Five Under the Fedora Thoughts: New Rules, DOJ Bannon, Dems Should Thank China, Stacy’s Ironic Line and Following Mom’s example

I see the Mayor of Pittsburgh has decided that he doesn’t like the new rules when they are applied to his house and his neighborhood just like reporters have decided they don’t like the new rules when applied to their homes either.

Kurt Warned them about these new rules.


I’m going to withhold judgement on the indictments Steve Bannon (full disclosure while we haven’t talked in 5 or 6 years knew Steve from CPAC & always had good things to say about me and right back at him) and three others concerning fundraising for “We Build the Wall” while saying that a lot of the fundraising of that nature by both sides can be “interesting” at best.

More interesting is this question that I’d like to ask:

Could you imagine the DOJ indicting a former Obama chief of staff who was supporting his re-election for iffy on fundraising in August of 2012, Or a Bush partisan in Aug of 2004 or a Clinton partisan in 1996 or a GWB one in 1992, or Reagan one in 1984 or a Carter one in 1980?

So much for the Trump administration and Bill Barr using DOJ for partisan ends.

Oh, and let me note that when you hit DaTipJar here all the funds go to pay the bills for what I do from paying the writers to the price of the new computer that I’m typing this on and all the extra goes to me. Needless to say I’m not quitting my day job anytime soon.


Given the fact that I work 2nd shift I wouldn’t have caught any of the Democrat Convention anyways but I’m thinking how the Pandemic must have been a godsend to them.

Not only does it mean that Joe Biden didn’t have to preform in front of the crowd but it also meant that they didn’t have to have the specticle of the BLM ANTIFA crowd fighting with police in front of their convention hall while at the same time people on stage were saying “Imagine a world without Police”

With those images on TV Trump would win 40 states and the GOP would sweep both houses. The Democrats should send a big wet kiss to China, but looking at their campaign, it seems they already have.


It’s not often I take issue with something that old friend Stacy McCain writes but I must confess that I was really amused by this paragraph in his post of yesterday:

The belief that words in the Bible have no objective meaning — true for everyone, everywhere, at all times, eternally — is part of what has undermined institutional authority in the church. And once this pastor pointed out to me this “what it means to me” intepretation (which was already widespread 30 years ago) as symptomatic of a spiritual disorder,

While the piece as a whole is very good and an on point evaluation of the insanity of moral relativism I chuckled here because my friend Stacy is very Protestant and the whole Reformation was based on the idea of Martin Luther deciding that his interpretation of Scripture and faith was superior to that of the successors to the Apostles, which of course led to other deciding that their interpretation was superior to his which is why there are 30K plus Protestant denominations.

Did you know that 100 years ago all of those denominations had the same view as the Catholic Church on birth control, abortion, Gay Marriage and Transgenderism? We may have a below par Pope today and quite a few iffy bishops and cardinals but on doctrine we’ve managed to hold the line.


Finally I was going to end this piece with a pair of paragraphs I was going to write to vent something that’s really bothering me and will likely be bothering me for quite a while. I have a very definite opinion on this particular subject and would very much like to speak on it, then I remembered two things. The first comes from scripture as quoted from the Vatican web site

He who upsets his household has empty air for a heritage

Proverbs 11:29a

Most often translated as “He who troubles his own house shall inherit the wind.”

And the second was the memory of my mother. She was a very opinionated person but being a proper Sicilian never volunteered said opinion particularly if it was a highly negative one…unless asked.

Once asked she would bluntly state it. She was a very wise women. I’m going to follow that example in this case.

Oh and don’t forget Podcast 3 PM today. I think I just might go freestyle today

2 thoughts on “Five Under the Fedora Thoughts: New Rules, DOJ Bannon, Dems Should Thank China, Stacy’s Ironic Line and Following Mom’s example

  1. ‘Martin Luther deciding that his interpretation of Scripture and faith was superior to that of the successors to the Apostles.’

    Martin Luther taught himself Hebrew so he could read the Old and New Testaments in the original (I guess because he had doubts about the accuracy of the Vulgate). He found that the original didn’t agree with the Vulgate. which meant that (in his opinion) St. Jerome translated it incorrectly. What was he to do? Dismiss an earlier version of the Word of God for a translation made by a man who no matter how saintly and devoted he was still had human foibles and frailties? And he was only led to do what he did due to the massive corruption of the Universal Church. And it wasn’t the first time the doctrine and infallability of the Church had been disputed by any means. Donatists, Arians, Monophysites, Cathars, Lollard, Hussites, the list goes on and on.

    1. That argument would have more weight if he had been the 1st church scholar since St. Jerome who knew Hebrew or examined the testaments.

      The question again wasn’t if there was corruption in the church, cripes at the time of Christ 1/12 disciples were traitors and 10 of 12 were cowards when the chips were down. The question was and is: Did his on his own initiative create a new church because he rejected the existing one, or in other words did his substitute HIS will for that of the church handed down through the successors of the apostles.

      The answer is clearly yes.

      there is a reason why Pride is the 1st of the deadly sins

Leave a Reply