Both MSNBC’s David Shuster and CNN’s Rick Sanchez pulled their scoop straight from Media Matters’ blog, and focused on Newt Gingrich’s Twitter comments criticizing President Obama’s upcoming commencement address at the University of Notre Dame, instead of the controversy over the speech itself. Shuster targeted the former Speaker of the House during the “Hypocrisy Watch” segment on Tuesday’s 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue program, saying that Gingrich was “already telling Notre Dame what to do,” even though he wasn’t Catholic yet and had gone through two divorces.
Almost a day later on Wednesday’s Newsroom program on CNN, Sanchez devoted a whole segment to Gingrich’s Tweet, and also brought up the divorce issue: “Newt Gingrich couldn’t resist taking a shot at President Obama. He seems to infer that the president shouldn’t talk to a Catholic university because of quote, ‘values.’ Should Newt Gingrich, thrice married, go there? Really?”
Jamison Foster, Media Matters’ executive vice president and a former research director for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, pointed out Gingrich’s Tweet on Media Matters’ County Fair blog early on Tuesday afternoon, and recounted the former Speaker’s marriage issues:
Gingrich has only been divorced twice so far. There was Jackie, his former high school math teacher, whom he divorced as she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery, and Marianne, whom he married shortly after divorcing Jackie, and with whom he was still married when he began his relationship with Callista -- an affair that occurred around the time he was promising to never give another speech as Speaker of the House without mentioning the Lewinsky scandal. He and Callista are still married.
Just over six hours later, Shuster used almost identical language during his “Hypocrisy Watch” segment:
SHUSTER: Here’s the Gingrich Twitter. Quote, ‘It is sad to see Notre Dame invite President Obama to give the commencement address since his policies are so anti-Catholic values.’ Anti-Catholic values? Well, that’s interesting, because Newt Gingrich has been divorced twice. There was Jackie, his former high school math teacher. Gingrich divorced her as she was in a hospital recovering from surgery. Then there was Marianne. Gingrich married her soon after divorcing Jackie. Years later, while still married to Marianne, Gingrich had an affair with a third woman named Callista. Gingrich divorced Marianne and is now married to Callista, wife number three.
Foster also updated his post, citing how Gingrich was converting to Catholicism. His response: “So he isn’t even a Catholic yet, and he’s already lecturing Notre Dame about how best to uphold Catholic values. Nice.” Shuster echoed Foster’s sentiment in the conclusion of his segment: “We’ve learned today that Gingrich is converting to Catholicism in the weeks ahead. Amazing. He isn’t even Catholic yet and he’s already telling Notre Dame what to do. Mr. Former Speaker, given the way you’ve led your life, when you lecture anybody about upholding Catholic values, that’s hypocrisy, and it’s wrong.”
Sanchez, who had the Catholic League’s Bill Donahue on during his segment about the Gingrich Tweet, used the same line as Shuster in one of his questions, as he rolled his eyes in contempt: “Is Newt Gingrich, Bill, the guy who should be telling the Catholic Church who is and is not allowed to speak to them?” He also raised the issue of Gingrich’s marriages in his promo for the segment: “Newt Gingrich couldn’t resist taking a shot at President Obama. He seems to infer that the president shouldn’t talk to a Catholic university because of quote, ‘values.’ Should Newt Gingrich, thrice married, go there? Really?”
This is the second time this month that Sanchez has turned to Media Matters. On March 4, the CNN anchor had Eric Burns, the organization’s president, on to “fact check” Representative Mike Pence. On the other hand, Sanchez at least read the statement from the office of Notre Dame’s president, which referenced the “life issues” of abortion and embryonic stem cell research as the main reasons why President Obama was such a controversial pick to be a commencement speaker. Shuster didn’t even raise these issues.
The full transcript of Sanchez’s segment with Bill Donohue, which began 54 minutes into the 3 pm Eastern hour of Wednesday’s Newsroom program:
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I’m Rick Sanchez. Newt Gingrich is Twittering. Yep, this thing that we started right here on this little show is really catching on. But you got to be careful what you Tweet, lest you be questioned not so sweet -- couldn’t resist it -- as is the case when the former Speaker of the House suggests the standing president of the United States shouldn’t be invited to speak to Catholics. Let me read this one to you -- it’s a Tweet. ‘It is sad to see Notre Dame invite President Obama to give the commencement address, since his policies are so anti-Catholic values,’ says Newt Gingrich.
