Lindy’s Blog: Where Mom is Always Right

March 30, 2009

Two steps forward…

Filed under: Catholicism,politics,pro-life — by lindyborer @ 7:33 am
Tags: , , , , , ,



And one back.  Perhaps this will swing north of us.  The snow doesn’t matter so much as the cold temperatures.  If it gets too cold, the few spring bulbs and the lilac buds will get zapped.  That happened two years ago, and to a certain extent, last year.  Adding insult to injury after The Longest Winter Ever.  I depend on my lilacs. 

What a weekend.  Suffice it to say, I’m glad it’s over.  Yes–I’m thankful it’s Monday.  One of the perks of working at home.  Schedule, order, talk radio, nap time–all there. 

And now this Notre Dame thing.  It’s really bothering me.  I take comfort in knowing that it is bothering a lot of others, as well.  From a convert’s perspective, it rankles the soul when an institution from the pillar and foundation of the Truth and the ultimate Defender of Life, and especially the one named for Our Lady, sinks to new lows in inviting The Abortion President to speak at their commencement and receive an honorary degree.  And I can safely say that if one more person mentions the importance of “dialogue,” I’ll heave.  Enough with the dialogue.  Dialogue has gotten us to where we are now.  The man sitting in the Oval Office is not teachable.  His hubris is palpable.  To be perfectly honest, there is something absolutely repellent about the man.  Call it what you will, but something in my soul shrinks away when I see him or hear him speak.  Everyone throws the word “evil” around so much now that it has lost its meaning or has made its user a laughingstock, but I’ll take the risk.  I think anyone who would take the anti-life stances that President Obama has taken so thoroughly, consistently, and unapologetically just has to have a black soul.  And it is my right to believe this, as I still maintain that there are such things in this world as “right” and “wrong.”

So, if you’re interested in signing a burgeoning petition to Notre Dame in grievance of this fiasco, by all means do so, here

And while you’re at it, remember to participate in Red Envelope Day.  Find a red envelope.  Address it to:  President Barack Obama/The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500  Seal it empty, and write on the back of the letter:  This envelope represents one child who died in abortion.  It is empty because that life was unable to offer anything to the world.  Responsibility begins with conception.  Mail your envelope on March 31st.  And pray to change the heart of the president.  Because it is our first and last hope.

March 26, 2009

Insane coincidence?

Filed under: politics,This and that... — by lindyborer @ 7:47 am
Tags: , ,

I never know what I’m going to find each day.  Today is no exception. 

If you’re unlucky enough to be on my email list, you got two from me this morning.  And, given my strange, reckless, paranoid, and faintly apocalyptic mood, I thought, what the hell?  Why not share it with everyone?

Here they are.  The first blogmail:  My mind, blown.

And the second:  This is either insane coincidence or something diabolical.   Make sure to watch both videos.   The skeptical side of me is, well, skeptical.  The other side?  Makes me want to hide under my bed, assume the fetal position, and whimper.  (After changing underwear, of course.) 

Make of these what you will. 

And, I should say, fear not, because we know Who is greater.

March 25, 2009

oxymoron of the day, UPDATED










Via Gateway Pundit:  House passes the Hitler Youth Bill—er, I mean, the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (GIVE, awww). 

Gateway Pundit: 

The bill includes language indicating young people will be forced to participate in mandatory national service programs. The bill also states that “service learning” will be a mandatory part of the youth curriculum.”

Ah, yes.  Mandatory volunteerism.  (kind of like the bumper sticker I saw recently that read, “Proud to be humble”)  Coupled with a healthy dose of indoctrination no doubt.

Well, at least Obama is keeping some of his campaign promises.  I recall blogging about his Civilian National Security Force, separate from and just as well-finded as the military.  Perhaps he’s recruiting our children for his ranks.  I look forward to the day my children turn me in for being in opposition to Obama. 

Hey, a little harmless conjecture, but skepticism and a healthy dose of cynicism is good.  If this doesn’t make a lot of people just a little bit nervous, then those people don’t have nerves.  Or brains.

Here’s more, via Free Republic:

Under section 6104 of the bill, entitled “Duties,” in subsection B6, the legislation states that a commission will be set up to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

You see, once the liberal/statists/secular progressives/ACLU succeeds in obliterating the role of faith and religion in the public square–you know, the ones traditionally responsible for strengthening the moral and social fabric of the nation—they have to come up with other means by which to do so.  Brilliant!

