From Vatican City:

Oct 23, 2010 / 01:11 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- The cause for the canonization of Cardinal François-Xavier Nguyen Van Thuan was officially opened in Rome this week. The cardinal, who suffered for years in Vietnamese prisons without trial, was exiled from his homeland and is remembered for never losing hope.

The diocesan phase of Cardinal Van Thuan’s canonization cause was inaugurated on Oct. 22 at Rome’s Lateran Palace. Cardinal Agostino Vallini, vicar of Rome, was on hand. So too was Cardinal Peter Kodwa Turkson, head of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace which Cardinal Van Thuan once led.

Cardinal Vallini remembered the Vietnamese prelate as a “witness of hope.”

Fr. Van Thuan was highly respected in his homeland. He worked in a number of roles including prison and hospital chaplain, seminary professor and rector before becoming the Bishop of Nha Trang, Vietnam in 1967. Through his direct involvement, in his eight years as bishop there the seminaries in the diocese more than tripled their enrollment.

Elected by Pope Paul VI as the coadjutor Archbishop of Saigon in 1975, he was subsequently jailed for “having plotted with the Vatican and the imperialists against the communist revolution.” He spent a total of 13 years imprisoned in North Vietnamese jails without ever receiving a trial. He was in solitary confinement for nine of them.

During this time, his hope was buoyed through the Eucharistic celebration, through which he transformed his cells into veritable chapels. Using breadcrumbs and wine, smuggled in under the guise of stomach medicine, he consecrated the bread and wine in the palm of his hand into the Body and Blood of Christ. He was also able to fashion a pectoral cross out of wood that hung from his neck by a chain made of bits of wire.

His imprisonment, John Paul II recalled in the year 2000, serves to “reinforce in us the consoling certainty that when everything around us and maybe within us falls apart, Christ remains our unfailing support.”

Archbishop Van Thuan was released in 1988, but after making a trip to Rome in 1991 he was not allowed to return home. He continued to work to build up the Vietnamese Church from Eternal City and in 1994 he entered the Roman Curia under appointment by John Paul II as the vice president of the Pontifical Council of Justice and Peace. In 1998, he was named the council’s president. He was created cardinal in Feb. 2001 and died in Sept. 2002. …

Go here for the rest of the story.

Harry Reid’s “surge is not working” slap in the face in 2007 should not be forgotten by Nevada voters.

Dennis Miller’s takedown is classic.

At an open NewsBusters thread this morning, commenter “ThisnThat” pointed to a Friday unbylined Associated Press item that twice used the label “ultraconservative” to describe Nevada U.S. Senate candidate Sharron Angle.

Just for the heck of it, AP also threw in Reid’s reference to Angle as being “too extreme,” and his parroting of that biennial Democratic falsehood that a GOP candidate is for “privatizing programs for the elderly and veterans.”

Meanwhile, the wire service did not tag Reid as an “ultraliberal,” or even as a “liberal,” even though his 2009 rating with the obviously ultraliberal group Americans for Democratic Action was 95% (large PDF here), one vote short of that organization’s definition of “perfection.”

Here are excerpts from the AP report:

Obama Campaigns for Reid as Democrats Try to Minimize GOP Gains in Senate

President Obama threw his star power behind the Democrats’ embattled Senate leader, who finds himself in a tossup campaign against an ultraconservative tea party favorite in America’s most-watched Senate race.

Republicans have made Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid their top target in the Nov. 2 election. The minority party needs to gain 10 seats to wrest control of the Senate from the Democrats, and unseating the most powerful Senate Democrat would deal a major blow to Obama, who reminded supporters of Republican opposition to his agenda.

Reid is tied in the polls with relative unknown Republican Sharron Angle in a race that has attracted millions of dollars from across the nation.

… Republican candidate Angle, campaigning Thursday in Las Vegas with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, urged Reid to “man up” and accept his share of blame for the state’s economic woes.

Reid has responded to such attacks by saying Angle like other tea party-backed candidates is too extreme for Nevada voters. He has called her an ally of the special interests and advocate for jettisoning government agencies and privatizing programs for the elderly and veterans that millions of Nevadans rely on.

