some facts from Clinton at Fr Z’s blog. Read em and share
I think it’s interesting to compare the charitable giving of our Republican politicians
and the Democrats, just to see if HuffPo is indeed full of it.
George W. and Laura Bush’s tax records consistently show charitable contributions of about
10%, both before and during Mr. Bush’s presidency. The Obamas’ tax records show a much
less consistent and less generous history:
In 2000, the Obamas reported $240K in combined income and gave 1.0% to charity.
In 2001, the Obamas reported $270K in combined income and gave 0.5% to charity.
In 2002, the Obamas reported $238K in combined income and gave 0.4% to charity.
In 2003, the Obamas reported $238K in combined income and gave 1.4% to charity.
In 2004, the Obamas reported $207K in combined income and gave 1.2% to charity.
In 2005, the Obamas reported $1,655K in combined income and gave 4.7% to charity.
In 2006, the Obamas reported $983K in combined income and gave 6.1% to charity.
In 2005, the Obamas’ reported income was over 2x that of the Bush’s, yet the Bush family’s
total amount of reported charitable giving was 2x that of the Obamas.
As for the VPs, In ’05, then-Vice President Cheney gave 77% of his income to charity. No,
that’s not a typo– the man the left accuses of being heartless gave 77% of that year’s income
to charity. In the 10 years prior to Joe Biden becoming VP, he and his wife gave a combined
total of $3,690 to charity– 0.2% of their income. They gave in a decade what most
Americans in their tax bracket give in a year.
And just for the fun of it I will note that John Kerry, who until he recently became our
Secretary of State was probably the richest man in the Senate, in 1993 reported $175 in
charitable contributions on his tax return. Which is a lot better than 1995, when he gave $0.
But he’s a Democrat, so I’m sure he loves the poor…
I think we can all agree that HuffPo is full of it.
Then what are we? Babylon? A conglomeration of various cultures, languages and a servant of the state?
How do we stand up to our enemies without a moral compass?For that matter how do we function as a country if we have a President who abdicated his moral authority?
Yes, it’s a Christian country or at least that is what the founders intended. It’s those same Christian values that protect the person who doesn’t believe.We don’t call atheists infidels and kill them.
It gave us freedom of religion-sorry to say we now have a president that is attacking the Catholic Church specifically,Christianity in general and violating freedom of conscience.
Obama believes the state is God and sad to say he’s got his own Messianic complex. Thanks to the media for helping his ego along and covering up his felonies.
Of course i’m proud our country would elect a black President and i understand why the black community would feel immense pride in this. Unfortunately i think the Democratic party used his race,rather than his character,to get the votes knowing that if a majority of blacks would vote for him he would win.It was a totally calculated strategy. They used the people who voted.
I don’t want to take away the pride they feel in what he accomplished. They have every right and good reason to feel that way. I’m not knocking anyone based on race. I’m only looking at Obama and WYSIWYG*
I’ve gotten weary of the narrative that the Republicans are not compassionate-Romney was just some rich white guy that didn’t care about the poor,minorities or women.
The narrative goes even further and uses the very Christianity we were founded upon to get ppl to vote Democrat. In the same breathe they attack Christianity and argue that it’s not a Christian nation.They use it as they see fit.
Let me remind the people who voted for Obama-Catholics especially.
He supports abortion and would not even sign the born alive infant protection act.
Our economy is crumbling before our eyes, violence is rampant in so many cities and we have one Kermit Gosnell committing the most henious crimes and what does Obama do? Runs off and reassures Planned Parenthood he’s behind them all the way.
He supports the LGBT community.Stood back and let DOMA be deemed unconstitutional.Didn’t say a word-didn’t lift a finger. He does when it suits him.
He let the IRS target conservative and religious groups,said it was unacceptable then turned around and called it phony.
What about Benghazi and Fast and Furious? Where is the media? It’s state run and nobody is forcing them. It’s one thing to live in a country like Venezuela where the state forces the media to put out their talking points,cover up their corruption and support the POTUS.Here they do it WILLINGLY.It’s shameful.
We are a Christian nation. Obama wouldn’t even permit the words IHS(Jesus Christ)to be on display. He’s trying to force Catholic institutions to violate their own conscience. He totally supports abortion, same sex marriage and has the IRS target opponents. Catholics voted for him? They do know that abortion,same sex,euthanasia are all deemed INTRINSICALLY EVIL by the faith they claim to profess. Do they not know that as a Catholic you submit to the teaching authority of the Church in matters re faith and morals?