Hey, we couldn’t become a Marxist regime without a mandatory youth program!

(Meanwhile, some of my contemporaries, who consistently decry the involvement of government in their homes and get understandably upset at the thought of universal pre-school/required preschool for all children, still seem to think that Obama is the best thing to come along since, yes, sliced bread.  Waiting for the outcry, waiting, waiting…  You know, I really respect these people.  But we need some independent thinking, here.)


UPDATE:  Expanded Americorps has authoritarian feel  –The Washington Examiner

Plus, GIVE participants will not be allowed to express religious beliefs

Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto

Filed under: conservatism,politics — by lindyborer @ 6:51 am
Tags: , , , , ,

Good stuff.  Liberals aren’t even “liberal” anymore.  They’re better known, now, as “statists.” 

I, and many of you reading this, would rather shun “authoritarianism” in favor of a fascinating little concept known simply as “liberty.”

Incidentally, just mere moments ago I ordered Levin’s book from for $13.  It’s already #1 multiple places.  Buy it, read it, disseminate it.

March 23, 2009

Iowahawk adds to the fun.

Filed under: Humor,politics — by lindyborer @ 10:40 pm
Tags: , , , , ,

First, we have the advent of the TOTUS (that’s “Teleprompter of the United States), complete with its own blog: Barack Obama’s Teleprompter’s Blog.

Now, the TOTUS is demanding some things, and, it says, they’re non-negotiable. 

It’s funny.  Hey, just like Obama said on 60 minutes Sunday night:  Just a little “gallows humor.”

More thoughts on ESCR, UPDATED

Filed under: ESCR,politics,pro-life — by lindyborer @ 10:20 am
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

*UPDATE:  Timothy P. Collins asks, “Why does President Obama object to human cloning?” You know, that’s a really, REALLY good question, Dr. Collins. 

Plus, they’re making it up as they go along again in the UK, led once again by green advisor Jonathan Porritt.  Speaking at the Optimum Population Trust’s annual conference, he warned that Britain must cut its population size in half in order to build a “sustainable society.”  Just how does one do that, Mr. Porritt?  Remember that this secular progressive society is exactly what people like our Dear Leader have in mind for our own country.  Make no mistake, we’re following in the UK’s footsteps.  (Optimum Population Trust?)  Rick Moran writes:

This is beyond insidious. In order to achieve a 50% reduction in population, Great Britain would have to mandate family size and even take control of family planning completely, making the decisions regarding which parents will be able to have children and which won’t.

I’ll say.


 Something that has been on my brain the most as of late has been the re-opening of federal funding for ESCR.  (One of many anti-life Obama actions.)  I and many others have been busy emailing our university regents, asking that they not receive funding for such an unethical  practice.  And we’ve gotten varying responses.  Our particular regent, a Mr. Kent Schroeder, seems unable to formulate a logical, thought-out response, and so resorts to snotty one-liners or  questions.  Mr. Schroeder might take heed and recall that he is, after all, someone elected to his position, and it is his responsibility to be open enough to listen to the input of those who put him there.  He might never listen or change his opinion, but I think that someone in his position should at least have the grace to respond in a non-adolescent way.

The ESCR argument is, at heart, the abortion argument.  I think that people who are pro-abortion realize that if we collectively deem research on human embryos as wrong, then abortion can never be right, either.  Back to one of the responses, this one from Regent Hassebrook:  Although he at least tried to be civil, his thought process was lacking logic.  At one point, he pointed to the fact that IVF clinics are essentially doing the same thing, and they’re not getting in trouble, so why villify ESCR?  Now, that might be considered a “zinger” for some people, mainly Protestants or others who might not object to IVF, but for Catholics, it proves nothing.  The Catholic Church has remained firm (the only church to do so) in its objections to IVF, contraception, and abortion.  All Protestant churches were against these three things in the early to mid 20th century.  Only the Catholic Church has stood firm until today.  So, for us, Mr. Hassebrook has made the mistake of trying to justify bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior, and he scored no points. 

