https://udaan.org/ti215oj.php 
Father Orthoduck is drifting farther and farther away from the Republicans with whom he voted during the late 1980’s and into President George Bush’s second election. The drift began during President Bush’s first term as the debate about illegal immigration heated up. You see, Father Orthoduck was working in an inner city area, and among undocumented immigrants, and could see for himself that many of the accusations that were being made in the debates were simply not true. The basic fact was true. We have people living in the USA who are not here legally. But, after that there were many distortions and fear-mongering. Worse, some of Father Orthoduck’s conservative colleagues were participating in the same distortions without investigating, or even asking people like Father Orthoduck who were working among those here without visa.
And, then began the charges about crime increasing, English-language only, failure to pay taxes, etc. And, then , Father Orthoduck had someone actually tell him that they felt “excluded” because Father Orthoduck was speaking Spanish with another person. Yes, the person who objected was conservative and was not the least bit offended, angry but not offended. And, then, Father Orthoduck was jokingly called by a nickname that is not to be used when referring to Latinos. And, then, Father Orthoduck was stopped by police in a small Alabama town for no traffic offense, but simply to check on his driver’s license, registration, and insurance information. The moment the Alabama policeman heard my English, he quickly said that it would not be necessary to check on registration and insurance. There were more incidents, but, Father Orthoduck could tell en carne propia, that is, in his own flesh, the changes that were taking place in the culture and how xenophobia and, yes, old fashioned racism was making a comeback.
https://www.clawscustomboxes.com/oe8pzh5 But Joe Wilson, a Republican from South Carolina simply helps Father Orthoduck to confirm that he needs to be away from Republicanism for a while. Last night he did what would be considered an incredibly symbolic action by many of us. A white southern congressman, from the state which began the Civil War, interrupted a black president during a televised talk to Congress when the subject of illegal immigration was brought up. Of all the points on which to interrupt the President of the United States, all the venues in which to do it, and of all the people to be the one doing it, this was a confluence of events that confirmed to many of us that what we have is not just simply opposition to a political opponent but something much worse.
In passing, more than one news outlet, but not Fox News, read out loud from the portion of the bill being discussed in the House that specifically prohibited the use of Federal funds to subsidize, in any way, the insurance of those here illegally. They may, of course, buy private insurance. But, there is no government option or subsidy for them. But, that really is not Father Orthoduck’s point. When we get people refusing to let others speak during town hall meetings, and interrupting Congressmen as they try to talk, when we get a southern white Congressman treating a black President with the same disdain that has been the experience of many blacks and Latinos in the USA, this is no longer something of which Father Orthoduck wishes to be a part.
Xanax Prescription Online
Mark Hamilton says
https://oevenezolano.org/2024/08/ijz9l6b
https://sugandhmalhotra.com/2024/08/07/b0vzhmn Wilson's comment at that time was quite inappropriate. Where was the outrage though when Bush was shouted at during his speeches before Congress? (And I'm certainly no Bush supporter). What about Obama's promise to work together and his comments that he wants to work with Republicans yet he rejects the comments of the conservatives. He has turned deaf ears on the American people and it has nothing to do with race. Why am I considered a racist when I have supported conservative black candidates but not black liberal ones? Liberals support the slaughter of 1/3 of American black babies through abortion.
https://transculturalexchange.org/blrcdhsiaha
Deacon Charles Joiner says
Thanx Father. Civility, honesty, and compassion are all important Christian values.
Torn City Cheapest Xanax
Dn Charles Joiner says
https://merangue.com/p0p752j2
https://eloquentgushing.com/vso2k43 Thanx Father. Civility, honesty, and compassion are all important Christian values.
https://inteligencialimite.org/2024/08/07/nkuregqm7
John Morgan says
Fr. I found this to be very well presented and thought out. I work in a small southern town and have seen many of the same things you do, especially with Latinos moving in for the first time in our area. The extent that many white southerners wish to deny race problems astounds me at times.
I really need to get out of this State…
Fortunately, I do not live in Joe Wilson’s district.
