Starting just before 6:30

6:25 a.m. Apparently they are riding the papers for not covering Nancy Pelosi except for the Washington post and Her hometown paper.

6:27 a.m. the Globe highlights the Gay Marriage Bill in NH but not the Governor’s demand for more religious protections if they want his signature. Of course they do.

6:30 a.m. Freeland apparently had her kid.

6:32 a.m. Good thing the MSN has all those reporters to do stuff, Mika points out that it was morning so that had no excuse.

6:34 a.m. Christa is spinning it for the NYT REALLY bad. This is just bull.

6:41 a.m. Even THEY say that if it was a republican, front page with pullout. Freeland is a hack.

6:44 a.m. One other person at all the others might have not recalled, Freeland sounds like Pelosi.

6:52 a.m. A forgettable day in Boston sports, everyone loses and the Bruins die.

6:55 a.m. You know the promo’s have all been about republicans you would think that Democrats didn’t control the Whitehouse, the Congress by a large margin and the Senate by a margin that can’t be filibustered. I suspect their audience can’t handle Nancy Pelosi stuff so all they can do is attack republicans that supposedly don’t matter.

7:00 a.m. Break out the Mommy drawing.

7:19 a.m. All about briefings, has the CIA lied to you senator? They lay it out for us.

7:03 a.m. Mika points out that Joe predicted the tribunals 6 months ago.

7:21 a.m. Just got a call from a friend I’m off to breakfast read you later.

7:24 a.m. “They don’t have briefings to tell you what they aren’t going to do.”

7:30 a.m. Ron Paul is coming up, I’m going to miss him, Charles Johnson is going to be unhappy.

…for those of us who think it is a disgrace that he (the President) is invited to Notre Dame to receive a degree and give the commencement speech.

He is likely going to give a very good speech and maybe an uplifting one. We are going to look very foolish when he does…

…however you know what: Let us look foolish!

We don’t dispute that the president can make a good speech or give a good message. Since Fr. Jenkins is not going to retreat I hope that the president does give a good speech and an inspiring one. That is the task that he has been given.

We say and we affirm that we are Catholics. We say and affirm the Nicene Creed every week. We affirm our loyalty to the Holy Roman Catholic Church. We affirm that the foremost Catholic University in the United States has a moral obligation to stand up for those Catholic values that we embrace. We affirm and support the message of the Bishops of the church that we don’t honor those who stand against our deepest beliefs and aid an intrinsic evil.

We take this stand even if it is unpopular, in fact especially if it is unpopular. St. Peter’s greatness didn’t come when he took the popular and safe decision to deny Jesus when he was clearly going down. He built a church by defying the leaders of his own Jewish faith (Don’t forget Jesus and all of the early disciples were Jews.) and the greatest military power in the world. He died defying that power but he died with the keys to heaven in his hands and when those who killed him came to the gates who was standing there with the keys?

I am an American Catholic of Italian/Sicilian stock. My grandparents came to this country over 100 years ago and built a life. I would not trade my worst time in America for the citizenship of any other nation and I thank God and my parents and grandparents that I and my children are Americans, however at best I will live in America for 120 years more likely with my waistline closer to 60-70 years if I’m lucky. Eternity is a whole lot longer. If I have to choose between America and the kingdom of heaven that is no choice at all:

The message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the learning of the learned I will set aside.”

Where is the wise one? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made the wisdom of the world foolish? For since in the wisdom of God the world did not come to know God through wisdom, it was the will of God through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those who have faith.

For Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks alike, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

Consider your own calling, brothers. Not many of you were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth. Rather, God chose the foolish of the world to shame the wise, and God chose the weak of the world to shame the strong, and God chose the lowly and despised of the world, those who count for nothing, to reduce to nothing those who are something, so that no human being might boast before God. It is due to him that you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, as well as righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, so that, as it is written, “Whoever boasts, should boast in the Lord.” 1 Cor 1:18-31

We will look foolish in the eyes of many but eternity is a long time and when we get to the gates we know who will be holding the keys.