I realize that some of you might cringe to read this, but know that I’m saying it in total love:  The pro-life Protestant who calls himself “pro-life” but sees no problem with contraception or IVF has simply not thought it through.  (This is 1000+ blog posts in itself.)

Anyway, I thought that Fr. Andrews’ response to Mr. Hassebrook did a really good job going beyond the arguments that only skim the surface of the issue, and addresses the more basic, foundational problem with ESCR (and by extension, abortion, etc…)  With permission granted, here is his response:

I appreciate your response. Yes, I understand that there are different positions on this issue. There are different positions on almost every issue. However, that doesn’t mean that it is impossible to find and then agree on the truth of an issue. Conscience must be informed by truth or else we are prone fall into moral relativism.

The common defense of embryonic stem cell research is that these embryos are going to thrown away anyway. Think about that a minute. What right does any person have to decide another person’s fate or to use them for medical procedures? We certainly don’t believe in carrying out medical research on death row inmates. They too are going to die anyway. We’d be rightly outraged and put a stop to it if that were ever proposed.
Human life should never be manipulated in these ways because we always run the risk of explaining away a death here or there for the “greater good”. That’s proportionalism – certain wrongs do make a right.
You and I were both embryos at one point. All human beings are. It’s a stage of life. I’m saddened by the thousands of embryos in cold storage. They never should have been created and put there in the first place. But now that they are, so what to do? Since they are persons they deserve either adoption by families or a proper burial. We don’t have the right to use them for research because people are not property. We settled that one in 1864.
There is another fundamental principle that has guided physicians throughout the ages – Do no harm. Even if someone says that they don’t know when human life begins – that that knowledge is “above their paygrade” – we err on the side of caution. If I’m not sure an embryo is a human being I don’t “shoot first”, so to speak, and then ask questions later. If I’m wrong and act anyway I can never correct my action.
As sure as I’m sitting here typing this, you and I both know that the embryos in storage are not going to be enough. No, a need will arise to create embryos for some new form of research that shows “great promise”. At that point though it won’t matter because we will have already decided that it’s okay to manipulate human life for whatever purpose we need. Don’t you see? Without a principle to guide us anything is justifiable.
There are so many things that we are capable of doing but that doesn’t not mean we should do all of them. I am a Roman Catholic priest but my arguments are not based on theology but on logic, biology and respect for the human person.
The one bit of theology I will leave you with is this – life is not about advancing from cradle to grave without getting a disease. We’re all going to die and there will always be things we can’t cure. In the end the greatness of our life will not be measured by how much pain we avoided but how much we loved even when it hurt.
Thanks for listening.
Fr. Dan Andrews

Now, isn’t it true that every social/moral dilemma that we face in the world today boils down to one thing:  Truth.  Many in our time have fallen under the impression that there is no objective truth, no right or wrong, no principle or standard by which to measure anything.  This is called relativism, and moral relativism is now running rampant.  People must realize that if there is no standard, no such thing as “truth”, then anything is permissible.  And we all would like to say, “Well, X could never happen because we as a society are evolved enough to never let it happen,” but we would be wrong.  We are “evolved” enough to elect a man to office who voted four times to deny basic medical care to infants born alive after failed abortions.  We are now “evolved” enough to allow abortionists to dismember babies in the womb.  There are countless examples of our collective “superiority.”  We will continue to rationalize horrific practices as long as we collectively accept that there is not objective truth. 

Another thing that strikes me about this discussion is the dilemma that couples undergoing IVF go through when trying to determine what to do with their leftover embryos.  I can’t remember where I read this, but for a good many of these couples, the thought of giving them to research or destroying them is abhorrent.  The greater question is, “Why?”  And the answer should give all of us pause.
One final thought.  (I’m sorry, I’ll never succeed in writing a short post.)  It is easy to deny the humanity of an embryo for many people.  After all, it doesn’t look like a person, it’s miniscule, etc…  But I’ve always looked at it in this way:  Each of us is unique.  No two people were ever alike.  It happens at the moment of conception.  The DNA and traits that make one human different from every other human in the world and across time is there the moment the sperm and egg unite.  So, for the couple who, say, determine to have an abortion due to an unexpected pregnancy, and then go on to have a baby when the time is right, it’s not simply having the carbon copy of the baby they aborted.  That unique individual person can never be brought back.  It’s a different way of looking at it, but it has always been a powerful thought to me.  So, it is no wonder why couples have a difficult time in determining what to do with their extra (unique) embryos.  It is to answer the question, what do we do with the rest of the unique beings we have created?  