Thank You Fr for saying this. I too live in South Carolina and find this behavior disgusting. Unfortunately it has become all to common in poitices these day, especially here in the south.
I too was once republican but I can’t stomach the hatred that is promoted these day under their banner. If it were not for the emotional abortion issue where whould they stand?
Joe Wilson from South Carolina, is just another good old boy where in the morning these married men preach to you that there should be prayer in our schools and in the evening they are on their cell phones setting up a date with their other women on the side, hypocrisy has been bred in. I am not surprised that he felt compel to yell like he was at some Friday night game. He is a hater not a debater like most of his side of the isle.
This is why I have had it with the two-party system. A plague to both their houses, I say!
When I became a U.S. citizen in 1986, I proudly registered as a Republican, since my hero, Ronald Reagan, was president, with a large conservative/libertarian coalition. The “conservatives” turned out to be neoCON-men: xenophobic, militaristic, state-loving phonies. These jokers talk a good game about reducing the size of government, but then turn around and push for a fascist-like national i.d. card, increased military adventures, more paper money that the Federal Reserve keeps pumping out while artificially manipulating interest rates, thus increasing the size of our debt. All of this increases the size of government.
I am a believer in subsidiarity, which makes me favor states rights. That said, I find it a source of embarrassment that the South pushed this perfectly good principle-both times-in order to promote racism.
Your comment about the fascist-like national ID card is interesting because, of course, many in the right-wing of this country have been trying to call President Obama both a socialist and a fascist. Father Orthoduck would say that this is the pot insulting the kettle, but, since the kettle is not guilty of the accusations, it is the use of deliberate prevarications in order to accomplish a political end.
But, Father Orthoduck agrees that they turned out to be con men. While speaking populism, they actually empowered the very rich by their supposed deregulation tactics that were supposed to benefit everyone. Years later, workers rights are in shambles while the top executives benefit regardless of the performance of the company they head.
“I find it a source of embarrassment that the South pushed this perfectly good principle-both times-in order to promote racism.”
Or I should say, it pushed this principle on the principle of their “right” to oppress their darker-skinned citizens.
The Democrats — plural — heckled President Bush during his State of the Union. I’m still waiting to hear a single one apologize for their behavior.
And you failed to mention that the illegal coverage loophole was closed AFTER the Joe Wilson incident. At the time, it did, indeed, cover illegals, and Obama was (as always) lying through his teeth.
Ahh, the Joe Wilson incident just happened on Wednesday. You can go to YouTube and find recordings from some of the healthcare town meetings this summer in which the part of the bill I cited was quoted. If you further doubt, you can look up that section in the bill and find that it has been in there for months.
You have just given a prime example of how conservatives are deliberately making up facts, as necessary. There has been no such change in the bill since Wednesday. But, I am sure that there will be emails being sent out trying to distort that fact in order to muddy the waters.
Finally, again, you make up facts on the Democrats. Both Republican and Democratic leaders called on Joe Wilson for an apology because his behavior went far beyond what was proper during a State of the Union message. Both standing ovations and remaining sitting, both some mild yes’ and some mild no’s are allowed in that protocol, and both sets of leaders emphasized that Joe Wilson went beyond the pale. Your history of “heckling” is not backed up or cited even by the current Republican leaders.
Again, as necessary, conservatives make up or distort facts. That is why Father Orthoduck is walking away from the Republican party.
I have long felt, sadly, that the neo-cons have taken lessons in lying from both the Stalinist and Nazi playbooks. Further, regarding illegal aliens, the complaint seems to be that while the proposed laws explicitly forbid them being covered, “there is no enforcement mechanism”.
It seems probable, therefore, that what is desired is that when someone shows up for emergency treatment, no matter how dire the situation, their citizenship/residency status be verified before treatment is begun. This, of course,would violate the professional ethics of all medical workers and would seem to be about as anti-life as one could get.
