on what I could write about, it was becoming harder for me to make a decision on where I should go. The number of posts for this year - not to mention the content- is unimpressive.

So, I will "mothball" this blog. I will, at some point, start up a new blog - one with a more organized theme. That may be today or tomorrow or next week. At this stage, the theme of this new blog hasn't come to me yet. It has to be something I can become enthused about. If I'm not, then neither will the readers.

My New Portrait.

This past Sunday, my four year old son, J.P. wished to give me a Father's Day gift ...... he would draw a portrait of me, my wife and himself.

For those who do not recognize us, I am wearing green, J.P. is wearing blue. It should be obvious to everyone which is Cathy.

No More “General Betray Us”.

When I first learned of Obama's dismissal of General Stanley McChrystal and his replacing him with General David Petraeus, I immediately thought of the 2007 Moveon.org ad which referred to the General as "General Betrayus".

I wanted to refresh my memory - I wanted to be certain of the facts before putting my thoughts down on (virtual) paper, so to speak. Step one: Google the phrase "General Betrayus". Unfortunately, any link to the original moveonorg ad proved to be a dead end; it's as if the advertisement criticizing the General was merely a figment our collective imagination.

I wasn't the first to notice this. The website Weasle Zippers documents evidence that references to the ad has been removed from Moveon.org after Petraeus was chosen as Obama's man in Afghanistan.

Fortunately for us, the ad has been preserved in other locations.

Yesterday, the Left ridiculed General Petraeus, but now, the question is being put forth "Is the Petraeus Decision the Most Widely Praised Thing President Obama Has Ever Done?"

Obama's decision is now being hailed as "a masterstroke", "a stroke of brilliance, an unassailable move, politically and strategically". One writer, Victor Davis Hanson, calls the move "workmanlike and wise in its emphasis on continuity of strategy".

Hanson also notes;

"It is one of ironies of our present warped climate that Petraeus will face far less criticism from the media and politicians than during 2007–8 (there will be no more “General Betray Us” ads or “suspension of disbelief” ridicule), because his success this time will reflect well on Obama rather than George Bush."

While Obama's toadies are calling his latest decision a surprisingly brilliant move, I, on the other hand, view this choice as the obvious one for Obama. Petraeus is, most probably, the only other General our President has heard of.

Dad's Boogie Woogie Dance Party.

On Father's Day, after Mass, my four year old son, J.P., told me that we needed to go to sproutonline.com to do the Dad's Boogie Woogie.
The result of that visit can be found here.

Although we could watch the video right away, we were not able to share it immediately. The website's software wouldn't allow me to post a link until Monday....and I was working a double shift then and didn't have time.

At any rate, the video is finally posted for everyone's enjoyment.

Mystery Solved?

In Tuesday's post, [The Mystery Saint] I related the story of a recent addition to our parish's garden area. I referred to the statue, pictured at left, as the "Mystery Saint" as there was (is) a bit of confusion as to the identity of the saint the statue represents.

The statue was originally given to our (late) former pastor, Father Miceli who kept it in the rectory garage. Our new pastor, Father Patrick, decided to bring it outside for all to see. However, no one knew who the saint was supposed to be and an Internet search was initiated to discover the name. According to the most recent church bulletin (page 5 of this pdf):

"After a vast Internet search and several inquires, one company responded: ' By a process of elimination, we have determined that your statue is St. Jerome. Based on our research, there were four doctors of the Western Church. These four doctors were traditionally pictured with a church in their arms. Of the four Patrons of the Western Church, St. Gregory, St. Augustine, St. Ambrose and St. Jerome, St. Jerome is the only one not a Bishop. Because he is sculpted without a miter - the traditional ceremonial headdress of Bishops of the Catholic Church - the mystery statue must be St. Jerome.' "

I have a problem with that assessment, however.

Take a look at the statues of St. Jerome below. (Click on images to enlarge). Our statue does not resemble any of these. In none of these statues of St. Jerome is he holding a Church. If anything, he holds a Bible. (He was responsible for translating the Vulgate into Latin. )


Comparing the known statues of St. Jerome to our mystery statue, I am convinced that ours is not of St. Jerome.

Who is it?

At first, I thought the statue represented St. Stephen. I based that assumption on these images found on this website.




As we see, St. Stephen is holding a Church in his left hand. In his right hand, St. Stephen is holding an incense burner. That fits with the fact that our statue was holding something at one time.

I have, after posting my previous post, come to change my mind about our mystery statue being of St. Stephen. The images above come from the Greek Orthodox tradition. I've since learned that, in the Roman Catholic tradition, St. Stephen is usually portrayed holding, not a church, but stones - he was stoned to death.



If not St. Stephen, who is it?

The best argument I've seen, since blogging this, comes from Mary Ann of Les Femmes - the Truth, who believes the statue is of St. Bernard. Her post and photos are most convincing.



While this may not settle the issue, if I were to bet on this, I would put my money on St. Bernard.