Joining us now is Bill Donahue of the Catholic League, one of my favorite guests of all time. Let me just go straight out with this --
BILL DONAHUE, CATHOLIC LEAGUE: Thank you.
SANCHEZ: Is Newt Gingrich, Bill, the guy who should be telling the Catholic Church who is and is not allowed to speak to them?
DONAHUE: No, I think it begins with Catholics. He’s not a Catholic yet. I understand he’s becoming a Catholic in a couple weeks --
SANCHEZ: Yes, he is.
DONAHUE: And I think that not only the Catholic community should look at this, but particularly the people at Notre Dame. It’s their school. It’s the board of trustees -- it’s the faculty, the students, the administrators, the alumni. That’s why the Catholic League has not put out any official statement on this. But I do think it’s tragic. I’ll tell you what -- my phones have been ringing off the hook since last Saturday. I think this broke maybe on Friday, and people have been e-mailing the Catholic League and contacting us through our website. This is the most polarizing thing I’ve seen in the Catholic community in some time.
SANCHEZ: You know, it’s interesting. By the way, let me just read you real quick -- to be fair to the university, here’s what they say. They say, ‘The invitation to President Obama to be our commencement speaker should not be taken as a condoning or endorsing of his positions on specific issues regarding the protection of human life, including abortion [and] embryonic stem cell research.’ You know, that’s the point with all of this. As a Catholic, both you and I belong to a church that's always been very inviting. Wouldn’t -- wouldn't this be like saying you and I as Christians should not be allowed to speak to a Jewish organization?
DONAHUE: I think there's a couple differences here, Rick, and that is this -- number one, in 2004, the bishops put out a statement, ‘Catholics in Public Life,’ which said that you should not give an honorary position or platform to somebody whose views are that contrary to Catholic teachings. Number two, if they invited him onto -- into the law school, for example, to be involved in a symposium, I think that’s entirely a different matter altogether. The problem -- the problem gets kind of sticky when you start giving people awards. That’s what -- that’s what has really raised the hackles of a lot of Catholics.
SANCHEZ: Well, and you know what? For Newt Gingrich -- look, let me just ask straight out. Is this a hit -- is this a political hit by Newt Gingrich? Would Newt Gingrich have said this if it hadn’t been the president speaking -- if it had been anybody else? Is he on the record in the past saying -- criticizing who Notre Dame invites?
DONAHUE: I don’t know, but I can tell you this. I mean, any active Republican or Democrat -- and Newt certainly is -- is always going to be driven by politics. But look, you’ve got a situation here. You get the local ordinary, or the local bishop there in Fort Worth [sic] who governs the South Bend, John D’Arcy, who says he’s not going to go through the commencement exercises. You have Archbishop Chaput, a very outspoken and bright guy from Denver who’s saying, you know, sign the petitions --SANCHEZ: Yeah, and that’s an ecumenical deal. I mean, these guys are in the Church and they have a right to have opinions on this. The question is when a politician involves himself on this, and that’s why I wanted to have you on. Bill, we’re out of time. We’ll get you back -- always will.
DONAHUE: Thank you so much.
SANCHEZ: Enjoy having you every time. Thanks so much.
—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.




















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
If I worked my tail off to
March 25, 2009 - 18:21 ET by mostlymoderateIf I worked my tail off to get into Notre Dame, my parents spent their fortune sending me there and I was about to graduate, I would find it a slap-in-the-face to have Barack Hussein Obama speak at my commencement. This man not only promotes killing babies through abortion, he also is a media-grabbing whore that has no reason to be at Notre Dame other than to promote is perverted ideas of socialism.
Whoever gave the green-light to have Obama speak at the commencement is totally disregarding everyone that can see through Obama's phony image.
Would U.C. Berkeley let George Bush speak at their college without protest? I highly doubt that.
Divorce doesn't equal killing babies
March 25, 2009 - 18:19 ET by RpeggioDivorce doesn't equal being pro late-term abortions and Obama actually opposing a law to require abortion doctors to try to save the life of a baby that somehow survives the abortion attempt! I'm pro adoption myself, how about that Obama, nicer to let a baby live and be adopted by a loving parent don't cha think?
