Ash Wednesday: How would Jesus vote next week?

Don't say pro-life. He would not support an obvious Republican scam (although he and his father never fulfilled the law which mandated forcing abortion on adulterous women as a pretext for stoning them). Besides, the GOP is doing the nomination Russian style. No primaries because Trump is the only one they will let on the ballot.

He would vote as a Zionist, but one who believes in the rights of Samaritans (aka, Palestinian Arabs - including the Catholics who are descended from the original Jerusalem - his kin).

He would vote against the rich and for social democracy for the poor.

He would vote for the candidate who spoke out against the evils of the Church hierarchy (a Marxist).

He would cheat and keep Sanders alive and vital for two terms (it would be easier than moving the heart of just one Trump voter).

He would have Mary Magdalena-Nazaro (Mrs. Jesus), write Bernie a check. And Judas. Jesus would bundle.

Now, about Ash Wednesday itself.

He would tell everyone to take the bus. Remember, he never took a chariot, a wagon or rode a horse. He walked. Can you imagine the picture of Jesus and the Twelve riding a posse. It would be funny, but no.

Jesus encouraged self-mortification to build an attitude of dependence on God, not impose divine sadism. If you fast, comb your hair and don't get the ashes. Ashes are group dynamics, not self-mortification. You can not add anything to his sacrifice, which was not a blood offering to God but a statement to us that God, as the Son of Man, has experienced the abnegation that we feel as sinners and as simply mortals. Our worship is for our sakes, not His. Anything else is self-centeredness.

About Last Night

I only saw part of the debate last night, but enough of the good parts to come to a few conclusions.

Bloomberg is not able to think on his feet and he is clueless about the job of President. President's are moral leaders, not managers. We tried the manager thing with Trump. Insanity is repeating a mistake.

Some think that nominating another woman is repeating that mistake. I disagree. Nominating the person who is taking their turn is the disaster. Sorry, Bernie. 

If one candidate is half of the age of three (or four) of the others - all on both ends need to get off of the stage.

Elizabeth had a great night. I am still concerned about the ability of her staff to think outside of their own box - then again, I have the same kind of box.

Amy needs to get dirtier. You cannot be too Minnesota nice - although former staff members assure us that she is not.

I simply cannot see how Sanders can be taken seriously on defense issues. Unless he condemns Putin in short order and in no uncertain terms, I cannot see how we can trust him. 

That none of them have condemned Mike Pence on not invoking the 25th Amendment shows a great failure of imagination among the entire field.

Free Roger Stone!

I hate to say it, but I agree with Citizen Trump on this one. Unless actual violence or bribery is involved, witness tampering should be an aggravating factor, as should lying to the FBI and Congress.

It is not Stone or Don, Jr. or Michael Cohen who should be on trial for the lies to Congress. It should be Jay Sekulow and his colleagues for both conspiracy and suborning perjury (which is more serious than the perjury itself).  That Jay can still practice law anywhere is a travesty.

What is Stone's underlying crime? Was he a acting as a journalist (he claims to be one) when he passed stolen information from the Internet Research Agency or was he a cyber-criminal? That is what a jury should have a chance to determine. If so, add the lying and tampering to the penalty.

Did the DNC have a right to not be embarrassed? Not really. Putting a thumb on the scale is how they roll. I am sure that someone is working behind the scenes against Sanders or Warren.

The most objectionable thing from 2016 is whether Trump had inside info on how soft Hillary was on Partial Birth Abortion. Did Moscow hack her briefing book? Did Trump collude with the Catholic bishops, who seemed ready to run with the issue after the third debate. I doubt there are fingerprints.

The question of election meddling is a way to muddy Trump without losing the ability to run against him and Moscow Mitch. The question behind the meddling is the real one that no one wants to touch. Mueller ignored it. So did Pelosi, Schiff and Schumer. It is this:

Is the President of the United States an unregistered Russian agent?

