What's an Old Pope to Do?

His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI

As many of you have no doubt heard by now, His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI has chosen to step down as acting leader of the 1 billion strong unified Catholic Church yesterday. Very little is known has to why Benedict has chosen to retire aside from the fact that he claimed on the Vatican Radio:

"In today's world, subject to many changes and shaken by questions of deep relevance for the life of faith, in order to govern the bark of Saint Peter and proclaim the Gospel, both strength of mind and body are necessary, strength which in the last few months, has deteriorated in me to the extent that I have had to recognize my incapacity to adequately fulfill the ministry entrusted to me."

 Due to this statement many believe Benedict to be ill, though it is unlikely. The higher probability is that due to the high stress brought on from mass social changes within His Holiness' reign, such as the issue of gay marriage, has taken a toll on his health not in the form of illness but in the way of waning on him mentally. As some may view this as a sign of weakness in comparison to his predecessor, Pope John Paul II, but in truth it is a strength has he recognizes he is no longer fit for his office.

Sistine Chapel, Vatican City, Italy

One of the biggest questions on everyone's mind now though is 'what will Benedict do now?'. Inside sources say he intends on staying at Castel Gandolfo in Lazio, Italy for a short time but his primary place of residence will be a monastery on the Vatican grounds though it is speculated he may move in with his brother [Monsingor Georg Ratzinger, 89] whom he is very close to. This is about as much as we know however. Christopher Bellitto, a professor at Kean University who has written 9 books on the Catholic Church, believe Benedict will undoubtedly continue writing on the Holy Trinity, a topic that is something of great interest to His Holiness.

Photo provided by the Vatican newspaper, L' Osservatore Romano

Now all that is left is the election of a new Pope. The College of Cardinals, consisting of 120 holy men, will be gathering in the Vatican at the end of this month, after Benedict steps down as of the 28th of February, to take part in the Papal Conclave to vote on the new leader of the Catholic world. It is a well kept secret as to how the College decides whom to vote for as no cardinals are allowed to campaign for the position, but there are a number of candidates that hold favor amongst the Church. Cardinals Angelo Bagnasco, Angelo Scola, and Gianfranco Ravsi of Italy and Cardinal Cristoph Schonborn of Austria are prime runners for the position, but with the ever growing church other possibles are Odilo Scherer of Brazil, Peter Turkson of Ghana (who currently heads the Vatican's Justice of Peace Bureau), and Mark Ouellet of Canada who is the current leader of the Congregation of Bishops. It is also possible that New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan could be chosen but it is believed that the College, half of whom are European, will look down on a possible Pope from a world superpower.

Now I can only hope, as many others both inside and outside the church, that the new Pope will be more open and accepting of gays and females, but it will be a challenge. Pope Benedict will not be voting along side the cardinals, but his influence will still be very present as he hand picked the cardinals, most of whom are older, conservative, European gentlemen. Benedict and I share very opposing views on a number of subjects, but none the less I wish His Holiness a peaceful and pleasant retirement and wish the College good luck in the coming month.

Author Stephen King Blasts NRA, Politicians, and Gun Owners with Release of "Guns" Essay

Just a few weeks ago prominent psychological thriller/horror writer Stephen King published an eBook essay entitled Guns in which he slams people such as the NRA for their stubbornness and calls on gun supporters to support the ban on assault weapons.

Lashing against the NRA's claim that America's 'culture of violence' was to blame for things such as shootings, King stated: "to claim that America’s 'culture of violence' is responsible for school shootings is tantamount to cigarette company executives declaring that environmental pollution is the chief cause of cancer."

King charges head-on at NRA members again by saying:

"In the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings,” King writes, “gun advocates have to ask themselves if their zeal to protect even the outer limits of gun ownership have anything to do with preserving the Second Amendment as a whole, or if it’s just a stubborn desire to hold onto what they have, and to hell with the collateral damage."

"I have nothing against gun owners, sport shooters, or hunters,” King writes, but “how many have to die before we will give up these dangerous toys? Do the murders have to be in the mall where you shop? In your own neighborhood? In your own family?" 

 He criticizes the National Rifle Association, the media (for knee-jerk coverage of school shootings) and politicians (for inaction). He also discusses why he pulled his novella Rage, about a teenage gunman, after it was linked to four shootings between 1988 and 1996. 

"I didn’t pull Rage from publication because the law demanded it; I was protected under the First Amendment and the law couldn’t demand it. I pulled it because in my judgement it might be hurting people, and that made it the responsible thing to do. Assault weapons will remain readily available to crazy people until the powerful pro-gun forces in this country decide to do a similar turnaround. They must accept responsibility, recognizing that responsibility is not the same asculpability. They need to say, “we support these measures not because the law demands we support them, but because it’s the sensible thing.”

Until that happens, shooting sprees will continue."

In the essay he does not apologize for righting Rage, but says that it acted as fuel for already broken children:

"My book did not break (them) or turn them into killers; they found something in my book that spoke to them because they were already broken. Yet I did seeRage as a possible accelerant which is why I pulled it from sale. You don’t leave a can of gasoline where a boy with firebug tendencies can lay hands on it." 

 He also goes on to state that no one is out to take away our rights to own firearms, but that the fact that many think that they need need assault weapons that hold 40 or 50 rounds of ammunition solely to defend our homes is pathetic: "If you can't kill a home invader (or your wife, up in the middle of the night to get a snack from the fridge) with ten shots, you need to go back to the local shooting range."