Yes, the Church calls on us to help the poor,needy and marginalized. She doesn’t say if you help the poor,needy and marginalized you can then look the other way at what is deemed intrinsically evil.Yes,the Catholic Church teaches that God is merciful but the flip side of that is in order to obtain mercy you must first know you need it.
Yes, this is a Christian nation and unless you want the state to be god then we need to realize this. Look at our Christian roots. Check out the history of our founding fathers.
They didn’t use the words endowed by our Creator in there because it sounded nice.We are not going to be a beacon to the world-or for that matter our own citizens-if we’re not guided by a moral compass based on our founders Christian values.
You CAN care for the poor and protect the unborn and their mothers.
You CAN focus on jobs and build up the family.
You CAN represent all Americans and not have to sacrifice your religious faith.
In fact without that moral compass all you have is power and end up corrupt.
I believe Obama was corrupt to begin with and ppl didn’t want to see it.The media told the folks he walked on water and so they believed he must walk on water.
WAKE UP.Obama duped you.The media helped him dupe you and you’re still being lied to.
We are never going to be able to fight the enemy until we recognize our own Christian roots. No they [jihadists]are not ‘on the run’. Nice election talk.
Obama’s parents were communists.Obama’s childhood mentor was Frank Davis-a dyed in the wool communist.This was your choice.
A federal judge in Richmond, Va., has refused to dismiss from a lawsuit several FBI and Secret Service agents as well as local police officers who arrested a military veteran based on an opinion from a counselor who had never met him that he might be a danger.The officers had confronted the veteran, Brandon Raub, after he expressed criticism of the U.S. government on a social networking page.
Pope Francis gave a memorable press conference yesterday on the airplane which brought him back from Brazil to Rome. Speaking to journalists for about 80 minutes, Francis was startlingly candid on many issues, but his remarks on homosexuality, priests with homosexual tendencies, and a “gay lobby” in the Vatican, raised the most eyebrows.
When these comments were reported in various secular newspapers, an explanation of the surrounding context of the question the Pope was answering was omitted. Below is an email sent out on behalf of the Vatican Press Office by Father Tom Rosica, of the Salt and Light Television Network of Toronto, Canada, which gives the full text of this portion of the Pope’s remarks.
Here is the email circulated by Father Rosica:
RIO DE JANEIRO
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
In response to many messages and calls earlier today regarding Pope Francis’ meeting with journalists aboard the return flight to Rome from Rio de Janeiro last night, I have received the full working transcript of his remarks from Fr. Lombardi.
Since most of your questions relate to his response to the question about Monsignor Ricca and the gay lobby, I have done a working translation of the question and the full answer of the Pope.
I have also included the original Italian transcription and the full paragraph from the Catechism of the Catholic Church on homosexuality to which the Pope referred.
The powerful and deeply moving visit of Pope Francis to Brazil last week left a deep and lasting impression upon this country as well as on the continent and the entire world. We encountered in the Bishop of Rome a shepherd “who knows the odor of his sheep,” a bearer of hope and peace, and an extraordinary pastoral model of tenderness and mercy.
He stressed the necessity of mercy throughout his visit, and reached out to so many people on the peripheries of society.
This was especially evident through his visit to the favela, the hospital and drug rehabilitation centre for young people, the meeting with young prisoners, the concern for the sick, and for young people who are broken.
He also showed how much he stands in solidarity with those living in extreme poverty and struggling for justice and peace.
His comments on the plane, particularly about the divorced and remarried, women, and homosexuals must be read and understood through the lenses of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the outreach and concern of the Church for those on the fringes, and the mercy, tenderness and forgiveness of a pastor who walks among his people.
The Question to Pope Francis from Ilse, a journalist on the Papal flight
Ilse: I would like to ask permission to pose a rather delicate question. Another image that went around the world is that of Monsignor Ricca and the news about his personal life. I would like to know, your Holiness, what will be done about this question. How should one deal with this question and how does your Holiness wish to deal with the whole question of the gay lobby?
The Pope’s Answer
[Pope Francis’s response:] Regarding the matter of Monsignor Ricca, I did what Canon Law required and did the required investigation. And from the investigation, we did not find anything corresponding to the accusations against him. We found none of that. That is the answer.
But I would like to add one more thing to this: I see that so many times in the Church, apart from this case and also in this case, one looks for the “sins of youth,” for example, is it not thus? And then these things are published. These things are not crimes. The crimes are something else: child abuse is a crime.