March 19, 2009

Don’t miss this.

Filed under: economy — by lindyborer @ 5:05 pm
Tags: , , ,

Victor Davis Hanson

The “Depression” for us Idiots

Again, the road to hell…(CPSIA)

Filed under: Health,politics — by lindyborer @ 7:32 am
Tags: , , , , ,

This has been brewing beneath the surface of my mind lately, and it has reached boiling point.  I now deem it necessary to blow my top.

It started out as a curious incident at Dollar General.  The kids begged and begged for some “fish squirties,” aptly named bath toys whose function reflects the name.  Less-than-thrilled by the prospect of four gallons of water, toys that propel it, and two overzealous children, I nonetheless caved that day.  (Moms, I was at that point where I would have done or said anything to get out of the store in a relatively calm manner.  It was past naptime, you understand.)  So, we reach the checkout and the cashier says, “Oh, I’m so sorry, I can’t sell this to you,” as she snatched it out of Linus’s little hand, pointing to the type-written sign on the pay pedestal with her other.  “Due to the recently-passed law, all products aimed at children under 12 that might contain pthalates are not for sale and subject to heavy fines.”  And that was the day that Mommy had to explain to Linus the pitfalls of Government.  “Linus, honey, I’m so sorry.  Blame the government.”  (Of course, now every time we go to the store, and Linus sees something he wants, he queries, “Can the government let me have this?”  And I go to smile, before realizing that his question reflects so much truth lately that all I can do is shrug and inwardly groan.)

Fast forward to my little solo shopping excursion last week.  I freely and openly admit that I shop at Goodwill.  Children have a habit of a) growing so fast that they barely wear an item of clothing, therefore leaving it brand-new and b) wearing their clothing to rags.  It is this combination that makes parents realize the genius of second-hand stores for children’s items.  Call it fiscal responsibility, if you will.  I have found more name-brand, excellent clothing for the kids at Goodwill or other thrift shops that I’ve barely had to pay over $5 for any single item of clothing.  (Plus, it’s rather fun/challenging to find a great bargain.)

Well, minus the children I was ready to hunt and rummage.  Change of season, Linus grew six inches, we need some bigger clothes!  I went to the back of the store to find–NOTHING!   Nada.  No children’s clothing.  I’m not exaggerating.  No toys, no childrens books.  I was like a black hole, and just as I turned to ask the store clerk, “Where are the goods?” I remembered:  GOVERNMENT!  CPSIA!  DAMMIT!

Okay, so what is CPSIA?  It’s the latest law designed “for the children” that practically no one in the House or Senate thought through when it was passed last August.  There was one nay vote in the House, and three in the Senate.  It was enacted on Feb. 10th, and it has done almost as much to piss people off as the drunken spending spree that is going on now.  (Which goes to show how many of our elected officials shop second-hand, apparently.) 

One of the Senators who didn’t vote for it, South Carolina senator Jim DeMint (along with five other Republican senators) has introduced a bill to amend the law so that it doesn’t include thrift stores, libraries, garage sales, hand-me-downs, etc… There is also a bill being introduced in the House to do the same.   Here is some more information about the law and its effects and requirements.

CPSIA:  The Consumer Products Safety Improvement Act.  Remember the China/lead toy scare?  In the rush to “do something,” our elected nincompoops passed a sweeping law that will do more to worsen the economic climate for millions of Americans who don’t necessarily buy all their childrens’ duds at Baby Gap or Janie and Jack.   Like garage sales?  Depend on hand-me-downs?  Fuggedaboudit.  Many stores won’t risk the liability or $100,000 fine.  (Here’s an excellent article that outlines the law and what is being done to try and amend it back to common sense.) 

And that’s not the worst of it:  any childrens books that are pre-1985?  Trash can.  Might have lead-type.  And we all know that children generally lick the pages of their books, right?  That treasured copy of The Velveteen Rabbit?  Get rid of it; it’s a hazard to your child’s health.  (Pause to think of the ramifications on used book sellers or collectors.)  That mom friend who knits baby scarves to sell online?  She might want to reconsider.  It is absolute insanity.)