I suspect that prosecutors are operating under the theory that he can be close to Putin as policy matter. Not making this the focus of the investigation (which it is in SDNY and with Mazars) is too little, too late. Quietly making a case against GRUdi instead of treating him and Trump as an immanent threat is a dereliction of duty. Election meddling and obstruction are small potatoes compared to that.

Catie, Mitt Romney, Impeachment, Identity Politics and Traditional Values

In the Raising Catie Saga, we have new developments. Prior entries (copied from FB Notes Pages) are at https://xianleft.blogspot.com/2014/11/raising-catie.html.

When she was a bit older (after 2012) and still taking baths, she would line up her toys on the edge of the tub and make rude comments about Mitt Romney (I had gotten her the Mitt Romney issue of Mad Magazine) and knock her toys into the water with each one (sorry Mittens).

We talked about this a few days ago on our weekly call. She gave Mitt his props for voting against Trump on Abuse of Power and recalled her prior feelings about him. I have to agree. Mitt proved himself more of a gentleman than any of his fellows. Too bad he did not wait until 2016. I would have voted for him. With apologies to Hillary, he would have beaten her, but by a bigger margin. She lost the Obama only and mushy middle Catholic abortion vote on her own.

Run on identity politics, lose on identity politics. That being said, I suspect that Klobuchar will likely come in second tonight and consolidate the women's vote soon after (as well as the Clinton wing). I would rather win progressive rather than settle for Neo-Lib governance. Between Amy and Elizabeth, I prefer Elizabeth. As long as Booker or Harris is the VP and abortion is dealt with before the convention in a way that discredits the pro-life movement as having more to do with the rights of state majorities to control sexuality than the unborn, either Senator will win.

Speaking of sex, when Cate was younger, the war in Afghanistan was still raging and I wrote something about Virgin Martyrdom. Every father of a daughter (and daughter) should read this. Also this bit about sex and pleasure for a more holistic view of sex and about equality in marriage in general.

On Iowa

Still waiting for final results.

Mayor Pete looks to have won, but does he have legs in New Hampshire?

Can he credibly ask a Senator to be his Vice President, especially Senator Harris?

After his speech last night about finding belonging, does he have a chance in South Carolina?

Will Joe Biden retire gracefully from public life? Paging Dr. Jill.

Is Amy a genius for investing in a New Hampshire, expecting Sanders and Warren to split the Left?

Will Bernie split the women's vote? (He also must get Harris as V.P., Biden too if he pulls off a miracle).

Haven't we ended our Billionaire fetish? Shouldn't Mike and Tom have run in the GOP instead? They vote for Billionaires and slavishly follow their policies. This seems like a lost opportunity.

We will know about much of this in a week. If Amy does really well in the Granite State, she is in and Mayors Mike and Pete have a reason to stay. If Sanders wins big, one of the women must leave and that may be Amy unless she comes in second.

If Warren wins big, Sanders needs to be a gentleman and join Biden in retirement. His band of Social Democrats (they are not real socialists, their ideology is a better cage).

Both Warren and Klobuchar must pick either Senator Booker or Mayor Patrick to get the male Obama only voters. They will get the women's vote for all but the pro-lifers.

Pro-life Democrats need to face the question of whether they would give the unborn the legal right to a claim to a criminal law solution against their mother's and their doctors. In the criminal law, the mother must be prosecuted for contracting murder. If not, abortion is not murder nor is regulating it possible without violating her privacy rights. If they can't face that question, no one will trust them. They need to chose between being RINO or DINO, based on their answer. Pick a side.

The smart move for Warren or Klobuchar and NARAL on life issues is jujitsu. Say absolutely nothing. Any pro-choice or mushy-middle woman will be voting against Trump anyway. If they want to make the election a referendum about abortion, either kiss Catholics on the fence about abortion rights goodbye or explain why Dems for Life must be DINO or RINO and offer an economic solution instead (a robust, refundable, child tax credit with pay).

I don't see Amy adopting an aggressive Child Tax Credit, so the best nominee must be Senator Warren.