I spoke to writer Patti McGuire Armstrong at the 2017 Catholic Marketing Network

Her website is here, her author page on Amazon is here her page at CatholicMom.com is here

The Rest of my Catholic Marketing Network posts are here.


This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

Sheldon Cooper:But you do bring up an interesting point. I don’t have to break new ground here, I’m sure much of the research already exists.
Leonard Hofstadter: No! no, my point is, if you want to learn how to make friends, then just go out to a coffee shop or a museum. Meet people. Talk to them. Take an interest in their lives.
Sheldon Cooper: That’s insane on the face of it. Come on.
Leonard Hofstadter: Where are we going?
Sheldon Cooper: You’re driving me to the mall. I’m going to acquire a book that summarizes the current theories in the field of friendmaking.

The Big Bang Theory The Friendship Algorithm 2009

This piece at Stacy McCain’s site concerning Emma Lindsay has really stuck with me:

She dated a series of boyfriends until she was in her mid-20s, at which point she decided she was actually bisexual, spent three years dating lesbians and, as she has said, convinced herself she was a victim of “the heteronormative brainwashing of society.” However, Ms. Lindsay’s lesbian relationships turned out the same way as her earlier relationships with men — i.e., failure — and, after a two-year romantic hiatus, she decided to subject herself once more to the insidious forces of patriarchy. What is her likelihood of heterosexual success, at age 32, if she always failed with men when she was younger? Or to look at it from a different angle, why would a man be interested in a woman who has not only been rejected by all her previous boyfriends, but has also been deemed an unsuitable partner by lesbians?

This latest shift seems about the desire for a child and has left her with a problem the quest is not going well because apparently the people she is meeting just aren’t as considerate as she is:

When I date people, I devote a lot of effort to making their lives better. When I’m with women, I read about health issues that effect lesbian demographics (higher rates of breast cancer, obesity, and depression.) When I’m with men, I read about health issues that effect straight men (coronary issues, blood pressure, and emotional issues esp. around anger.) When I date people of color, I research POC health/discrimination/etc. issues, especially issues around dating white people (mental/health effects of internalized racism, institutionalized racism, the types of micro-aggressions I may be likely to commit.) When I date people with less money, I pay for shit. When I date people who are messy, I organize their shit (even though I’m also really messy.) When I date people with physical limitations, I massage their shit (weird Emma past: I went to massage school.)

Her efforts have all come down to two choices in her quest for motherhood:

As far as I can tell, I have 2 options. Option 1 is “trapping” some guy into having kids with me because he lacks the self awareness to plan for it himself. This would also involve taking his last name, doing most of the housework while contributing 50% to the earnings, and faking my orgasms so he doesn’t have to feel emasculated by his lack of sexual prowess.

Option 2 is having kids by myself.

It would involve some sacrifices, like probably not living in San Francisco. However, every time I go on a date with some man-child, I become more and more convinced that those sacrifices are probably the less bad option.

Stacy sums up this conclusion here:

Her proposed “Option 2” — pay for donor sperm, “becoming a single mother by choice” — is a childish threat: “If you don’t play by my rules, I’m going to take my uterus and go home.” To which the world’s male population will generally react with a shrug of indifference.

“Damaged goods,” they’ll say, and if Emma Lindsay were an isolated exception, a lone kook howling at the moon, perhaps I’d shrug, too. Yet the fact is that Ms. Lindsay is part of a tide of human wreckage washing up on the shores of our sin-sick society, the flotsam and jetsam created by the disintegration of America’s formerly Christian culture.

While I agree this entire situation reeks of the disintegration of America’s Christian Culture I think Stacy is missing a key point concerning Miss Lindsay’s screed a consideration that is completely ignored in her calculations.

The good of her child.

You can look high and low, but in all her critiques of the various men she is considering none of said critiques include:  Would this man be a good father?  Would he put our child first?  Would this man be a good role model for our child?

Nor does she seem to be all that concerned about what she would bring to the table.  She talks about having to give up San Francisco and alludes to other unnamed sacrifices but nowhere is the realization that once you have children your life and your commitment belongs to them.  Their well-being, their education, feeding them, clothing them, steering them along the right path.  All of this considerations would seem to be job one.

Where is all her research on what makes a healthy and happy child who will grow up to be a responsible member of adult society?

In the days of my youth, these considerations went without saying, today with the sex act completely divorced from its actual function of procreation it seems her MIT education has not prepared her to ask this completely obvious question.

There is good news however for Miss Lindsay.  She has access to an excellent resource on this subject, as evidenced from an earlier piece of hers concerning the moment the general public discovered her writing:

Then, the day after, I got 75 thousand views, and I called my parents.