President Obama speech at Arizona State University, had a very important line concerning the difference between a title and an accomplishment.

At the 3:40 mark or so he starts to hit it out of the park with a segment that culminates with the following quote:

“I come to affirm that one’s title, even a title like President of the United States says very little about how well one’s life has been lead.”

The advice he is giving is pretty good and the message strong. It doesn’t seem to be that it is the advice that he has followed himself, but the message itself is right.

If he lives up to those ideas he is speaking then he will turn out to be an excellent president. (remember he has been in only 4 months or 6 1/4% of his terms. He could actually rise to the occasion.) I doubt this will happen but you know I’d love for him to prove me wrong.

Update: Missed the 3rd part.

I gotta give credit to Willie Geist for coming up with this angle.

This morning on Morning Joe they were interviewing someone from the Politico concerning the photos that the president has decided not to release.

He asked if the idea might have been to protect democratic pols who would have had these photos “hung around their necks”.

You know there are several angles to look at this. It could be considered the president’s “Sister Souljia” moment, turning from the left.

It could be his “Errol Flynn Trial” Errol Flynn Trial: 1943 – “j.b.” And “s.q.q.”, Suggestions For Further Reading on the subjectmoment as Monica Crowley maintained on O’Reilly last night, the theory being now people will imagine the worst.

Most people think that its a question of following the advice of the generals. The thought being that now the war is now owned by him is isn’t going to lose it.

The political angle didn’t occur to me and I’m ashamed of it, particularly with the excellent post by Legal Insurrection:

This presents a problem mostly for Democrats. Republicans who were briefed on the interrogation methods at least will be consistent, for the most part, in maintaining that the methods were lawful and useful. No Republican is going to be harmed politically by the revelations because most Americans support these methods against people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. If leaks of a Justice Department report are to be believed, there will be no prosecutions. Republicans are safe politically and legally.

For Democrats, however, the damage could be significant. Nancy Pelosi already has lost a great deal of credibility from her changing stories. Dozens of other Democrats, including such senior Senators as Jay Rockefeller, apparently also were briefed on the interrogation methods and either were silent, approved, or encouraged the policy.

The irony is that a full blow investigation and hearings will turn mostly on what the Democrats knew, and when they knew it. The Republicans mostly couldn’t care less if they were “blamed” for keeping the country safe even if it necessitated waterboarding the mastermind of 9/11 to prevent further attacks. When faced with sacrificing a city versus using harsh interrogation methods, most voters would opt for harsh interrogation.

Keith Olberman, Chris Matthews, et/al not withstanding people who live here actually Like America and dislike having to choose between burning to death or jumping 100 stories to become street pizza. The Air force one debacle showed that no matter how they vote people know what the score is as thousands fled for their lives. This is not something you want to be on the wrong side of.

There is a story of Ronald Reagan meeting with European leaders in the 80 hearing them privately urge him to stand up to the soviets and deploy missiles while telling him they would publicly condemn him for political reasons.

Don’t think for one moment that high level people in congress didn’t make that request. The president has the approval ratings to withstand the hit, congress can’t, and believe that he made this move for their sake he WILL collect a chit for it.

I say the right thing is almost always the smart thing in the long run. President Obama did the right thing and it will turn out to be the smart thing in the end.

Update: Et Tu Chris Matthews?

Update 2: added the DUmmie Funnies link above, between them and Andrew Sullivan it looks like they are all learning about feeding the dog and liberal pets.

Update 3: via Jules Crittenden David Ignatious votes Souljia and has a full round up.

Starting with the Obama situation

6:02 a.m. The topic is the photos and Obama

6:04 a.m. Barnicle: It’s good that he listens to the generals on this one instead of the polls.

6:06 a.m. Willie wasn’t invited? Must have been because he voted for Miss California.

6:08 a.m. That is a very classy line by the president. Very well said.

6:14 a.m. “I pulled something but not a string.” Mika’s head is on the desk Joe turned around and Willie walked away so Barnicle had to do the next bit. That moment was worth being up this early.

