Good Riddance to Bad Rubbish

Sen. Arlen Specter evidently reached satisfactory terms from the Democratic Party and evaded a likely-terminal primary challenge by Club for Growth Chairman Pat Toomey. It's fascinating to see the media establishment attempt to spin this as a story of an intolerant Republican Party driving out its thoughtful moderates, when in fact the only principle Sen. Specter has consistently embraced throughout his career has been the political survival and advancement of Arlen Specter.

E.J. Dionne demonstrated his capacity to completely misunderstand the conservative worldview in his analysis that the Republican Party sought ideological purity in order to strengthen its former majority. In fact, the Republican Party seeks to achieve its platform, just as the Democratic Party does. Strangely, only the Republican Party is capable of ideological rigidity in the eyes of the establishment media--as demonstrated by the legions of Democrats speaking out against, say, Roe v. Wade.

In the end, once again, it seems that unforgiveable rigidity of the Republican Party turns out to be its refusal to purge the Pro-Life movement from its ranks.

What's the Matter with Iowa?

The Governor of Iowa weighed in mendaciously yesterday on the Iowa Supreme Court's abusive ruling on homosexual "marriage," declaring--in a trope familiar to pro-choice Catholic politicians--that, while he personally felt marriage should be a bond between a man and a woman, he couldn't impose his personal, religious preferences which were only "a tenet of my personal faith."

The dishonesty of his position was compounded by his declaration that "I am reluctant to support amending the Iowa Constitution to add a provision that our Supreme Court has said is unlawful and discriminatory," overlooking the fact that such an amendment would not make the provision unlawful or discriminatory under Iowa law.

The real point of the misruling, as with the abortion misrulings over the last 35 years, was to continue the overturn of the influence of traditional sexual morality in public affairs. As with the abortion cases, we see that elected officials will first plead helplessness in the face of judicial activism, and then declare the matter "settled law," as though the law, in this case, were anything other than the whim of the Supreme Court.

The core purpose, as I pointed out earlier, of civil marriage is to establish a social commitment to and privileging of the procreation AND upbringing of children by legally committed pairs of mothers and fathers. Whether or not homosexuals might choose to commit themselves to such relationships is not of interest to this state commitment, since maximising the private pleasure of the married couples is not a state interest, any more than making sure, say, a significant number of Jews choose to enter into the hog-slaughtering business.

What's at issue here is the right of children to a committed mother and father from the first day of their lives, and the means the state takes to promote and defend that right. Presenting the children that some putative homosexuals bring into homosexual relationships as the children of that homosexual pairing, as the Iowa Supreme Court did repeatedly to attempt to obscure that core commitment, strikes directly at the biological reality of the perpetuation both of the nation and of the human race.

The Purpose of Marriage

In the course of Philo-Junius' examination of the illegitimacy of the Iowa Supreme Court's decision mandating the absurdity of homosexual marriage, it may be useful once again to remind everyone of the traditional meaning of marriage, taken from the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, which the Iowa Supreme Court felt keenly enough to spend three pages arguing veiledly against under the heading of "Religious Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage", even though the arguments themselves are not exclusively religious, nor, unfortunately, did they form any coherent part of the defendants' arguments, making the Court's shadow-boxing even more telling:

"DEARLY beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this Man and this Woman in holy Matrimony; which is an honourable estate...therefore is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God; duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.

First, It was ordained for the procreation of children...

Secondly, It was ordained...to avoid fornication; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry...

Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help, and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity..."

Another Iowan Discovers Secularism

In addition to refueling the joke-tellers of the northern Great Plains for years to come, the absurd decision of the Iowa Supreme Court striking down the state's statute defining marriage as a state between one man and one woman provides at once both a striking example of advocacy adjudication in the text of the decision, which verges both on the maudlin in its treatment of the plaintiffs' case and their "committed relationships and the morally obtuse in its bland denial of the obvious centrality of the mother-father partnership to the upbringing of children, and also a textbook case of judicial supremacy resulting in the complete evacuation of any semblance of democratic input on issues our secularist ruling classes have decided for themselves.

The falsehoods shot through this decision are legion; Philo-Junius will spend some time refuting them in turn, but will begin with an enumeration of the more glaring:

"Almost every professional group that has studied the issue indicates children are not harmed when raised by same-sex couples, but to the contrary, benefit from them."