Anybody else detecting a
March 25, 2009 - 18:21 ET by SickofLibsAnybody else detecting a trend here at NB in the last few days?
"Shystertwit angling to be the next Olbermann."
SoL...Yeah...I've
March 25, 2009 - 18:32 ET by bigtimerSoL...
Yeah...I've noticed....I'm just sick of seeing his face, I'm more worried about China/Iran/NK/Russia/Chavez etc...our loss of using our natural resources, the borders and our military...among other things like the economy with the O crew leading the way to our downfall/destruction.
I'm just disgusted....I could give as rats rear less about Shuster...just in one of those moods.
Oh yeah....and the 2nd Amendment and more leftist Judges being crammed through...let alone the power Holder, Napalitano and the EPA and such have.
Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart
I'm with you; this is such a
March 25, 2009 - 19:44 ET by MANstreammediaI'm with you; this is such a minor issue in the grand scheme of things. I'm getting sick of this administration's "wag the dog" circus distracting us from the horrible mistakes they are ramming through as fast as possible. How does one push through the largest spending bill evah though OH NOES DEPRESSIONz!!!, only to say that it was never that bad in the first place. If these guys aren't making a huge smoke screen, each of them needs a mental evaluation to rule out psychiatric illness.
Well, they could probably use a mental eval or two
March 25, 2009 - 20:43 ET by thebutlerdiditin the WH, but unfortunately this is all a huge smoke screen. I think most people on the right, or middle are having a hard time accepting that anyone could be bad enough to actually purposefully tear down our system of government, just to advance the agendas they want, but it is what it is. Once this public/private sector deal fails, and it will, then they can come in, say, we tried, we tried! And the desperate rats in the US will say, save me, save me! And then they will be able to enact their plans to nationalize the banks, etc. Never let a crisis go to waste, remember?
All a Democrat needs is the upper-story window of public attention and the chamber pot of rhetoric. How else to explain the rise of Joe Biden? P.J. O' Rourke
~There you are my evasive Georgia fireball
March 25, 2009 - 20:46 ET by choselife3xThat high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
tbdi
March 26, 2009 - 00:09 ET by well99Actually anyone who studied world history understands the process. The method to get control has been happening for centuries. Chavez is probably jealous of Obama's method.
I hope not SoL
March 25, 2009 - 18:33 ET by HeavyChevyOne is bad enough.
Yeah, and Rick Sanchez has
March 25, 2009 - 18:56 ET by d1carterYeah, and Rick Sanchez has his beady little eyes on Olby too.
I'm sorry, I can't help
March 25, 2009 - 22:39 ET by CaligulaI'm sorry, I can't help it. I have only seen Mr. Sanchez maybe half a dozen times, but I have always gotten the same visceral response from my gut... he needs to just get a beatdown. I cannot, for the life of me, find any reason why he would be under the assumption that he is important in any way. But to listen to him, it is just irritating as hell. Self-important, bloviating ass is what he is.
Shyster should plaster his
March 25, 2009 - 19:39 ET by kgShyster should plaster his own photo on the hypocrite watch segment.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
He seems to infer that the
March 25, 2009 - 19:10 ET by motherbeltHe seems to infer that the president shouldn’t talk to a Catholic university because of quote, ‘values.’ -Rick Sanchez
First of all, Rick, it should be he seems to imply, not infer.
And there are certainly plenty of non-Catholics in Washington who are constantly telling the Pope what he should do....so the fact that he is not a Catholic yet is not a valid argument . An opinion is an opinion. If you and David were restricted from voicing an opinion on any number of things that don't actually involve or affect you, you would be off the air, as would most of your buddies in the MSM.
I didn't think it was physically possible, but this both sucks and blows. -Bart Simpson
David Shuster Was On My Twitter List
March 25, 2009 - 19:05 ET by HoosierEmI made a real smart a** comment to him about his "hypocrisy watch" and he stopped following me......can you believe that?
My son's girlfriend goes to Notre Dame and he has a brazilian (ha ha) friends who go there as well (he's stuck at IU because his parents didn't love him enough to pay for Notre Dame) and most have already said they will not attend graduation if BHO speaks.