6:20 a.m. You know the idea that this is to protect democratic pols didn’t hit me at all.

6:24 a.m. Take Obama away from the Democratic party and they are weak. Everyone agrees. I guess Mrs. Clinton star has truly fallen.

6:30 a.m. Market down unexpectedly. Is it?

6:33 a.m. What parent would put their child on the local airline after this?

6:39 a.m. We will leave it there on the joke.

6:41 a.m. Until someone else steps up Rush is it, that’s true but I think that Rush is right and the more people who actually hear him will agree, but then again I think the best voice I heard was on morning joe two days ago.

6:43 a.m There was not one tea party when George Bush was president. Harold never heard of Porkbusters or saw the graph. As Glenn pointed out there was a protest, it was the elections of 2006 & 2008 when conservatives stayed home.

6:57 a.m. Put your phone on vibrate, Barnicle is not allowed to comment. That was funny and Gibbs is right.

6:59 a.m. Did anyone else notice Barnicle’s hand was under the table during the entire Maxim 100 segment?

7:02 a.m. They do a lot of fund raisers don’t they?

7:06 a.m. This will all come out. Joe was right about the democrats on this and he is right about this.

7:07 a.m. Harold Ford is right again. Joe is right, he would make an acceptable moderate republican.

7:09 a.m. Joe I like you but you aren’t a Catholic, Barnicle is and should know better.

7:10 a.m. This isn’t a speech code, he is being given a honorary degree at a CATHOLIC university when he is radically pro abortion. That is contrary to our beliefs.

7:11 a.m. You know if I’d been tailing this guy for 40 min i might have lost it up front too.

7:13 a.m. Mark my words it will be AFTER the Notre Dame speech. His appointment is going to be a kick in the teeth to ND.

7:14 a.m. Harold and Joe make a good point but that is because like slavery Abortion is a seminal issue of good vs evil. It can’t help but be the point.

7:16 a.m. This all sounds nice but the job of a judge is to read the law and rule based on what it says. Not on what their life experience gives them. They are umpires. Their job is to apply the rules.

7:18 a.m. I think Richard Hass is exactly wrong on these issues. I predict before he actually comes on his arguments will the opposite of what is correct.

7:32 a.m. Jed Babbin on Morning Joe?

7:39 a.m. He points out that Powell ran out on his own and points out his bs on the Plame scandal.

7:47 a.m. It is a lot more complicated when it is your stuff. It’s a question of protecting troops in Afghanistan. Hass proves me wrong right away. Good for him!

7:48 a.m. There is nothing more satisfying than being proved wrong when you think ill of people’s opinion, I hope president Obama proves me wrong a lot.

8:06 a.m. You know that Savannah is a real good sport. The time will come when she can take over Mika’s chair. Mika better watch out.

8:22 a.m. You can say things on this show but you will be accurately represented.

8:26 a.m. Ad Hoc decisions?

8:37 a.m. The great morning joe Wars are on. MSNBC vs CNBC

8:38 a.m. This is a lot of fun, but relative to the other Joe he is liberal.

8:40 a.m. You are copying CNBC you have 6 boxes up.

8:42 a.m. And these guys are talking about the big tent that the republicans need?

8:48 a.m. Monica Pelosi. Barnicle is off the hook.

I have a pet peeve about people making the argument about priestly celibacy.

About 20 years ago I knew a this girl she was very good looking and everyone married or not (including me) noticed her and she liked being noticed. One day to my surprise she approached me asking my opinion about a married man she was interested in.

When someone asks you advice about dating a married man by definition the argument “He’s a married man!” isn’t going to cut it. So I pointed out that if he was willing to be disloyal to the mother of his kids with her, what will stop him from being disloyal to you once he finds someone he finds hotter? That was an argument she understood. So lets ask the question:

If a priest is ready to break his vows on one thing what makes anyone think that he won’t be willing to break them on another?

