I don’t have a problem with the president giving an economic talk at a Catholic University, it was certainly not inappropriate for Georgetown to welcome him for his speech but I do object to this:

Georgetown University says it covered over the monogram “IHS”–symbolizing the name of Jesus Christ—because it was inscribed on a pediment on the stage where President Obama spoke at the university on Tuesday and the White House had asked Georgetown to cover up all signs and symbols there.

National Review is not impressed.

What was that verse?

Everyone who acknowledges me before others I will acknowledge before my heavenly Father. But whoever denies me before others, I will deny before my heavenly Father.Matt 10:32-33

You know the more I read about Catholic Colleges the better Fitchburg State keeps looking.

Update: There can be only one!

Update 2: Don Surber notices and more importantly (Sorry Don) does Drudge.

Update 3: The Green Room notices and asks…

Imagine if Obama were to give a speech at the Islamic Center of Washington, DC. Would members of that community approve the covering of the Shahada?

They are talking a bit on tea parties

7:08 a.m. Suddenly Bernie Goldberg is quotable on MSNBC.

7:12 a.m. “I don’t think he hates America, I just think he’s wrong.”

7:14 a.m. “We weren’t against wasting money for the past 7 years but now it’s ok.” I’ll say the same thing I said at the tea party yesterday. I think this is a lot like Roosevelt, I think he let a lot of things through to assure support for the war.

7:20 a.m. Napotaliano will be on this show that should be interesting

7:21 a.m. Andrea Mitchel is on, lucky for me I haven’t eaten yet.

7:24 a.m. Mexico should not be a poor nation, they have resources and a ton of advantages, if the country wasn’t so corrupt it could be as successful as the US.

7:25 a.m. I will hold my angry Napolitano post till after this interview. Joe asks about the report.

7:26 a.m. Apparently we are misreading the report we don’t want to infringe on anyone’s rights. I don’t see any retraction concerning troops, she brings up McVey says she has vets in her department. It sounds a lot like …”Hey some of my best friends are…”

7:28 a.m. Apparently there were conditions on this interview, Joe and Mika doesn’t like it.

7:31 a.m. “A 19 year old kid being shot at in Bagdad is going to be thinking that his government doesn’t trust him.”

7:46 a.m. 10 10 10 that = 30

8:03 a.m. Mika throws in a dig about being allowed to ask only one question on that subject.

8:07 a.m. An appropriate cover considering the Tea Party stuff

8:22 a.m. King ducks the Coleman question but on Napolitano, noted that she didn’t want to use the word terrorist about Al-Queda but was willing to use the term for abortion opponents and troops.

8:24 a.m. He gives props to the Democratic chairman for calling her on it. And we should give him props.

8:25 a.m. “She has never put out a report saying looking out for Mosques.”

8:31 a.m. In case you wonder why I watch Morning Joe this is why, it is the voice crying out in the wilderness of MSNBC.

8:32 a.m. Too bad they didn’t have that shot when we had the protest yesterday, or maybe they did and I was in the traffic jam on the way. (nasty traffic on the way to Boston Yesterday)

8:38 a.m. Stiglitz goes after treasury and points out the robbery of all this.

8:49 a.m. Kathie Lee talks about Courtney’s ovulation. Mika is cracking up.

8:59 a.m. What has Joe learned today? Who is ovulating.

Here is my Tea party gallery. I like the dog’s sign best.

I really didn’t care of the 1-20-13 Tee shirt. I never liked the 1-20-09 shirts. It seems whiny to me.

People who pretend that this is something that it is not are making a big mistake.

Update: Jules Crittenden was there too.

Update 2: Michelle Malkin has a roundup

Update 3: BTW feel free to download any and all of these photos if you want them, if you use them in a post please credit Datechguy blog. Yes Captain I know I took your Zorro picture without permission two years ago when I did the podcast interview with you. That was wrong and I’m sorry about that. I still think you looked cool in the costume and I’m a big Zorro fan.

…some quick thoughts and impressions photos will follow in the next post.

The two women who put this together did an incredible job and deserve so much credit that it can’t be adequately expressed. I was watching them juggle all the work and they were astounding. I would trust them with any enterprise that I needed done. I will definitely add GOPMOM to my list of blogs to read.

Got there at 10 and the crowd built and built. At it’s peak the crowd was at my raw guesstament Over a thousand.

There were a fair amount of elderly people there. The long amount of standing must have been pretty hard.

Most of the signs were home made, they also had blank poster board available and markers so people could make their own sign.

The 1st Rally took place on the common at the State House and the monument to the 54th Massachusetts.

I made it a point to ask the police how the protesters were. It was calm and quiet and peaceful an easy day. At the 2nd Tea party I asked the police officer there the same question, got the same answer.

There was a very small contingent of Paulians carrying Paul 08 signs. I thought it was out of place as the election is long over.

There was a single LaRouchite passing out literature. I turned it down but a few people took it.

Carla Howell the mother of question 1 was there. Not only is she a most articulate and well spoken women on these issues, she is also a very handsome one.

The two protests were split as rival radio stations sponcered them. WRKO had the one at the common and WTKK had it at Columbus park where we walked after the first one was done. Quite a few people went to both.