The Mystery Saint.

In our parish, we have Eucharistic Adoration on the first Friday of the month; it lasts from early that morning (6:00 AM, I think) until 6:00 AM Saturday. Because of my work schedule,when I attend, I will normally go after midnight.

That was the case this past "first Friday". I got off work at 11:00 PM, went home, showered and changed clothes and headed for the church just before twelve. My plan was to be there from midnight to 1:00 AM. When I go, I don't usually "sign up" in advance - I can't always be certain when I can arrive. It's just as well that I choose that particular hour; only one person had "signed up" for that hour and had I not arrived when I did, she would have been the only person in the church.

At one o'clock this lady left the church, two other folks arrived and I left a few minutes later. As I stepped outside, I noticed, out of the corner of my eye, a figure lurking in the shadows. I nearly jumped out of my skin....until I discovered that the mysterious figure was a new, life-sized statue - pictured on the left.

The following Sunday, after Mass, a number of us stood outside, admiring our new statue, though we were puzzled as to the identity of the saint that the statue represents. I went back inside the church in search of Deacon Stu. He would know the identity, surely.

It's Saint XXXXX, he told me. (I won't disclose the name, as yet). They had done quite a search on the Internet, and finally learned the name of the saint. Later, a photo of the statue was put in the church bulletin (that's the source of this photo) along with a brief story.

Years ago, the statue was given to our (then) pastor, Father Miceli. It has remained out of sight in the rectory garage, until our new pastor, Father Patrick decided to put it outside for all to see. An Internet investigation was begun to identify the saint. According to the church bulletin, one company responded and attempted to identify the saint by "a process of elimination". It was "determined" that the statue was Saint XXXXX. As I said, it was by "a process of elimination". In other words, someone at the company took a guess.

When I was told that the statue was of this saint, I did my own Internet search to learn more about him. I made an odd discovery, however. There were several images of Saint XXXXX to be found - both as paintings and statuary - but none fit the profile of the statue in the church garden. Of course, no one really knows what the older saints actually looked like, but a tradition has come about where certain saints are given certain characteristics so they will be easily identifiable.

You can always spot a statue of St. Francis of Assisi, for example. We all know how he looks; he's the bearded one, dressed as a monk, who's holding little birds and accompanied by other cute little animals. St. Anthony of Padua is always dressed the same way, though sans beard, and holding the Christ child. This particular statue in question did not fit the imagery traditionally used to represent Saint XXXXX.

Through my own "process of elimination" I've come across several paintings of another saint (who'll I'll call Saint YYYYY, for the time being) who, I believe, fits the imagery of our statue more.

Of course, I don't know that I'm right. I suspect that the company that identified our statue as Saint XXXXX is wrong, but I don't really know. This is the reason for my current post. I'm hoping some of the Catholic bloggers I visit will be able to help me. I'll be providing a link to this post to some of the more knowledgeable bloggers in hopes that either they or their readers can tell me the true identity of the saint this statue was made to represent.

In a few days, I'll write another post explaining who I think the saint is ....along with my evidence. I'd like for you all to leave comments as to who you think the mystery statue represents. If you know for a fact ....that's all the better. But, I'd appreciate educated guesses as well.

One clue; the statue was, at one time, holding something in it's right hand. Obviously, whatever it was is lost. Knowing what was in the hand could be a determining factor.


Update: Mystery Solved?

YouTube removes ‘We Con the World’ video.

As reported by Caroline Glick on her blog , Youtube has removed Latma's parody video, "We Con The World", sighting copyright infringement.
Fortunately, copies were downloaded and the video can be found on other websites.

In solidarity, I'm posting the wejew.com copy.

Is it too late to Invest?

My favorite paragraph of the day comes from Jonah Goldberg's article, Obama's Tough Talk Is a Real Kick.

"Any day now, after thorough interagency review, the Standing Committee for Posterior Selection will have given provisional approval for a working list of asses for POTUS to kick with an OSHA-approved shoe. Alas, final environmental-impact statements are pending. But once that hurdle is cleared, the president will focus like a laser on ass-kicking."

I wish I had invested in those Obama Action Figures.

The Ignorant, Cowardly Bully and the SBA List.

Radio talk-show host, Neal Boortz ( AKA the the ignorant, cowardly bully) has some very odd views on abortion. His views on the subject appear to be stuck in the 1970's. I suspect that is when his current views were formed and he hasn't given any real, open-minded thought on abortion since then. His mind is closed on this ....not even allowing callers to mention abortion; he'll occasionally give us his thoughts on abortion but will not entertain any contrary opinion.

Boortz claims that nearly all the emails he receives concerning abortion are written from men. ( I'm not sure how he can identify the gender of every email username.) That's, evidently, enough evidence for him to declare that the "anti-choicers" are men who want to keep women under their proverbial thumbs. In Boortz' world, all women are "pro-choice" who favor legalized abortion.