As for married priests I actually don’t care which way the church goes on it. We currently have some married priests due to protest conversions It’s not a piece of unchanging dogma but as the father of a family the clash between family and church would be huge and I haven’t figured out how priests managed to do everything they need to already.

The Orthometer via the Curt Jester cuts though the nonsense concerning the Fr. Cutie scandal:

He is unapologetic about it. He only regrets causing people pain, not violating his promises, not committing the mortal sin of adultery (the woman is evidently a divorcee). He is so unrepentant that he went on national TV where he said that celibacy is good, but it should be optional for priest. (And the man caught in adultery said, “Marital fidelity is a beautiful thing, but it should be optional.”)

Fr. Richtsteig then hits another:

If you want to know what I think about priests “falling in love” and leaving, read this. Said briefly, it is the equivalent of a married man falling in lust with another woman and leaving his family because he can’t control his hormones. Human beings are rational animals not just animals. Yes, we have feelings, but we use our mind and will to discern which are in accord with God’s will and should be acted upon.

I am also not much interested in ‘dialoguing’ with those include Cutie who want to use this challenge the Church’s apostolic teaching on celibacy. One does not need to be sexually active and/or married to lead a normal life or be free from loneliness. No one ever died or became ill from not having sex. If you think optional celibacy is the or a panacea for problem clergy, take a long hard look at Orthodox, Protestant, or Jewish clergy.

We all struggle with our own temptations, I know I do and the Curt Jester has solid advice on it:

He said that he had been under spiritual direction since he was tempted against celibacy and that this is something he struggled with. Too bad he did not take this temptation more seriously and worked to avoid situations where he would be tempted. Becoming a minor celebrity and media personality and being nicknamed “Father Oprah” was probably not the most prudent course if you are particularly tempted in this manner. We should flee from those situations where we know we are easily tempted.(emphasis mine)

Not doing so is like eating food that you know you are allergic to.

Like Mika I’m starting to get Miss Californiaed out but the Anchoress makes a point that is worth quoting:

Let this be a lesson to young ladies everywhere, but especially young ladies who profess Christ; if you’re going to take off your top for a camera, be prepared (sooner or later) to have to answer for it, both in this world, and the next. But in this world, the chances are you will have to defend your nudity against the jeers, sneers and fake prudery of those “open-minded” folks who would never, for an instant, tolerate anyone telling them what they should or should not do with their own bodies, but will crucify you for the choices you made with your own. You’ll have to answer for it because when you profess yourself a Christian, you choose exile, and you will be held to a different standard, entirely, than the world’s.

And that is not a bad thing, but you girls must think about that.

In the next world, of course, you’ll have to answer to Christ, himself, who is much more merciful than the rest of us. He will likely ask you why you threw your pearls before swine.

He may gently ask you if you realized at the time that your actions could lead others into sin, by helping them to treat another human being (you) as a “thing”.

And I can tell you from personal experience: that is one awful question to have to contemplate and answer.

This is the cellphone internet business squared.

The Right Wing Gaming room’s author hasn’t posted (or come to game night either) in a while but today he hits it out of the park:

I had a thought the other day, “The price of peace is simple, merely the chains of slavery.”

Patrick Henry put it much more eloquently as follows:

“Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”

Do these words stir anyone nowadays?

It doesn’t stir many because of Narcissism! When the only thing you love is yourself the idea that you risk for the sake of others or future generations is just not there.

My generation, the baby boomers are the most narcissistic that has ever lived. We are the only generation that thought they were brighter than their parents as teens and never changed that opinion.

I have a pet peeve concerning the “greatest generation” nonsense. My father’s generation wasn’t the greatest generation, they would have pointed to their parents as better men as would their parents before them. The only reason why that is claimed is because my generation is the WORST GENERATION that has ever lived in this country. We never stopped being full of ourselves and have wasted the gift that our forebears gave us.

Our children, at least the ones not over medicated and under achieving; the generation actually volunteering and fighting in Iraq is greater than ours and it isn’t close.