"The legislature, in carrying out its constitutional role to make public policy decisions, enacted a law that effectively excludes gay and lesbian people from the institution of civil marriage."

"Thus, the right of a gay or lesbian person under the marriage statute to enter into a civil marriage only with a person of the opposite sex is no right at all. Under such a law, gay or lesbian individuals cannot simultaneously fulfill their deeply felt need for a committed personal relationship, as influenced by their sexual orientation, and gain the civil status and attendant benefits granted by the statute."

The mind reels at the bald mendacity of this reasoning. The "deeply felt need for a committed personal relationship, as influenced by their sexual orientation" has been by this ruling made the essential, defining element of marriage, overwhelming all state or social interests.

THIS is the smartest woman in the world?

It turns out that Hillary!, in addition to not knowing anyone who can translate "reset" into Russian, or that Russian is written in a Cyrillic alphabet, also is profoundly ignorant of Mexican culture:

"During her recent visit to Mexico, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made an unexpected stop at the Basilica of Our Lady of Guadalupe and left a bouquet of white flowers “on behalf of the American people,” after asking who painted the famous image.

"The image of Our Lady of Guadalupe was miraculously imprinted by Mary on the tilma, or cloak, of St. Juan Diego in 1531. The image has numerous unexplainable phenomena, such as the appearance on Mary’s eyes of those present in the room when the tilma was opened and the image’s lack of decay."

When she got into the limo to go to Guadalupe, did she ask, or did anyone bother to tell her WHY the photo op was considered a good idea?

Thank heavens the smart people are in charge now...

Formal Cooperation with Evil

President Obama to deliver Notre Dame’s Commencement address.

The cooperation of the Notre Dame faculty with the culture of death, by providing its current champion a platform from which to obfuscate, scandalise and confuse the faithful is duly noted--can anyone stop them?

For the Love of Heaven, Let Them Die

Rattner: GM, Chrysler May Need 'Considerably' More Govt. Money

Ailing Detroit automakers GM and Chrysler may need “considerably” more government bailout money than they've already asked for, said Steve Rattner, Treasury's de facto "car czar."

So far, GM and Chrysler have asked for $21.6 billion. But Rattner said that figure could go as high as $30 billion or $40 billion, according to an interview earlier today on Bloomberg TV, The Post's Kendra Marr reports.

There's no evidence that any amount of money is going to solve GM and Chrysler's problems, which are entirely wrapped up in outrageous and unsustainable labour costs. GM has basically staked its survival on hikes in federal gas taxes to keep gas at about $4 a gallon to force consumers to buy their alternative fuel automobiles. For the sake of the transportation industry and the U.S. economy in general, these two corporate vampires need to be staked and buried at a crossroads.

Is Anyone Who Can Add REALLY Surprised?

From The Washington Post:

U.S. Federal Deficit Soars Past Previous Estimates

"Deteriorating economic conditions will cause the federal deficit to soar past $1.8 trillion this year and leave the nation wallowing in a sea of red ink far deeper than the White House had previously estimated, congressional budget analysts said today.

"In a new report that provides the first independent analysis of President Obama's budget request, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicted that the administration's agenda would generate deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade -- $2.3 trillion more than the president predicted when he unveiled his spending plan just one month ago. "

Here's your change.

"Great Job, Brownie"

Obama to Leno: Geithner doing 'outstanding' job
By MARK S. SMITH – 4 hours ago

BURBANK, Calif. (AP) — President Barack Obama says his embattled treasury chief, Timothy Geithner, is doing an "outstanding job."

Philo-Junius will say it first:

"President Obama just don't care about taxpaying people."

Letting the Contempt Show

Steve Pearlstein of The Washington Post evidently got his bailout talking points today:

There's nothing remotely fair about using taxpayer money to rescue a free-market financial system from the mistakes of the financiers. But the reality is that we can punish the bankers or we can save the banking system, but we can't do both at the same time.

Philo-Junius invites Mr. Pearlstein to demonstrate this contention which, despite being noticeably repeated by many usual suspects of the media establishment, has never actually been proven.

The key to every con is to appeal to the mark's fear or greed and force them to make a quick, unthinking decision. Pearlstein and his ilk are merely running the same racket.