… The 61-year-old Angle, a former state lawmaker — like tea party-backed candidates in other states — defeated a favorite of the state’s Republican establishment in the primary election.

Her ultraconservative policies have hurt her in the general election campaign with some moderate Republicans and leaders of the state’s gambling industry backing Reid. She has countered by casting Reid as a career politician who lives in a fashionable condominium in Washington and is out of touch with the state he has represented in Congress for decades.

Here’s something odd. Even though the story appears at many other publications, it is not being carried at the AP’s main web site, as shown here in searches on “Reid Obama” (not in quotes), in which the above story does not surface, and “ultraconservative,” which comes up empty. It’s almost as if AP wants to conceal the story from many national readers while making sure it gets seen in Nevada.

Oh, and as if anyone expected otherwise, a search on the word “ultraliberal” at the AP’s main site comes up empty.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

When a Democrat or leftist makes an ill-advised remark, it seems that there’s a three-stage process at the Associated Press, and perhaps in most other establishment press outlets, for handling it. It goes roughly like this:

• Stage 1 – Ignore it as long as you can. If there isn’t much outcry, keep ignoring it.
• Stage 2 – If there ends up being enough of an outcry from conservatives or Republicans to warrant coverage, make sure that the story is about the criticism at least as much as the remark.
• Stage 3 – In the ensuing coverage, leave out what was originally said.

The Associated Press is currently and grudgingly at Stage 2 with Harry Reid’s remark that “but for me, we’d be in a worldwide depression,” as seen below (reproduced in full for fair use and discussion purposes):

It’s worth going back two years to when the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) legislation was passed to demonstrate that even if it helped avoid a depression (a dubious assertion in the first place), Harry Reid’s support of and vote for TARP had nothing to do with it — unless he had advance knowledge about how TARP would really be carried out.

You see, the TARP Congress voted for was not the TARP that was carried out by Hank Paulson with the cooperation of (and some say the urging of) then New York Federal Reserve President Tim Geithner.

Reid, the Senate, Nancy Pelosi, and the House voted for a TARP whose clear intent was to buy up bad mortgages, as indicated in the following articles from the relevant September-October 2008 time period:

At NPR; October 1, 2008 (“Senate OKs Bailout Package, House To Vote Friday”) –

… Lawmakers in the House added provisions that would dole out the $700 billion the government wants to buy bad loans in three tranches.

… The bill also includes beefed-up oversight of the program and a cap on compensation for executives who have the Treasury buy up their bad mortgages.

At Fox News (“Reid Pushes to Reach Bailout Deal Before Markets Open”); September 28, 2008 –

… The legislation the White House is promoting would allow the government to buy bad mortgages and other sour assets held by investors, most of them financial companies.

At USA Today; September 29, 2008 (“Leaders back historic bailout; ‘Now we have to get the votes’”)

(in the sidebar) The Treasury Department will buy up to $700 billion of distressed mortgage-backed securities and other bad debt held by financial institutions; it will get $350 billion to start.

(in the article text) “Now we have to get the votes,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Harry Reid apparently believes that because he was able “to get the votes,” he should get full credit for depression avoidance. What else has he done?

But “buying up bad mortgages” is not what happened with TARP. Instead, in mid-October 2008 (covered at the time at NewsBusters; at BizzyBlog), Hank Paulson figuratively “pointed a gun to the heads” of big bank CEOs and forced them to “accept” direct government equity investments. Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for TARP, revealed in October 2009 that Tim Geithner viewed Paulson’s move as, in a CNS News paraphrase, ”an offer the banks could not refuse.”

I daresay that nobody who voted for the legislation, and for that matter no one else in America — except perhaps for a number of insiders — knew that TARP would be used to purchase ownership stakes in banks, other financial entities, and eventually car companies. I also daresay that TARP never would have gotten through Congress if those outcomes had been known.