Look, I managed to survive my “unprotected” childhood without growing a second head so far.  Do you think we’re overreacting?  

Anyway, this post grows long, and if you want to learn more, just google CPSIA and you’ll find tons of information, “Save handmade” blogs, etc…

What is the lesson, here?  There have been more stupid laws passed because the words “for the children” or “for the environment” are pasted on them, and in the end, they ultimately do far more harm than good.  (One that I can think of off the top of my head is the 1972 US banning of DDT, which has led to millions of malaria-related deaths in primarily Africa, the largest casualty group being children.)

As for poor children who might need that donated winter coat?  Well, they won’t get it.  Hey, they’ll be cold, but at least they won’t run the risk of lead exposure, right?

March 18, 2009

Bring it.

Filed under: politics — by lindyborer @ 7:34 am
Tags: , , , , ,

Under the category, “Unbelievable”:

I was over at American Thinker and saw this article written by Lona Manning, titled, The Knock on the Door.

The White House and the Democrat Party is organizing a “grassroots” organization, called “Organizing for America.”  The purpose?  To bring together Obama supporters and have them go door-to-door  in their neighborhoods and ask that their neighbors support Obama and sign a pledge card.  This is for real.  Obama announced it at the end of January, and the “forces” (gulp) are mobilizing as we speak.    

Manning writes:  “A sitting President of the United States is “organizing a political organization loyal to him, bound by a pledge, outside the government and existing party apparatus. The historical precedents are ominous.”  

Again, I’ll remind everyone that the campaign is over.  And generally, sitting presidents don’t “go there.”  Which is here.  And might I remind them that grassroots efforts are most often generated from the bottom-up, not the other way around, hence the name.   But I digress…

A visit to the official website, writes Manning, will show you this:

obama20hand20salute[S]upporters are not simply asked to sign up, they are asked to take a pledge. A pledge to support — not the flag, not the constitution, not the country, not even the Democratic party, but Obama and his “bold plan.” OFA does not use the Democratic Party logo but the “O”-shaped logo of the Obama campaign in which the red white and blue of the flag are abstracted to soft pastel colors.

Yes, this is ominous.  Any talk of pledging loyalty (fealty?) to another human being goes against every fiber of my being and my experience as both a Christian and an American.   And one need only look at history to understand that this sort of thing generally leads to no good.

Hmm, have we ever seen a charismatic, eloquent leader who took a country by storm, and had citizenry pledge loyalty to him and his “solutions,” complete with their own neat “salute”?  Seems rather familiar…but, anyway, let’s go on…

Manning wonders if the young Obama zealots in charge of this neighborly charade have ever heard about Mao’s Red Guard, or Fidel Castro’s “widespread system of neighborhood informers,” or Hugo Chavez’ use of “neighborhood committees”? 

Probably not, but the scarier possibility in my mind is, “Probably.”

I hazard to guess that the reception of such loyal entreaties would be met rather coldly around here.  And the sinful part of me would simply love to reveal my own “pledge,” complete with an altogether different salute: the one-fingered version.

March 17, 2009

totally arbitrary observations…

Filed under: This and that... — by lindyborer @ 11:58 am
Tags: ,

…just for the fun of it.  Brought to you by the devious minds of myself and my DH.

1) Closed captioning is fantastic.  Never miss an important phrase in a movie again.  Finally, thanks to CC, I know the words to ABBA’s Dancing Queen.  “You can dance, you can jive, having the time of your life, oooh, see that girl, watch that scene, dig in the dancing queen.”  I rented the movie version of Mamma Mia! while the kids were asleep and David was away.  Don’t repeat my mistake, but gleaning the actual lyrics was somewhat worth it.  Although David did come home to catch the end of the movie, and lost his permanent respect for Pierce Brosnan, who starred as one of Sophie’s fathers.  He:  “You were BOND, man!  How could you have sunk so low?”

2) Women dress for other women.  And women try to impress other women visitors by lighting as many candles as they possibly can.  (That is David’s observation, and I suppose he’s right in a sense.)

3) Women begin to regress fashionably as they age.  Little girls wear Tinkerbell and ponies on their shirts.  Women in the over 65-set opt for Precious Moments and cardinals.  Think about it.

Next Page »

Create a free website or blog at