The 2nd party seemed more organized than the first, I suspect that is because the Radio station took a more active role. I particularly liked the bit where they allowed people to come up and speak for 30 seconds each to give their opinions.

I only saw two pro Obama people there with signs. I give them props for showing up and displaying their colors.

The 10th Amendment was very popular, Barney Frank is was not. There were one or two vulgar posters involving him but many more creative ones. He and the president were the villains in chief, although at the 2nd rally Governor Patrick ranked high on the villain list.

The people were not all solid behind all the opinions, one called for the end of the Federal Reserve System another wanted the 16th Amendment repealed.

Invariably the people there were friendly and interesting, quite a few parents had their kids there and there were plenty of college students.

I talked to a reporter from NECN and asked him about the threat of bloggers who do reporting, in his opinion the biggest threat to papers was not so much bloggers as complacency. In his opinion if reporters are professional and accurate then they can compete. He seemed to have exactly the right attitude.

Lots of local press there and Fox and CNN as well. No sign of MSNBC.

The 2nd rally talked about actually getting people to run for offices. That is the actual solution, particularly in Massachusetts. Nothing is going to change unless we change it.

A blogger from Redmassgroup was doing audio interviews and asked if this would be the reaction if this was happening under McCain. I honestly couldn’t say but I suspect McCain wouldn’t have been as bad. He also asked about the Bush spending. I offered the opinion that the war was the big thing. You can always change laws and votes, you can’t unloose a war.

All in all it was a very interesting experience. I’m not one to chant or get excited but it was very worthwhile and I would do it again. The real question will be what happens after this?

Update: Ed Driscoll notes that the mainstream media didn’t take the NECN reporter’s advice.

Glenn mentions that Liberty and Tyranny is still #1 at Amazon.

Wasn’t planning on buying it myself but when I went out to buy Escape From Hell. (I’m in my 2nd reading of it awesome book review will follow later this week.) I noticed something interesting.

At B.J’s wholesale they had about a dozen copies of Levin’s book I was really surprised to seem them there. I then went to Barnes & Noble. They not only didn’t have the book (tons of Michael Fox’s all over) but the people at checkout seemed to not have heard of it.

After all this is Massachusetts.

Inside Catholic has a first rate article on the 10th commandment and the sin of covetousness, an excerpt:

In a world filled with tremendous greed and the celebration of wealth amassed by wicked people using unscrupulous means, it becomes extremely easy to justify covetousness. But covetousness is perhaps the most fruitless form of sin there is. With greed, you at least experience possession (though not real enjoyment) of the thing you own. With lust, you at least get sexual pleasure now and then, though not love. With gluttony, you get the taste of food, though not the satisfaction. But with covetousness, you get only the raw envy of the other, with no compensation at all. A jealous man can at least use his jealousy to go out, work hard, and get the same car his neighbor has. An envious man sits there doing nothing, waits till it is night, and then slashes the tires on his neighbor’s car instead of lifting a finger to accomplish any good at all. Jealousy can be redeemed. Envy must simply be destroyed.

Hell is an equal opportunity landlord. As the article says:

The sin of covetousness is typically the sin of the poor and weak, just as the sin of greed is typically the sin of the rich and powerful.

Both are wanted down below. The good move is to decline the invitation.

Catholic and Enjoying it points out the logical conclusion from the nonsensical argument that because president Obama is not a Catholic rules don’t apply.

I think a better example would be the a Leni Riefenstahl Chair for film excellence. After all she was clearly a genius and an important person in film history. So she was friend with Hitler and company and her greatest film was a piece of Nazi propaganda.

Meanwhile rather than simple mockery that I am using Edward Peters actually addresses this nonsense:

It is paradigmatic of the theological Left to ignore canon law when it poses the slightest inconvenience for its plans, but to hide behind canons (or at least behind canonists, even anonymous ones) when they afford some cover (however thin) for obvious blunders or malfeasance. And so Jenkins, invoking unidentified canon lawyers, holds that the USCCB’s 2004 statement, “Catholics in Political Life”, merely restricts Catholic institutions from honoring Catholics whose public record evidences disdain for fundamental moral principles.

Is the man serious?

Does Jenkins really think that Catholic bishops would countenance a Catholic institution honoring a philanthropic murderer, or a free-speech crusading pornographer, or a right-to-privacy pimp, provided merely that the awardee was not a Catholic? Really, that’s too bizarre for words.

I think the problem now is the sin of pride. Any retreat would be an embarrassment for Fr. Jenkins and that embarrassment trumps theology. Peters an expert of Canon Law has a solution:

Seriously, what I wonder is, why, amid the canon lawyers Jenkins claims to have consulted, not one, it seems, pointed out the most obvious solutions to their client’s problem:

The USCCB’s statement applies only to “Catholic institutions”, right? Well, all Jenkins and the ND board need do is declare that Notre Dame is not a “Catholic institution”, and poof! all these problems disappear. Notre Dame could confer honorary doctorates in law on anybody it wants after that, even on people who have built a career out of denying unborn babies the protection of law, and nary a bishop would say a word about it.

Of course then ND just becomes a college with a declining football program.