“Are you ok?” they asked, “How are the trolls? Are you getting trolled?” Then, “Why did you never tell us about this? You know you can tell us anything.”

She  has (or at least at the time of that writing did have) two parents who are apparently there for her.  I’d suggest sitting down with these parents and having a long talk with them on the subject.  They will almost certainly give the best advice they can on this decision and can do so with practical examples from both their and her own experiences.  And while I may or may not agree with what said advice might be, I’m certain it will flow from their unconditional love for their daughter.

Me I’d sum things up in two sentences:  The secret to a successful marriage is putting up with each other foibles during the 95% of the time when nothing too exciting (good or bad) is going on.

As for Parenthood; The secret to being a good parent is loving your child enough to be willing to enforce an unpleasant rule or speak an uncomfortable truth even when it hurts.

No Charge


The Layoff bleg continues. with 5 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.

By John Ruberry

“And it was inevitable that some of these people pushed back…”
Ray Bradbury, The Martian Chronicles.

Could it be that the deep-blue residents of America’s second-most populous county, Cook County–Chicago is the county seat–have had enough?

Probably not, at least yet. But serious dissent may be bubbling as the effects of Cook County’s unpopular soda tax sink to the bottom of the glass.

Cook County Board President Toni “Taxwinkle” Preckwinkle, a former Chicago alderman who represented the University of Chicago area–the Obamas were among her constituents–touted that tax as a public health measure. The new tax covers not just soda but also many other sweetened beverages including those with corn syrup, such as diet sodas, some iced teas, and bottled sweetened Starbucks coffee–but not, for instance, cavity-causing Frappuccinos prepared at a Starbucks location by a barista. Even “free refills” are taxed now. But Preckwinkle, a hardened leftist, exposed her true colors by suing a retail association that delayed collection in a legal challenge of the tax for a month for $17 million of what she claims is lost revenue. That is how thug states such as Venezuela and Russia are run. Dissent will not be tolerated–enemies will be punished.

Preckwinkle defeated a Democratic incumbent in a 2010 primary election vowing to repeal an unpopular one-percent county sales tax. She phased it out, yes. But last year Preckwinkle brought it back.

And the soda tax was never about health. If it was, then why the lawsuit? Taxwinkle is a liar. Besides, federal law prevents taxing food stamp recipients–there are nearly 900,000 of them in Cook County–on their sweetened beverage purchases. Poor people consume larger amounts of sweetened beverages than wealthier folks and the health problems blamed on these drinks, such as diabetes and obesity, are more prevalent among the less wealthy.

The soda tax is a penny per ounce. That doesn’t seem like much, but the cost of a case of Diet Coke, as you seen in this Tweet, soars by 5o-percent after the Taxwinkle tax is figured in.

My friends and co-workers–and yes, there are some liberal Democrats within that group–are furious about the soda tax, even the ones who don’t drink what most people here call “pop.” Yesterday one man told me, “I live just south of Lake County, I’m going to buy all my Coke there,” adding, “There is a big sign outside the Target there, ‘No county sugary drink tax here.'” And of course he won’t only buy soda there–he’ll probably buy most, maybe all of his groceries there. Why wait in two long check-out lines? Grocers on the wrong side of the county line not only will face lower sales, some may be forced to close down and of course lay off their employees. Oh, I forgot to tell that new Lake County shopper that he should top off his gas tank up there, as there is also a Cook County gasoline tax.

And there are so many other taxes Cook County residents, particularly Chicagoans, have to endure. In an example provided by the free market Illinois Policy Institute, the base price of a two liter bottle of pop is $2.49. But when the 67 county soda tax is added, on top of the nation’s highest 10.25 percent sales tax, and an additional 3 percent Chicago soda tax, the true cost of that soda jug is $3.49. And if you accept a bag, paper or plastic, when you buy that sugary drink in Chicago, there is an additional 7 cent per bag tax. Unless you are paying by food stamps, formally known as SNAP–the “N” stands for nutrition–with your Illinois Link card.

When was the last time you devoured a grocery bag?

Keeping track of all of these taxes are a nightmare for retailers. That extra cost of course is passed on to consumers.

Last month Illinois’ income tax rate was hiked by 32 percent. Illinoisans are burdened with among the highest property rates in the nation. Yet, Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago are functionally bankrupt, which exposes another left-wing lie–fiscal stability in Democratic-run sinkholes is always only just one more tax hike away.

Why does Crook County need the soda tax, and yes, the next tax, what ever that one is going to be? To pay for lavish but woefully-underfunded county worker pensions and the Cook County Health System.

Chicago is a sanctuary city and Cook is a sanctuary county–Cook County health facilities are often the health care provider of choice of the area’s large population of illegal immigrants. No, I’m not saying we should cut off care to illegals with health concerns, but as a Cook County taxpayer, it’s fair to know what that care costs me.