But sins, if a person, or secular priest or a nun, has committed a sin and then that person experienced conversion, the Lord forgives and when the Lord forgives, the Lord forgets and this is very important for our lives.
When we go to confession and we truly say “I have sinned in this matter,” the Lord forgets and we do not have the right to not forget because we run the risk that the Lord will not forget our sins, eh? This is a danger. This is what is important: a theology of sin.
So many times I think of St. Peter: he committed one of the worst sins denying Christ. And with this sin they made him Pope. We must think about fact often.
But returning to your question more concretely: in this case [Ricca] I did the required investigation and we found nothing. That is the first question.
Then you spoke of the gay lobby. Agh… so much is written about the gay lobby. I have yet to find on a Vatican identity card the word gay. They say there are some gay people here. I think that when we encounter a gay person, we must make the distinction between the fact of a person being gay and the fact of a lobby, because lobbies are not good. They are bad. If a person is gay and seeks the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge that person? The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains this point beautifully but says, wait a moment, how does it say, it says, these persons must never be marginalized and “they must be integrated into society.”
The problem is not that one has this tendency; no, we must be brothers, this is the first matter. There is another problem, another one: the problem is to form a lobby of those who have this tendency, a lobby of the greedy people, a lobby of politicians, a lobby of Masons, so many lobbies. This is the most serious problem for me. And thank you so much for doing this question. Thank you very much!
Original transcript in Italian
(Ilse) Vorrei chiedere il permesso di fare una domanda un po’ delicata: anche un’altra immagine ha girato un po’ il mondo, che è stata quella di mons. Ricca e delle notizie sulla sua intimità. Vorrei sapere, Santità, cosa intende fare su questa questione? Come affrontare questa questione e come Sua Santità intende affrontare tutta la questione della lobby gay?
(Papa Francesco): Quello di mons. Ricca: ho fatto quello che il Diritto Canonico manda a fare, che è la investigatio previa. E da questa investigatio non c’è niente di quello di cui l’accusano, non abbiamo trovato niente di quello. Quella è la risposta. Ma io vorrei aggiungere un’altra cosa su questo: io vedo che tante volte nella Chiesa, al di fuori di questo caso ed anche in questo caso, si va a cercare i “peccati di gioventù”, per esempio, no?, e questo si pubblica. Non i delitti, eh? I delitti sono un’altra cosa: l’abuso sui minori è un delitto. No, i peccati. Ma se una persona, laica o prete o suora, ha fatto un peccato e poi si è convertito, il Signore perdona e quando il Signore perdona, il Signore dimentica e questo per la nostra vita è importante. Quando noi andiamo a confessarci e diciamo davvero “Ho peccato in questo”, il Signore dimentica e noi non abbiamo il diritto di non dimenticare, perché abbiamo il rischio che il Signore non si dimentichi dei nostri [peccati] eh? E’ un pericolo quello. Quello è importante: una teologia del peccato. Tante volte penso a San Pietro: ha fatto uno dei peggiori peccati, che è rinnegare Cristo, e con questo peccato lo hanno fatto Papa. Dobbiamo pensare tanto.
Ma tornando alla Sua domanda più concreta: in questo caso, ho fatto l’ivestigatio previa e non abbiamo trovato. Questo è la prima domanda. Poi, Lei parlava della lobby gay: mah… si scrive tanto della lobby gay. Io ancora non ho trovato mi dia la cartella d’identità in Vaticano con “gay”. Dicono che ce ne sono. Credo che quando uno si trova con una persona così, deve distinguere il fatto di essere una persona gay dal fatto di fare una lobby, perché le lobby tutte non sono buone. Quello è il cattivo. Se una persona è gay e cerca il Signore e ha buona volontà, ma chi sono io per giudicarla? Il catechismo della Chiesa cattolica spiega tanto bello questo, ma dice, Aspetta un po’, come si dice…e dice “non si devono emarginare queste persone per questo, devono essere integrate in società”. Il problema non è avere questa tendenza, no: dobbiamo essere fratelli, perché questo è uno, ma se c’è un altro, un altro, il problema è fare lobby di questa tendenza o lobby di avari, lobby di politici, lobby dei massoni, tante lobby. Questo è il problema più grave per me. E La ringrazio tanto per aver fatto questa domanda. Grazie tante!
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
On behalf of Fr. Federico Lombardi and the Holy See Press Office, thank you for your continued interest and collaboration. —Father Tom Rosica