The proposed laws forbid illegal aliens from being covered by any publicly subsidized insurance. Anyone is free to buy private insurance from the free market, there is no “legality” requirement. However, you are correct that what most very conservative folks focus on is that two amendments they proposed were defeated. They would have required additional citizenship checks at the time of acquiring subsidized insurance. Supposedly the defeat of these amendments means that fraud can now happen. Please note that the whole deliberate mistatement is over two amendments not being passed, not over the actual wording of the law, which does forbid the subsidizing of illegal aliens.
However, the proposed law already requires that social security and some type of state identification card be required. Thus, in effect, by checking both the social security number and the state identification number, one already has a check on legality. If either number comes back as either false or not matching the person then the subsidized insurance is denied. The currently applicable Real ID laws already cover how to ensure that the state ID is real and not false.
But, whether one agrees that the proposed law as written needs strengthening or not, it is a complete falsification to say that the current proposed laws allow illegal aliens to be subsidized. The proposed law says the exact opposite. The most one can say is that one does not believe that the process of verification is strict enough, but that is not what is being put out is it?
Mark, how did you manage to turn shouting at Obama into an anti-abortion diatribe? In passing, though there has been the accusation that the Democrats did it first, where is the proof of that. Part of the shock was precisely that BOTH Republicans and Democrats agreed that he went far beyond anything that had happened in the setting of a joint session of Congress.
Mark, how did you manage to turn shouting at Obama into an anti-abortion diatribe? In passing, though there has been the accusation that the Democrats did it first, where is the proof of that. Part of the shock was precisely that BOTH Republicans and Democrats agreed that he went far beyond anything that had happened in the setting of a joint session of Congress.
Ernie, I agree that he was outrageous. Of course we need civility. But I am disgusted that it is reduced to racism and that any opposition to the socialist policies of Obama are turned into diatribes of racism. Wilson was chastised appropriately. But does that make him a racist? Not at all. It obscures the real issues. I oppose Obama on his Statist policies. It is recorded history that twice Bush was called a liar by Congressmen on the floor, one a black woman. Was she a racist by calling Bush a liar from the floor? Was West a racist the other night by taking the mic from a white female vocalist and saying a black artist should have won or was he just an idiot? The most overt racism in America today is the practice of abortion which slaughters thousands of black babies at an enormous rate and yet the media and liberal leaders fail to see or acknowledge this realistic form of racism. No one can look into Wilson's heart to determine whether he is a racist, not even Jimmy Carte
On Kanye West, I think the President's word choice about him was quite accurate!Go to the Drudge Report. I do not know whether it is still up, but he was fair enough to publish the rules of the house under which Wilson was reprimanded. The rules do permit open expression of disagreement in the course of a joint session of Congress, such as the "no's" that greeted President Bush in 2005 and have greeted other PresidentsSenator Reid called President Bush a liar in 2004 in a Meet the Press interview and refused to apologize. I could not find the congresswomen you talked about, but I am willing to believe it. You see, the issue was not whether the President was called a liar. Too many bloggers are trying to make that the issue. The issue was that the rules of decorum for a joint meeting specify which behavior is permitted and which is not. Wilson crossed the written specification, and crossed it very strongly. You are actually allowed to call the President a liar in certain venues.
On Kanye West, I think the President's word choice about him was quite accurate!Go to the Drudge Report. I do not know whether it is still up, but he was fair enough to publish the rules of the house under which Wilson was reprimanded. The rules do permit open expression of disagreement in the course of a joint session of Congress, such as the "no's" that greeted President Bush in 2005 and have greeted other PresidentsSenator Reid called President Bush a liar in 2004 in a Meet the Press interview and refused to apologize. I could not find the congresswomen you talked about, but I am willing to believe it. You see, the issue was not whether the President was called a liar. Too many bloggers are trying to make that the issue. The issue was that the rules of decorum for a joint meeting specify which behavior is permitted and which is not. Wilson crossed the written specification, and crossed it very strongly. You are actually allowed to call the President a liar in certain venues.
Agreed. It was worthy of a rebuke. But Wilson's inappropriate outburst was directed at the policy, the statement of Obama's. I cannot judge the heart of Wilson and call him a racist. To do so is to obscure the issue.