For Harry Reid to be able to say “but for me, we’d be in a worldwide depression,” he would have to also claim that he knew that TARP would not be employed as Congress clearly intended, and that he was perfectly okay with deceiving his fellow legislators and the rest of the country despite having that advance knowledge. It that really the case, Harry? Are you one of the insiders who knew what would really be done?

The establishment press, as usual, has missed an opportunity to shine a light on what really happened after TARP was passed. I suspect that this oversight has a lot to do with many of them supporting what Hank Paulson did, and what his successor has done.

Cross-posted at NewsBusters.org.

From Bordeaux, France:

Oct. 20, 2010

A woman pronounced “very certainly clinically dead” at a French hospital woke up hours later after her sons refused to turn off her life-support system, medics and the woman said.

Doctors were preparing cancer patient Lydie Paillard, 60, for a chemotherapy session when she passed out, the director of the Bordeaux Rive Droite private hospital Yves Noel told AFP on Wednesday.

A doctor managed to resuscitate her and put her on a ventilator but then, having consulted other doctors, called Paillard’s sons to break the news that their mother was “very certainly clinically dead”.

But her sons would not turn off the respirator and she was then transferred to the university hospital of the southwestern French city where a scan revealed that she was in fact not brain dead, Noel said.

“It’s a kind of miracle,” he said of Paillard, who woke up after 14 hours. He said that the doctor who resuscitated her had committed a communication error not a medical one as “he saved her life.”

“All I remember is that I felt unwell after receiving an injection to prevent me vomiting,” Paillard told AFP by telephone from hospital where she said she felt “more tired than usual” after her ordeal. …

Go here for the rest of the story.

Nicely done (HT Hot Air via Instapundit):

The lecture pictured here happens in 2030, and is looking back at the USA’s failure as if it’s in the somewhat distant past. Though it doesn’t name a date, 2020 would be about right — if not earlier.

At Investors Business Daily:

Dr. Obama diagnoses a heretofore undiscovered psychological derangement: anxiety-induced Obama Underappreciation Syndrome, wherein an entire population is so addled by its economic anxieties as to be neurologically incapable of appreciating the “facts and science” undergirding ObamaCare and other blessings their president has bestowed upon them from on high.

I have a better explanation. Better because it adheres to the ultimate scientific principle, Occam’s Razor, by which the preferred explanation for any phenomenon is the one with the most economy and simplicity. And there is nothing simpler than the Gallup findings on the ideological inclinations of the American people:

Conservative: 42%. Moderate: 35%. Liberal: 20%. No fanciful new syndromes or other elaborate fictions are required to understand that if you try to impose a liberal agenda on such a demonstrably center-right country — a country that is 80% non-liberal — you get a massive backlash.

Moreover, apart from ideology is empirical reality. Even as we speak, the social democratic model Obama is openly and boldly trying to move America toward is unraveling in Europe.

Actually, where Obama wants to take this country is far to the left of anything even the most ardent socialists in Europe have ever put into place. To cite just one example, this is demonstrably obvious when, looking at the massive subsidies — and literal wealth redistribution — hard-wired into ObamaCare.

If you haven’t seen the table at the link, you owe it to yourself to see it, and grasp its impact. So I’ll put it here again:

In certain instances (the purple boxes), a person who increases their income loses more than the amount of their income gain in reduced health premium subsidies.

If ObamaCare is implemented, once its full impact is appreciated by the populace, Dr. Obama’s and the Democratic Party’s prescription for U.S. health care will depress and demotivate individual and families to a degree heretofore unseen, and all but destroy any incentive to advance and improve one’s economic standing — which is why it must be repealed.

From Rio de Janiero:

Oct 21, 2010 / 10:02 pm

The bishops from the Brazilian state of Rio de Janeiro issued a statement on Oct. 18 encouraging the faithful to vote for candidates who defend life from conception until natural death.

Coming just two weeks before the Oct. 31 presidential runoff election, the bishops said that “because of her universality, the Catholic Church does not have its own party or candidate.” However, the prelates emphasized that the Church “urges now more than ever that voters elect those who respect ethical principles and the criteria of Catholic morality as laid out in the Social Doctrine of the Church.”