I'm not sure how he'd explain The Susan B. Anthony List - an organization made up of self described pro- life feminists. I've never heard him mention the group's founder and president Marjorie Dannenfelser.

How does Boortz explain pro-life candidate,Carly Fiorina's victory in the California Senate Republican primary?

Likewise, how would Boortz explain pro-life candidate Sharron Angle’s victory in the Nevada Senate Republican primary?

In Neal Boortz' limited world view, pro-life feminists do not exist and therefore incapable of winning a political victory. Perhaps if he were to open his mind to the issue and discuss this with his listeners he might learn a thing or two.

One Legged Man ..........

Obama is looking to kick ass over the BP oil leak.

Being the reincarnation of Jimmy Carter, Obama really is like a one legged man in an ass-kicking contest.

Here's a photo of the president after his last competition where he came in first place. He only fell on his face 36 times.


Oh, yeah; thanks Larry for putting this idea in my head :)

The Argument hasn't Changed.

I'm unsure as to why John Podesta and Robert Levy thought it necessary to co-author an opinion piece for today's Washington Post [Marriage equality for all couples]. It's certainly not because the two working together could come up with a new angle on the issue of same-sex "marriage".

The piece consists of pretty much the standard argument that the supporters have been using of late. Namely, that marriage between same sex couples is an issue of equality and simply a continuation of the wrongs righted by the Supreme Court case of Loving vs Virginia in 1967 which put an end to bans on interracial marriage in the United States.

That argument is no different than the one put forth by Richard Cohen in the same paper in December, 2009. Since the argument hasn't changed, obviously, my response would be the same as it was when I criticized Cohen with my post, It's the Biology, Stupid.

"The race-based restrictions on marriage were based on erroneous beliefs concerning the "racial superiority" of Caucasians over "non-whites". The ban on interracial marriages was based on the racist idea that children born of such a marriage would pollute the "white race".
Of course, we all know now that no race is superior or inferior to any other race. The children that come from interracial marriages are equal in every way to children coming from "same race" unions.

There never has been any legitimate reason to prohibit marriage between a man and woman of different races.

The same cannot be said about "marriages" between two men or two women. As much as some would wish it were otherwise, the ultimate biological and evolutionary purpose of sex is to reproduce the species. I know it isn't fashionable to say this, but sex is not about self expression. In this day of contraceptives and abortion-on-demand, people seem to have forgotten this basic biological fact."

I am surprised, however, that the Post published the opinion piece today, June 8. Wouldn't it have been more fitting for the paper to wait 4 days and publish the piece on June 12 ? June 12 is, after all, Loving Day.

Hey, Paul......You Can Kiss Mine, As Well.

There really isn't much point in my writing a post on Paul McCartney's recent insult of George W.Bush ...... other bloggers have beaten me to the punch.
( see Paul McCartney, I.Q.’s and The Obama Mystique and Hey Paul McCartney--Kiss my ass! )

I will, however, post this wonderful photo of Sir Paul.

Elections have Consequences.

From the Washington Post:

"Obama told CNN's Larry King on Thursday that he is 'furious at this entire situation. . . . Somebody didn't think through the consequences of their actions.'"

Is he referring to the dunderheads that voted for him?
They sure as hell didn't "think through the consequences of their actions".

Obama is a half step away from being declared as incompetent as Jimmy Carter.

I suppose I should look on the bright side. At least he's too incompetent to get most of his agenda passed. That would really damage the country.

They're Crawling out of the Woodwork.

Checking the Google Analytics, I learned that my post, Boycotting BP had received an unusually high number of hits Saturday, particularly from Facebook. As a matter a fact, it received significantly more than the number of friends I have on Facebook, so I surmised that a link to my post must have been placed on the Boycott BP Facebook page. I attempted to verify that assumption by checking out the page....but there are so many people posting so many links that it was impossible for me to go through the whole site.

At any rate, going through the Boycott BP Facebook page, I see now the number of fans is approaching a quarter of a million.
Jeez, Louise.
As any of the fans can leave links and comments, I came across a link from a Facebook group calling for the replacement of crude oil with hemp oil. A typical comment on that page reads,

We need to harness the backlash against oil, and the best way to do it, is to push people in favor of legalized hemp farming across the United States and abroad. Remember: 6 times cheaper at the pump with no oil wars, no oil spills and a reverse of the greenhouse effect. There's no downside to hemp enthanol [sic] , unless you're an oil company.

Never mind that we've tried this before using corn to produce ethanol - with disastrous effects on world food prices. If farmers can make more money growing hemp than they can growing food grains the price of wheat, corn, and other cereal grains will go up.

A fan of the Facebook hemp oil page put up a Youtube video which I am posting here. They are really coming out of the woodwork. Watch this video to the end as this space cadet tells of how they are using this oil spill disaster to relocate everyone on the Gulf ...... and put RFID tags on everybody.

I understand now how we ended up with Obama as President.