There's also a push to get donors to stop sending money to Notre Dame. It's not smart to mess with the alumni at that university.
This has nothing to do with the subject, but...
March 25, 2009 - 19:42 ET by SlyrrI should probably wait for another 'tea party' related post to make this comment, but I'm just too curious for feedback. So what do you think of THIS idea...? (warning: it's LONG)
An effective way to focus the 'tea party' protests - or howling at the moon?
The tea parties being hosted across the country in various locations are a good thing. They are being done because of Obama and his administration's policies of reckless taxing and spending while driving America towards communist socialism. It shows that many people are angry over Obama's wrong-headed policies of 'spreading the wealth' into the hands of illegal aliens and giving more rights to Islamic terrorists than to American citizens.
The thing is, it's not enough. As we have seen already, despite the fact that literally thousands of poeple are attending these tea parties, the media is totally ignoring them. Nearly every newspaper, magazine and TV network is turning a blind eye and a deaf ear to the growing anger and unrest against this communist president and his cabal of anti-white religious bigots, 'unrepentant' terrorists, crooks, tax cheats and swindlers.
So I humbly suggets it's time to take the Tea Party to the next level. Here's my idea: Accept private donations to a fund in order to buy enough tea to fill a dump truck. And then: stage a march in Washington D.C. in which the culminating event is that the entire load of tea is dumped into the reflecting pool in front of the Lincoln Memorial.
The reasons this would be more effective are:
1) The smaller parties are too easy for the media to ignore. The media has already proved it can blow up a tiny anti-war protest into a national frenzy, while burying larger protests held for social causes they disagree with. They're spin doctors, and they spin the smaller tea parties right off the front page.
2) The tea used in the smaller parties doesn't 'inconvenience' anyone in Washington. Until something is done that gets 'in the way' of those bloated gas-bags in Congress and befouls (in their minds) their comfortable little gated community, they won't listen, or care, or act. But filling the entire reflecting pool would force them to pay time, and money, and attention to the rage and anger of the protest.
3) The tea used in smaller parties didn't 'affect' the bodies of water into which they were thrown. But a dump truck of tea poured into the reflecting pool in Washington will turn the whole thing brown and take them days to clean up. If we're lucky, they'll do their normal, incompetent job of 'debating' how to clean it and it will be left rotting in the reflecting pool for weeks until it starts to smell bad - just like Congress itself, and the White House - rancid and putrid and corrupt.
It may not take all that much to get enough tea to fill an industrial-sized dump truck. Nearly half the country did NOT vote for Obama. If everyone in the country (who isn't in the media) donated a couple of tea bags, we'd soon have enough for at least a dozen cubic yards. Then it would just be a matter of renting a dump truck, driving it up to the reflecting pool and making HISTORY.
Potential Problems:
I'm sure Obama, his ACORN thugs, the Democrat Congress and Democrat House of Representatives would do everything in thier power to stop such a thing from happening - because it would be effective. Plus, doing this would involve some sacrifice beyond just the cost and price of the tea, and the cost of renting the dump truck.
1) It's probably a misdemeanor at least. Dumping a whole load of tea into the reflecting pool would 'damage' it. They'd need to hire crews to filter out the tea, change the water and probably fix any pumps and equipment which are clogged as a result of the tea insertion. Given Obama's thug-like demeanor and the tyrannical hatred of the Democrats in general, the person who actually drove the truck and dumped the tea would most likely be arrested - along with anyone who dared to host the event. They'd probably also arrest and imprison anyone who attended the protest to boot.
2) Media retaliation: The media are slaves to Obama. Anyone who makes Obama look bad will be branded an enemy of the state and treated accordingly. Chris 'I've-got-thrills-in-my-pants' Matthews of MSNBC declared to the world that it was 'his job' to make Obama look good - making him a confessed hireling of his socialist president. Almost every TV network, entertainment magazine, newspaper and news magazine are of the same mind-set. The reflecting pool Tea Party would be an event that they could not ignore. So they would do their usual 'Plan B' and attempt to destroy the lives of the ones who organized it. Using their typical methods of propaganda, intimidation and threats, they would sully the reputations and careers of anyone involved in the Tea Party to avenge the 'attack' against their god, Barack Obama. They would gin up angry mobs to attack the protest, perhaps violently, and hound participants for months after the event. The media would want revenge against the Tea Party - they would want blood. And they would not rest until they had several bodies to lay credit to.