The bishops explained that “in particular, those who have defended and defend the value of life from conception to natural death and who defend the family in its natural form should be elected.” They also rejected the idea that abortion be considered “an issue of public health.” …

Go here for the rest of the story.

This is as good as it gets:

Key question: “If wealth is limited, where did all of this stuff come from?” He tells us: Creativity, Complexity, and Free Trade.

The free trade riff is especially good, but doesn’t cover the point I raised here in a comment a while back, which I believe needs airing. So here goes:

Say there are two people in the world and two things that people need to survive: food and water.

Person A can make food better than Person B. Person B makes drinkable water better than person A. Whereas both of them had been making both items for themselves, they figure out that they’d have more of each if they specialized in what they’re better at. So Person A makes all the Food and Person B makes all the water.

Ah, but after after some time goes by Person A throws away the tools he used to make drinkable water, and after a further amount of time he also forgets how to make it.

One day Person A and B get into a fight. Person B, who didn’t forget how to make food and who didn’t throw his food-making tools away, tells person A that he will no longer provide him any water. Person A retailiates, but Person B still remembers and retained the capability of making food.

Person A, helpless, dies of dehydration.

Similarly, if we totally abandon or outsource certain key capabilities, we can be seriously hurt. If, for example, China and India get to the point of making all of the world’s aircraft avionics and spare parts for planes, we could get to the point where our Air Force is held hostage to the national interest of either country if they turn hostile. If we abandon the factories that make these things and throw away the tooling involved in getting set up to make these things, what choice will we have but to comply with whatever their hostile desires might be?

Ricardo assumed rational economic human beings. And to defend Ricardo, the scenario described above would probably never occur if “trade” were purely a matter of transactions between individuals and individual entities, even if some of those entities are large multinational corporations.

But that’s not how it is. We operate in a world where many whole nations are controlled by irrational dictators and/or irrational statists and/or irrational nationalists.

“Trade” is anything but free in many parts of the world, especially those where the government has a majority stake in all enterprises. There is nothing stopping a country from doing what appears to be economically “irrational” in the name of some “higher purpose.” We seem well on the way down the path towards being unable to protect ourselves from sudden trade “irrationality.” Creating this vulnerability has been a bipartisan effort.

Juan Williams is an African-American liberal who often makes sense. For example, in his 2007 book “Enough,” he rightly contends that the leftover vestiges of racism are way down on the list of things holding many African-Americans back. His subtitle points to some of the items that are way ahead of racism: “Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure.”

Williams also appears on Fox News.

NPR, for whom Williams had worked for at least 10 years, has just terminated Williams’s contract (HT Erick Ericksen).

Jeffrey Goldberg at the Atlantic correctly contends that NPR’s “justifications” constitute “No Particular Reason”:

These are two of the controversial comments in question, according to The New York Times:

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

And this, in reference to Faisal Shahzad, the Pakistani immigrant who attempted to blow up Times Square with a car bomb:

“He said the war with Muslims, America’s war is just beginning, first drop of blood. I don’t think there’s any way to get away from these facts.”

The first quotation reflects the views, I’m guessing, of the vast majority of people who fly in this country (and in Europe and Asia and other parts of the world, as well).

… is he wrong to worry about Islamist terrorism? Of course not.

In reference to Faisal Shahzad, Williams is on firmer ground: Shahzad, and other Islamist terrorists, view themselves as engaged in a war with America, in which American cities are meant to be battlegrounds. … It is not racist to acknowledge that in many different countries, and even within the United States, young Muslim men — thousands, it would be fair to say — spend their days thinking up ways to kill American civilians.

Ericksen notes that part of NPR’s “justification” for the termination is that “his remarks on the O’Reilly Factor … were inconsistent with our editorial standards,” and observes: “NPR recently ran a segment on how to speak ‘teabagger.’” Actually it was almost a year ago, but they certainly did, and it’s still there, with animation.

NPR’s newsroom, and public radio newsrooms in general, just got chillier, as those who remain in their well-paid perches (I would argue “overpaid”) fully realize that any straying from leftist orthodoxy on civil rights, Islam, or terrorism — oh, I’m sorry, “man-caused disasters” (HT The Foxhole) — may jeopardize their cushy, Ruling Class positions.

