Under the Fedora: Amy Without Objection, Democrats watching the Ark, Pope Adopts the Sullivan Rule, A Monty Python Irony, Mel’s all in for Biden and Biden’s Kick me sign

Democrats decided to play one last stunt with the Amy Coney Barrett nomination replacing themselves with cardboard cutouts for what became a unanimous vote to send Amy Coney Barrett to the full senate with a positive recommendation.

Under the Committee rules you have to have at least two senators of the minority party to have a quorum allowing a vote but alas to have a quorum call you have to have at least one senator suggesting the absence of a quorum and that would have required at least one of them to abstain from their exercise in performance art.

I swear the left is entirely made up of failed wanna be actors.


Watching how this election process has turned out reminds me of the biblical tale of Noah’s Ark with Trump & his supporters as Noah. For a solid year the left / media have spent their time pointing and laughing at him and now as election day comes closer and closer the rain has started to fall and they are getting more and more nervious.

Election day will be like them watching the ark float away while they seek higher ground.


Speaking of the Bible and scripture The Pope latest actions of this week reminded of this quote:

He said to his disciples, “Things that cause sin will inevitably occur, but woe to the person through whom they occur.

It would be better for him if a millstone were put around his neck and he be thrown into the sea than for him to cause one of these little ones to sin.

Luke 17:1-2

Andrew Sullivan’s plan of working to redefine sin rather than struggling to overcome it has found a buyer in Rome. No word yet if he is going to apply this same standard to other mortal sins like having a mistress or other things.

As a Catholic I never realized how spoiled I was by a lifetime of Saintly Popes until Francis came along.


The real irony in watching Facebook determine this Monty Python Joke by the Babylon Bee

is an incitement to violence is that the Monty Python Crew was always fighting censorship from their TV show to the Life of Brian and even in their final performance when Eric Idle wrote a special skit to replace a censored scene on TV which made fun of said censorship.

Of course given that Eric Idle and John Cleese are both steadfastly against this president perhaps they don’t see this censorship of a joke hitting Trump opponents problematic.

(I’m not aware of any public position by Michael Palin or Terry Gilliam nor has any mystic produced a comment from beyond the grave from Terry Jones or Graham Chapman so I can’t comment on what they might think).

Update: After I wrote this post Facebook reversed itself claiming it was an automated system what done it:

I guess it all depends on what the word “manual” means.


Speaking of Comic genius Mel Brooks has in his 94th year decided to come out with a video endorsing Joe Biden and hitting Donald Trump before the election hitting him over COVID.

What I find really ironic and in fact comical is the timing Brooks investment of political capital. Not only is it unlikely to change any minds but at this point the battle is already lost. (and if he didn’t know it before the debate he likely knows it now. It’s sort of like jumping on a horse to join the Charge of the Light Brigade or Picket’s charge just at the moment when it’s clear they have failed. You’d think a comic genius would recognize when something is a joke.

Of course in fairness to Mel he’s likely deep in the Hollywood bubble and at his age he likely past the point of having to worry about offending the customers.

Although I’m wondering if this is a crazy as a fox move to make the left decide not to censor his movies after he’s gone to keep the Royalties coming for his son.


I was going to finish with Mel but I just watched the Debate and I can’t believe what I saw. Joe Biden could have just put a “kick me” sign on this rear and be done with it. What kind of idiot denies he ever opposed fracking and suggests that Trump put on his web site if he did?

Ignoring all else, nobody that stupid should be leading the US.

I’m old enough to remember when “Is the Pope Catholic?” was a Rhetorical Question

One of the advantages of actually reading scripture, having been brought up by devout Catholics and having a faithful priest is that if a Pope says something like this:

The first is all. In front of an unbeliever the last thing I have to do is try to convince him. Never. The last thing I have to do is speak. I have to live consistent with my faith. And it will be my testimony to awaken the curiosity of the other who says: “But why do you do this?” And yes, I can speak then. But listen: Never, never bring the gospel by proselytizing. If someone says they are a disciple of Jesus and comes to you with proselytism, they are not a disciple of Jesus. Proselytism is not done, the church does not grow by proselytism. Pope Benedict had said it, it grows by attraction, by testimony. Football teams proselytize, this can be done. Political parties, can be done there. But with faith there is no proselytism. And if someone says to me: “But why?” Read, read, read the Gospel, this is my faith. But without pressure.

emphasis mine

I can reference the opinion of a higher authority in the Church (again emphasis mine):

The eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had ordered them.  When they saw him, they worshiped, but they doubted.

Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

Go, therefore,  and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,  teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you.  And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”

Matt 28:16-20

Furthermore I recall a fellow named Paul who said this:

I am amazed that you are so quickly forsaking the one who called you by (the) grace (of Christ) for a different gospel (not that there is another). But there are some who are disturbing you and wish to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let that one be accursed!  As we have said before, and now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received, let that one be accursed! Am I now currying favor with human beings or God? Or am I seeking to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a slave of Christ

St. Paul to the Galatians 1: 6-10 Emphasis mine

Now I don’t pretend to be anywhere near as well trained and educated in theology than the Holy Father nor more familiar with scripture as a whole but as a person with a Computer Science Degree I can certainly read and comprehend a plan set of instructions with the best of them.

So while the Holy Father’s words on living your faith and setting an example are well taken I think I’ll decline to share his advice to judge those who choose to spread the Gospel in the very way that the apostles were instructed by Christ.

Incidentally if you told me as little as ten years ago that I’d hear a Pope say something like this I wouldn’t have believed you, but I’m not worried.

Given the Catholic church survived the Romans, the Huns, the Rest of the Barbarians, the 1st Islamic Invasion, the Black Death, Napoleon, Hitler & the Cold War it’s certainly going to outlast Francis we’ve had 2000 years of Popes and lately we’ve had a good run of saintly ones so I guess we were overdue for a Lemon.

After all Lemon Pope is still the Pope until God decides he isn’t so I will endeavor to give all the respect that the chair of Peter set up by Christ himself deserves trusting that God knows what he’s doing even if I don’t.

And don’t forget pray for the Pope remembering that he is no more and no less deserving of and in need of the mercy of God than anyone else.

Update: Forgot to give a hat tip to Insty here, my bad.

Update 2: Lemon Pope? sounds like a song…

Lemon Pope very iffy

And his message ain’t so sweet

but the truth of the old Gospel

Is impossible to beat

I’m here all week, try the veal.

Review: The Two Popes

By John Ruberry

“I’m not familiar with this part of the garden,” Pope Benedict XVI (Anthony Hopkins) tells Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio (Jonathan Pryce) as they enter an area overrun by brush and deadwood in The Two Popes. Benedict then asks the Argentinian, “Which way?”

That garden, at the Vatican’s Palace of Castel Gandolfo outside of Rome, could rightly be called Benedict’s garden, as he was the Pope. Yet Benedict asks the man who ends up as his successor, Bergoglio, who became Pope Francis in 2013, for direction. Oops, I mean directions.

Clearly the scriptwriters and the director of The Two Popes favor the liberal leadership under Francis–the garden scene neatly ties up that sentiment in a bow.

Later, as Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Bergoglio decries inequality, repeated images of ugly walls are shown.

The Two Popes is largely fictionalized story centered on the theological divide between the 265th and the 266th pontiffs. After a limited theatrical release, including a showing at the Chicago International Film Festival, which was sold out, preventing Mrs. Marathon Pundit from seeing it, the film debuted Friday on Netflix. The Two Popes is worth seeing, whether you are a Catholic or not, or a believer or not. The Welshmen in the lead roles, Hopkins and Pryce, provide superb performances. Of course Hopkins’ career has been justifiably rewarded, including gaining four Academy Award nominations, and winning the Best Actor Oscar for his role as Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. Amazingly, despite stellar work in such movies as Something Wicked This Way Comes, Brazil, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, and The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, Pryce has never been honored with an Academy Award nomination. He deserves it for his performance as Francis, but my guess is that the Academy will overlook Pryce again.

The interplay–and the arguing–is what keeps The Two Popes going.

As for the fiction, there is plenty of it here. There were no long meetings between Benedict and Bergoglio; the catalyst for their movie summit was an offer of resignation from the cardinal, which is harshly rejected as a challenge to Benedict’s authority. The future Pope Francis turned 75 in 2011, it is customary for archbishops to retire at that age. It can be assumed that the pair never discussed the Beatles or their Abbey Road album. And it’s quite likely that Benedict’s favorite television show is not Kommisar Rex, an Austrian detective program where a German shepherd solves crimes. This sidetrack is probably a sly reference to Cardinal Ratzinger’s long term as the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the Vatican under John Paul II, where he picked up the nickname “God’s Rottweiler.”

There are numerous flashback scenes involving Francis, including his early romance, his call to the priesthood, his muddled legacy from Argentina’s “Dirty War,” his rise, then fall, and his rise again within the Argentine Catholic Church. 

In the garden walk scene, Bergoglio condemns Benedict’s handling of the pedophile crisis within the priesthood, which included confession of the guilty–he calls it “magic words.” Benedict’s retort is harsh and telling, “Magic words, is that how you describe the sacrament?”

The Two Popes gives viewers plenty to think about. 

John Ruberry regularly blogs at Marathon Pundit.