3) Government opression: Obama has already proved through ACORN that he has no qualms about using intimidation, mob tactics, bullying and threats to protect himself and attack his enemies. He would also (perhaps not publically but surely behind the scenes) abuse the power of his office and use government forces to harass, bully and hound such a protest. He might take names, and use punitive taxation on the protestors, just as he did against AIG. He would also probably revoke drivers licenses, and use activist judges to bring trumped-up charges, and otherwise 'punish' those who dared to besmirch his god-like presidency. He has the media, Congress and the House on his side. He is a small-minded man. A bully at heart, cold-hearted, cruel and sadistic. He is a tyrant - and if the Tea Party is pulled off, he would use all the powers of a tyrant to squash the offenders.
Would it be worth it? I think so. Obama, Congress, the House of Representatives, the Judiciary, they have all forsaken their stewardships. They are recklessly engaged in spending programs that have already bankrupted the country and put us on the path to a depression, hyper-inflation, massive unemployment, energy shortages, food shortages and future terrorist attacks. And they're smiling about it, throwing lavish parties in Washington and rolling in the money they've stolen from honest taxpayers. In the case of Obama, he's chucking and laughing about the havoc he has created while appearing on "60 Minutes", glorying in the misery and destruction he has wrought.
It's going to take a sharp whack on their metaphorical noses with a yardstick to get their attention. Only then, once their eyes are crying in pain and thier faces are red and stinging from the blow, will they wake up and realize that they are a hair's breadth away from having angry mobs storming outside their OWN offices with pitchforks, torches and lynch ropes. The Reflecting Pool Tea Party would be a massive first step in the right direction....
Have you ever seen the Refecting pool?
March 25, 2009 - 20:46 ET by general companyIt is pretty brown already, plus you probably would need a special permit to get a truck in the mall area anyway.
I dont know what the best way of attracting attention is, but it seems to me if we had one as big as Obama's inauguration that would be difficult to ignore. But what I am going to do is to inform as many folks as I can, friends neighbors and folks I meet everyday. My biggest problem is I am typically preaching to the choir here. Just about everyone around here thinks Obama is nuts. Well there are a few at work, but even most of them have quit defending him.
Organize locally, we must convince our Reps of both parties that we are not on board with Obama's socialist plans. It is them who can stop this nonesense, it is up to us to make them heed.
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
149,283
March 25, 2009 - 21:50 ET by kilrodThe petition against o-Dumb-uh-uh being the commencement speaker at Notre Dame is up to 149,283. If they can keep him from being the speaker it will be a huge defeat for o-Dumb-uh-uh and the sub-slime-media. A Pro-Life rally and a Tea Party at Notre Dame on graduation day would be a huge victory for conservatives and the sub-slime-media would have to acknowledge it.
To sign petition go to www.notredamescandal... href="/SignthePetitiontoFrJenkins/tabid/454/Default.aspx">here.
kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
~Done
March 26, 2009 - 10:09 ET by choselife3xThanks kilrod.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
Good to Hear cl3x
March 27, 2009 - 07:37 ET by kilrodGlad to hear you took action cl3x, May the Lord Bless You, Your Kids and Your Man.!!~~!!
kilrod
Remember, only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American Soldier
The still deny their
March 25, 2009 - 20:06 ET by GeronLThe still deny their bias?
who could believe they are anything other than leftwing propaganda?
Sanchez started Twitter?
March 25, 2009 - 21:15 ET by Texndoc"Yep, this thing that we started right here on this little show is really catching on."
+++++++++++++++++
I had NO IDEA Rick Sanchez and his show "started" Twitter, especially with his audience of 3 or 4.
Keep the posts on Shuster and Sanchez coming though. They're always an afterthought for me since they actually rate so low on ratings they don't make any ratings lists. Was reading Shuster's Twitter page one early a.m. - felt sympathy for him because it relys heavily on "Please Please PLEASE watch my show!" If I remember correctly an idea to maybe give out balloons or t-shirts was floated by Shuster (IF you watch!)