_______________________________________________

At New York Magazine, apparently based on piece in the Harvard Business Review (“Analyst Places $2.7 Billion Value on Michelle Obama’s Public Wardrobe Choices”):

Apparently when Michelle wears something, that company’s stock spikes upward.

The smart-aleck comeback would be that this only demonstrates the presence of Capitol Hill insider trading.

Looking at the bigger picture, here is how some of the companies named in the article have been doing:

• Saks — “Saks 2Q sales up 5 percent, posts loss.”
• J. Crew — “Needham & Co. cut third and fourth quarter profit estimates for the U.S. clothing retailer.”
• The Gap — Same-store sales in September were down 2% from a year ago.
• Dillard’s — “Year-to-date sales, meanwhile, are virtually the same in 2010 as in 2009 at more than $3.7 billion. … The financial news comes in the same week Dillard’s announced it was laying off 50 workers in the information technology department of its Little Rock offices.”
• DSW is the only store with clearly good news — “… net income of $23.5 million on net sales of $415.1 million for the second quarter ended July 31, 2010, compared with net income of $7.6 million on net sales of $369.5 million for the quarter ended August 1, 2009.”

I’d say Ms. Obama’s effect on most of the “beneficiaries” of her fashion choices is similar to the employment effects of the so-called stimulus on the economy as a whole: isolated, momentary improvement, followed by flatness and/or decline.

Also, Doug Powers at Michelle Malkin’s place finds the claim of Ms. Obama’s star power hard to reconcile with the fact that two of her more famous designers have gone belly-up.

_______________________________________________

Maureen Dowd took some more condescending swipes at conservative women yesterday, which is hardly noteworthy any more. What should be noted is this contention:

It’s news to Christine O’Donnell that the Constitution guarantees separation of church and state.

Earth to MoDo: The Constitution does no such thing. If you need a law prof to explain it to you, go here.

Here’s another law professor:

I also think it’s important to use this opportunity — like the Sarah Palin “1773″ brouhaha — to point out that the credentialed gentry class isn’t nearly as smart, and certainly isn’t as well-educated, as it thinks it is. Because, you know, it isn’t.

He’s talking to you, MoDo.

_______________________________________________

Ginni Thomas’s request for an apology from Anita Hill is spot-on, because Anita Hill lied 19 years ago (“The jury of the watching populace at last had something to go on other than conflicting testimony. If Ms. Hill was obviously willing to lie about the plot to get Judge Thomas to quit, might she not be the liar in the escalating story about monstrous behavior?”).

_______________________________________________

From “The World Will Love Us If We Elect Obama — NOT” Dept.:

The leaders of Iran and Venezuela hailed what they called their strong strategic relationship on Wednesday, saying they are united in efforts to establish a “new world order” that will eliminate Western dominance over global affairs.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and visiting Venezuelan counterpart, Hugo Chavez, watched as officials from both countries signed 11 agreements promoting cooperation in areas including oil, natural gas, textiles, trade and public housing.

_______________________________________________

China’s rare-earth maneuvering is yet another reason why we should be exploiting our own bountiful domestic energy resources. The continued, enviro-led and Obama administration-assisted attempt to prevent it raises the question of whether we are being deliberately led into dependency on the tender mercies of what is still an oppressive Communist regime. Update: Yes, I am also quite aware that there are tech-related implications of China’s rare-earth hoarding. Obvious solution: Find whatever we have, as Boeing (I’m sure among many others) is doing.

From Sheffield, UK:

Last updated at 10:17 AM on 6th October 2010

Steve went to hospital where a consultant cardiologist carried out further checks that revealed he had an aneurysm of the ascending aorta – a bulging in the front of the heart which could burst at any time.

He underwent open heart surgery to repair the aneurysm and to replace the valve and is has now made a full recovery.

Becky, a GP at Highfield, Sheffield said: ‘Steve’s condition was picked up by chance. If it hadn’t been, we could have been out on bikes or pulling something heavy and it could have just burst, as happens to a lot of people.