Now I have yet to read Mr. King's essay, but I hope to do so soon. However if his essay is as solid as most articles state it as then I absolutely agree with King in all areas. The gun supporting lobby and the NRA needs to step up and realize the unnecessariness of the general public owning semi-automatic/assault weaponry and having over 10 rounds in your clip. If you can't take out a home invader within 10 shots then you need to spend more time at the range.

It's Back With Vengeance

Wow, I haven't posted since November. I do apologize for that. It's been a hectic time for me due to my son being hospitalized since October. Good news is he'll be finally in a couple days.

In other news though we have the clinically right-winger Glenn Beck. He's gone so far off the deep end Fox News doesn't even want him anymore, but there's still people crazy enough to support him, so he's back with glorious internet vengeance. Now he wants to build a city he's dubbed "Independence, USA" that embodies everything "real" America should be. So Jon Stewart takes a few well placed jabs at him, much to the entertainment of your logical brains and funny bones. Maybe it's just me, but I think ol' Glenn plays too much SimCity.

Election Day

Men and women of this once glorious country, I call upon you to do your civic duty and given right to cast your vote for the United States Presidential Election today, November 6th 2012.

Now I know I have been very critical of Gov. Romney and his running-mate Paul Ryan, and trust me I will continue to be as long as they remain in politics. But in all honestly and fairness I wish both Republicans, Democrats, and Independent runners the best of luck and that God, Allah, Buddha or what ever forces may be bless you in your endeavors. I personally will be voting for our current Commander in Chef, Barack Obama, but no matter who you support just remember to get out there and cast your ballot.

And to you out there that have no plans on participating in the election, I don't want to hear your complaining about whomever gets elected. If it's so important to you then you should have gotten up off your butt and voted.

Pinocchio for President

Over last weekend Gov. Mitt Romney began airing a political ad in Ohio specifically focusing on the auto industry, one of Ohio's biggest career areas. Now to most folks this is fairly commonplace during presidential  election time, but the thing that's got everyone's attention is the wonderful little morsel that Romney set before us but didn't think we'd notice. His incredibly blatant lie to Ohioans about their own industry. In a tv spot ad Romney has been stating that, "Obama sold Chrysler to Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China". However Chairman and CEO of Chrysler, Sergio Marchionne, gave a reply to local papers and news stations stating that Chrysler has "no intention of shifting production of its Jeep models out of North America to China". Well now, you'd think to save his rear end Romney would correct himself and move on to his next political agenda. But no, what does he do? Romney goes on to make several more radio and television ads stating the same lie. Mr. Marchionne stated again to the press saying "I feel obliged to unambiguously restate our position: Jeep production will not be moved from North America to China", and what does Romney do? He releases another radio ad stating the lie over again and saying the auto industry is a huge failure. Now that Romney shoved the entire auto industry into the same pile General Moters felt Romney targeting them too and their spokesman stated "We've clearly entered some parallel universe... campaign politics at its cynical worst" and "At this stage, we're looking at Hubble telescope-length distance between campaign ads and reality". Now see it's one thing if Romney was lying about Medicare or Welfare, but he's lying to people who work in the auto industry in the heart of that industry's territory and as Rachel Meddow of The Rachel Meddow Show said: "You can tell Romney's lie about Jeep isn't going to work in Ohio in part because Ohio voters follow the car industry like it's the local football team". So it's obvious Romney is getting scared that he's losing the election if he's pulling stunts like this in a hail mary-esk attempt to snag Ohio voters. Honestly, do we really want a president that lies so horribly that he trips over it in public?

Binders Full of Women

And – and so we – we took a concerted effort to go out and find women who had backgrounds that could be qualified to become members of our cabinet. I went to a number of women's groups and said: "Can you help us find folks," and they brought us whole binders full of women.

  

This is the infamous quote that left Romney’s lips yesterday, October 16^th 2012, that made women across the country scowl at the presidential hopeful. In the second presidential debate, women's issues finally came up. And Mitt Romney had an opportunity to show female voters he cared. But from his bullying of moderator Candy Crowley to his dismissive description of his hiring practices, he fumbled the chance. “Binders full of women”, his badly chosen phrase became the meme of the night and will likely haunt him past Halloween.

An important topic, and one which I learned a great deal about, particularly as I was serving as governor of my state, because I had the chance to pull together a cabinet and all the applicants seemed to be men. And I – and I went to my staff, and I said, "How come all the people for these jobs are – are all men." They said: "Well, these are the people that have the qualifications."

Now I don’t know about you but last I check in 2003 (when Romney was building said cabinet) there were plenty of highly educated and more then qualified women he could have had placed onto his cabinet. This isn't the 1800's when women didn't even go to college.

But why did the phrase “Binders full of women” resonate? Because it was tone deaf, condescending and out of touch with the actual economic issues that women are so bothered about. The phrase objectified and dehumanized women. It played right into the perception that so many women have feared about a Romney administration – that a president Romney would be sexist and set women back. Because of Romeny and Ryan the rights of women are in jeopardy and the country is becoming more and more aware of it.

Segments and paraphrasing used from The Guardian

Welcome Aboard

Greetings and salutations ladies and gents. I'm Jon, your snarky political moderator. I like to think of myself as an unaffiliated political party member, due to the fact that I find both the Democratic and Republican parties incompetent a majority of the time. This blog is where I'll bring you the facts of news and politics and where I'll also bitch on occasion about particular issues that strike an unpleasant cord with me. I hope you enjoy and become informed with the information I place before you, and please, give your feed back. Agree, disagree, argue, defend.


Sincerely Yours,
Jon W.