And I invented the hammer...
March 25, 2009 - 22:44 ET by CaligulaAnd I invented the hammer...
Do you know who David Shuster reminds me of . . . .
March 25, 2009 - 21:18 ET by Gat New YorkSeparated at birth with David Shuster:
http://figuremasterles.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/joke004.jpg.w300h440.jpg
Good comparison
March 25, 2009 - 21:26 ET by TexndocI'm thinking he was fired from Fox News because he was told viewers grew tired of staring at his mouth when he talked. And that whiney nasally voice. No wonder he grew so hateful.
Gat
March 26, 2009 - 19:56 ET by well99Looks more like Jon Steward.Here is a picture of Davey.Fourth one to the right.
http://www.fugly.com/pictures/11635/horses-ass.html
Obviously these nitwits at
March 25, 2009 - 21:50 ET by EugeniaObviously these nitwits at CNN and MSNBC don't understand the difference between conversion of heart and thought and hypocrisy. Once you've seen the light, you want to share it and should. Obama still believes it's okay to kill babies even AFTER they're delivered. If he had once believed it was okay but no longer, that would be conversion.
Honestly, that these idiots have a say is amazing.
EUGENIA...
March 25, 2009 - 23:25 ET by danybhoyCNN & MSNBC don't care about honest conversation. They have not showed that they have fir many years, & are they have no shame whatsoever, they have no concept of hypocrisy.
As for abortion, I'll tie the issue of showing dead soldiers to that. There are many in the MSM who are hellbent on showing the coffins of American soldiers with flags on the when they come to US soil, but would never think about showing an abortion on TV. Kind of like people who like hogdogs, but never want to see how they are made?
As for Shuster & Sanchez, they really are near the bottom of the on air talent food chain in cablenews. Good God, there must be a thousand people working in local TVnews in cities like Sioux Falls, Omaha, Dayton, or Chattanooga who are trying to advance in their careers wondering how in the hell did these 2 @$$clowns got to where they are.
"The Fairness Doctrine = Jim Crow laws for Conservatives". Jim Quinn from "Quinn & Rose"
Another way of looking at this ...same results...
March 25, 2009 - 22:04 ET by Southern voterUnder the Golden Do m e: A Ti m e to Choose
March 25, 2009
Al Kresta
Nothing would better settle the question about Notre Da m e’s value as a Catholic witness to the Kingdo m of God than for its graduating students to greet this year’s co m m ence m ent speaker, President Oba m a , with a vivid sign of Christian faith, hope, love, and courage. During his address, each graduate should cover his or her face with a two foot by two foot photo of either an aborted child or a beautiful Leonard Nilsson photo of an in utero hu m an.
The President prizes learning and a lesson of this sort should delight hi m . It would place hi m in a new “pay grade.” Think of it: an auditoriu m of courageous and robust young m en and wo m en, willing to set the m selves apart fro m the apathy of bourgeois society in order to confront the culture of A m erican violence, all gathered under the patronage of a Wo m an and out of respect for the office of the Presidency. Isn’t this the type of co m ing generation President Oba m a hopes to cultivate?
For these Notre Da m e students, the ti m e to choose between Christ and Caesar has co m e. Even if the m o m ent has eluded Notre Da m e’s president, Fr. John Jenkins, Bishop D’Arcy, in whose diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend, the University of Notre Da m e resides, has already decided that this is a ti m e for choice and a ti m e for action. For the first ti m e in 25 years, he will not attend the graduation. “I wish no disrespect to our president. I have always revered the Office of the Presidency. But a bishop m ust teach the Catholic Faith ‘in season and out of season’ and he teaches by not only by his words – but by his actions.”
While this is a painful decision for the Bishop, it is not unclear. I have in m ind also the state m ent of the U.S. Catholic Bishops in 2004. “The Catholic Co m m unity and Catholic Institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of our funda m ental m oral principles. They should not be given awards, honors, or platfor m s which would suggest support for their actions. Indeed the m easure of any Catholic institutions is not only what it stands for, but also what it will not stand for.”