‘It’s pretty rare for an aneurysm to be diagnosed in this way, most of the time it presents itself with people having a pain in the chest and becoming very unwell. …

Go here for the rest of the story.

This seems timely, given the comedy officially known as the CNN/Time poll showing Ted Strickland ahead of John Kasich by a point, with moderates breaking 63-31 … for Strickland (click on the link at this Real Clear Politics to get to the detail)!

I think CNN and Time polled “moderate Marxists.”

As I noted when I originally posted the video (direct YouTube), it may be that watching with the sound off will give you the best idea of how truly unhinged Ted Strickland’s Labor Day rant at the AFL-CIO’s Coney Island picnic really was:

Partial Transcript (unfortunately not complete because of weak audio and strident delivery):

The Republican Party has been overtaken by the zealots, by the extremists, by the radicals, by the _____, and they don’t seem to like Ohio very much, and quite frankly, they act as if they don’t like America very much.

They want to change our Constitution, they want to change Medicare, they want to change ___, they want to change this country …. and we say to them, “Hell no, we won’t …”

And so I ask you: Are you read to fight …. against the extremists? Are you ready to fight the Tea Party radicals? … Are you ready to fight John Kasich?

… What we are fighting against is Wall Street greed that brought our economy to the brink of total disaster.

… They like to say that in Ohio has lost 400,000 jobs. What they don’t say is that America lost 8-1/2 million jobs. And why did those jobs leave our people and our country? It was not because of Ohio, it was not because of the men and women standing on this platform with me. It was not because of organized labor. It was not because of Ted Strickland. It was because of Wall Street greed!

… They want to take the culture of Wall Street, they want to take the greed of Wall Street, they want to take the leadership of Wall Street, and take over this country, and we say, “Hell no!” …

This was Tea Partier Chris Littleton’s response, as carried at RightOhio:

Dear Fellow Citizens and Taxpayers,

There really aren’t any words that describe this video. It’s simply what Governor Strickland thinks of you and me.

He asks the crowd a very simple question – “Are you ready to fight the tea party radicals?”

And just for Governor Strickland’s pleasure, let me outline those “radical” beliefs of the tea party.

1. Limited Government: we think the bigger the government the smaller the citizen. We advocate for less government in our lives and therefore more personal liberty.
We believe the current direction at all levels of government is expanding government’s scope and influence not lessening it.

We also believe both parties are to blame for expanding government in Ohio and elsewhere.

2. Fiscal Responsibility: we think the government should spend less than it takes in. We believe that working Americans and small business owners in every inch of the United States understand this because we live it every day in our personal lives.

We believe the only people that don’t get this are government officials and bureaucrats.

Example (just for governor Strickland): when faced with a budget crisis (AKA more bills than money – had to explain it for Strickland), you can’t expand programs or take money from the federal government just to patch the hole. You must cut spending.

We believe that citizens do this in our personal lives – why can’t government?

3. Free Markets – we believe the government should not be driving the economy – the entrepreneur should. The less tax and regulatory burden placed on business owners, the more wealth and jobs that will be created.

Since Ohio ranks at the bottom of the list in practically every ranking for a business-friendly state, I’m pretty sure neither party for the last 20 years gets this either.

But, our people get it. They say – “Government I don’t need anything from you. I just need to be left alone for my business to succeed. Get out of my hair.”

So Governor Strickland – how are these key principles so radical?

I would consider these American values, but if you want to declare war on the American value system. Who am I to stand in your way.

I wish you the best of luck in declaring war on people who believe in personal responsibility, hard work and strength of character. But, if that’s your belief system…well…I guess we weren’t raised the same way, and thank God for that.

Best of luck to you in the upcoming election. I guess only time will tell how many of us embrace these “radical” ideas and are happy to denounce you.

OPEN INVITATION: If you’d like to sit down with me and discuss my radical value system – open invitation. Happy to chat anytime.

I don’t think Chris needs to keep his cell phone on 24-7 in anticipation of that call.