Liberalism is very expensive.

Blogger in downtown Chicago

Next year Taxwinkle will face voters. She’ll probably be reelected. Rebellions take time to build, after all, it took ten years from the passage of the Stamp Act until the first battle of the American Revolution to be fought.

How did Preckwinkle fare in her last election? She ran unopposed.

Shame on you, Cook County Republican Party.

Meanwhile Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago continue to lose residents.

Quietly, the rebellion has begun.

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.

Definition of phobia

  1. :  an exaggerated usually inexplicable and illogical fear of a particular object, class of objects, or situation

Merriam Webster Online

I wish I could say I was surprised by this story:

A LOCAL council has banned the construction of a synagogue in Bondi because it could be a terrorist target, in a shock move that religious leaders say has caved in to Islamic extremism and created a dangerous precedent.

The decision, which has rocked the longstanding Jewish community in the iconic suburb, was upheld in court this week as the nation reeled from the alleged airline terror threat and debate raged over increased security measures at airports and other public places.

The Land and Environment Court backed the decision by Waverley Council to prohibit the construction of the synagogue in Wellington St, Bondi — just a few hundred metres from Australia’s most famous beach — because it was too much of a security risk for users and local residents.

And this story is a twofer for those who believe in liberty, because it’s a great example of Bureaucracy gone wild to wit:

Ironically, the council and the Land and Environment Court appeared to use the proposal’s own risk assessment and security measures in the proposed design — including using setback buildings and blast walls — as evidence the site was too much of a security risk.

Yet in a classic catch-22, the council also said if the design was changed to boost security this would be unacceptable because it would be too unsightly.

Or to put it simply, the steps you’ve taken to increase security at the site prove that it’s too much of a security risk to allow you Jews to worship here.

The folks at Elder of Ziyon says this is all about obeying the overriding rule of the middle east:

The entire history of Middle East peace attempts are based on this rule. Not international law, not justified claims, nothing like that. it is all a smokescreen to cover what the real imperative is: Don’t Piss Off the Muslims.

Newspapers, TV news and Hollywood have all enthusiastically adopted this rule above all others, using the excuse of “preventing Islamophobia.”

Editorial cartoonists and newspaper editors censor themselves because they embrace the rule of Don’t Piss Off the Muslims. Depictions of Mohammed, only forbidden under Sharia law, are now effectively illegal anywhere because of the rule, Don’t Piss Off the Muslims. 

President George Bush made sure that he fulfilled this rule by specifically going to a mosque while the World Trade Center was still burning and Muslims around the world cheering over the death of thousands of Americans, saying that “Islam is peace.”

Even the Prime Minister of Israel embraces this rule, removing non-obtrusive detection technology at the entrance to a holy site and severely limiting the freedom of worship of Jews and Christians there, claiming – exactly like the Australians – that undefined, nebulous security concerns are more important than basic human rights.

But the real reason is the rule: Don’t Piss Off the Muslims.

And if you judge by the attack/body count at Religion of Peace™ you might think that make a lot of sense.

But if you think about it, isn’t what the Bondi council ruling actually saying.

It’s saying that it is not possible to protect Jews in their community because Muslim Terrorist would target them

It’s saying that attacks by Muslim Terrorists are so much of a threat that the current residents of  the community can not be protected if Jews are worshiping nearby.

It’s saying that the  security measures taking by Jews at worship only confirm that Muslim Terror in Australia is a clear and present danger to the citizens in Bondi.

Maybe it’s just me but wouldn’t’ such assertions, by definition, be considered Islamophobic?

If I was a leftist I would organize protests, hold marches, and shout slogans against this.   I would enlist local Muslims and national known Imams.   I would condemn most strongly the decision of the council, I would stress that such a ruling implies a perception of Islam as something other than peaceful and that it’s imperative that said synagogue be allowed to be built, preferably without the extra security measures,  in order to counter the exaggerated, inexplicable and illogical fear of Islam , people who follow Islam and  so called “Islamic Terror”  which the west has defined as “Islamophobia”  has no basis in reality.

Because to do otherwise is a  public declaration to the world. that the “phobia” concerning Muslims and terrorism is not so irrational after all.


The Layoff bleg continues. with 5 days to go we’re $1515 away from the goal to make August dedicated to the blog, the new radio show (shows?) and events.

This blog is a venture in capitalism that depends primarily on readers. You can help finance this by picking up my new book Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) prayer is now available at Amazon

A portion of every sale will go to WQPH 89.3 Catholic Radio) or show your approval by Hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

and if you really want to help for the long term consider subscribing and get my book as a premium


Choose a Subscription level



And as I’ve said before if you can’t spare the cash we will be happy to accept your prayers.