President Oba m a during his ca m paign m ade it clear that he supported the Freedo m of Choice Act, which, had it been passed, would have swept away all state restrictions on abortion. As Bishop D’Arcy succinctly described in referring to the President’s decision to approve Federal funding for e m bryonic ste m cell research which destroys hu m an e m bryos: “It was just a few weeks ago that President Oba m a has recently reaffir m ed and has now placed in public policy, his long-stated unwillingness to hold hu m an life as sacred. While clai m ing to separate politics fro m science, he has in fact separated science fro m ethics and has brought the A m erican govern m ent, for the first ti m e in history, into supporting direct destruction of innocent hu m an life.”
The New Testa m ent distinguishes between two different types of ti m e, “chronos” and “kairos”. “Chronos” refers to ti m e as duration. Heaven knows, these graduating students have put in their ti m e at Notre Da m e. Their chronos is co m ing to an end. “Kairos”, however, refers to ti m e as the pregnant m o m ent, the ti m e of crisis and decision, the instant when ti m e see m s to stand still and one realizes that this particular choice will deter m ine his or her future direction and character.
Notre Da m e’s graduating class of 2009 can settle for a routine college co m m ence m ent cere m ony sprinkled with a little glitz of A m erican civil religion or they can turn the m o m ent into an international testi m ony to the dignity of the hu m an person. They can proclai m “The Gospel of Life” and broadcast to the watching world that when it co m es to protecting the weak and vulnerable, God doesn’t grade on the curve. Presidents and janitors, football players and grad assistants, priests and prostitutes are all judged by the sa m e unwavering standard: “I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of m ine, you did for m e.”
We encourage you to speak out on this issue by visiting www.notredamescandal.com and signing the petition put together by the Cardinal New m an Society. Also, Patrick Reilly, Founder and President of the Society will join Al on “Kresta in the Afternoon” today, March 25, at 4:00 p. m . Eastern Ti m e.
Al Kresta is a broadcaster, journalist and author who is, first of all, a m issionary. He is the author of Mo m ents of Grace: Inspiring Stories Fro m Well-Known Catholics, Why Are Catholics So Concerned about Sin?: More Answers to Puzzling Questions about the Catholic Church, a follow-up to the best-seller Why Do Catholics Genuflect? And Answers to Other Puzzling Questions About the Catholic Faith, as well as a contributor to Shaken by Scandals: Catholics Speak Out About Priests' Sexual Abuse, Loving Your Neighbor, and the original Surprised by Truth. Kresta in the Afternoon is broadcast on over 120 stations nationwide including the EWTN Global Catholic Radio Network and Sirius Satellite Radio. It is produced by Ave Maria Radio every weekday afternoon fro m 3-6 p. m . Eastern Ti m e. Kresta in the Afternoon takes a closer, Catholic look at current events, issues and ideas. It is conversation with consequence
Why would Mr. Lispy cite Media Matters?
March 26, 2009 - 08:10 ET by ArminiusAfter all, its CEO and president, David Brock, is an admitted liar. Even his fellow leftists don't believe Brock.
"When incurable liberals like Todd Gitlin and Eric Alterman begin using the name Whittaker Chambers as a term of approbation, we are entitled to say that there has been what the Germans call a Tendenzwende, or shift in the zeitgeist. The odd thing is that they have both chosen to compare Chambers’s Witness, a serious and dramatic memoir by any standards, to a flimsy and self-worshiping book titled Blinded by the Right, by David Brock. Meyer Schapiro, one of the moral heroes of the democratic left, once said that Whittaker Chambers was incapable of telling a lie. That might well be phrasing it too strongly, but I have now been provoked by curiosity into reading Brock, and I would say without any hesitation that he is incapable of recognizing the truth, let alone of telling it." - Christopher Hitchens
“I think the problem is that once David Brock admits he knowingly wrote lies, it’s hard to figure out when to believe him, essentially….” - Jill Abramson
“I do not offer Brock absolution. The man who made a best seller out of a defamatory rant now wants to make a best seller out of repentance. What’s his next gig, ‘My Life as an Opportunist’? If his old allies accuse him of lying about lying, he deserves that. He did too much damage.” - Ellen Goodman
Catholic community
March 26, 2009 - 09:48 ET by countrycuzcountrycuz - Most Americans today are atheists or, like our President, religious opportunists who could care less were they go to church as long as it helps them get ahead. He should be allowed to speak but there is no way that he deserves any honorary degree.