Thursday, October 16, 2008

Moving a Mountain Redneck Style

Americans may very well wake up on November 5 to find that Barack Obama has driven a hell-bound freight train across their country, leaving in its wake a changed America, one the founding fathers would not recognize were they alive today. Obama seems to have the majority of Americans under his spell; he has somehow blinded them to his ties with left-wing extremists and crooks.

It seems only the pro life crowd can smell danger clear enough to bypass his name on the ballot. But will their numbers be enough to keep Obama from gaining office? One blogger who goes by the pseudonym Redneck Catholic thinks so. He is organizing as many people as possible to commit to three days of prayer and fasting leading up to the election. So far, at least forty people have joined the ranks of this spiritual army of prayer warriors.

In an email The Redneck sent me today, he compares the political situation in the US to the temporal dimension of a spiritual battle between good and evil. He goes on to cite the Gospel passage of Matthew 17 where Jesus casts out a demon from a boy the Apostles
were unable to. When the Apostles complained to Jesus they had failed in their attempts to rid the young man of his demons, Jesus told them that some demons can only be cast out with prayer and fasting. He said if we only have faith as a mustard seed, we could move mountains, and nothing will be impossible to us.

Nothing will be impossible, not even a small army of forty prayer warriors defeating a political candidate favoured by millions.


Shirley said...

I linked to this post and added Fr. Corapi's newsletter on the same subject.

paramedicgirl said...

Thanks Shirley. I will have to read your Father Corapi newsletter later tonight. Just starting work right now.

Anonymous said...

Over on "The Lair of the Catholic Caveman", you asked if we are allowed to vote for a third party candidate.
As Catholics we have no choice since Obama and McCain both support abortion.

The only other two alternatives are Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party, who is 100 % pro-life, but is a Baptist preacher, and Dr Alan Keyes who is a devout Catholic and 100% pro-life.
I will be voting for Dr Keyes.

Alan Keyes on Abortion
American Independent nominee for President; 2004 Republican challenger for IL Senate

Principles in Declaration of Independence prohibit abortion
The Declaration of Independence states plainly that we are all created equal, endowed by our Creator with our basic human rights. But if human beings can decide who is human & who is not, the doctrine of God-given rights is utterly corrupted.
For these & similar reasons, abortion must be understood as the unjust taking of a human life, & a breach of the fundamental principles of our public moral creed. Some people talk about "viability" as a test to determine which human offspring have rights that we must respect, & which do not.

But "might does not make right." So the mere fact that the person in the womb is wholly in its mother's physical power & completely dependent upon her for sustenance gives her no right whatsoever with respect to its life --since the mere possession of physical power can never confer such a right. Therefore, medical procedures resulting in the death of the unborn child, except as an unintended consequence of efforts to save the mother's physical life, are impermissible.

Source: Campaign website,, "Issues" Oct 1, 2007.

Sorry about the long post, but Catholics must be made awre of the only Catholic pro-life candidate for president.

McCain is just as bad as Obama.

Deo Gratias!

paramedicgirl said...

Thanks, Dan. Since I am Canadian, I didn't even know about your independents. Why aren't they allowed in the presidential debates? Do they have to be in a formal party to get recognized?

From what I have gathered from the profiles of the two frontrunners, Catholics who are voting their moral conscience cannot choose either Obama or McCain. Both have ties to abortion.

Catholics are often accused of being one-issue voters, but I always answer that by saying if one is denied the right to life, then nothing else matters. If I were American, I know how I'd be voting.

Dim Bulb said...

he has somehow blinded them to his ties with left-wing extremists and crooks.

When the major secular media is the propaganda wing of your campaign it makes things difficult for the other side.

Thomas Jefferson was an ardent supporter of the free press, yet he feared what it could do. He knew its propensity for toxicity and deceit:

* “Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle. The real extent of this state of misinformation is known only to those who are in situations to confront facts within their knowledge with the lies of the day.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224

* “As for what is not true, you will always find abundance in the newspapers.” –Thomas Jefferson to Barnabas Bidwell, 1806. ME 11:118

* “The man who never looks into a newspaper is better informed than he who reads them, inasmuch as he who knows nothing is nearer to truth than he whose mind is filled with falsehoods and errors. He who reads nothing will still learn the great facts, and the details are all false.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:225

* “At a very early period of my life, I determined never to put a sentence into any newspaper. I have religiously adhered to the resolution through my life, and have great reason to be contented with it. Were I to undertake to answer the calumnies of the newspapers, it would be more than all my own time and that of twenty aids could effect. For while I should be answering one, twenty new ones would be invented. I have thought it better to trust to the justice of my countrymen, that they would judge me by what they see of my conduct on the stage where they have placed me, and what they knew of me before the epoch since which a particular party has supposed it might answer some view of theirs to vilify me in the public eye. Some, I know, will not reflect how apocryphal is the testimony of enemies so palpably betraying the views with which they give it. But this is an injury to which duty requires every one to submit whom the public think proper to call into its councils.” –Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Smith, 1798. ME 10:58

* “Perhaps an editor might begin a reformation in some such way as this. Divide his paper into four chapters, heading the 1st, Truths. 2nd, Probabilities. 3rd, Possibilities. 4th, Lies. The first chapter would be very short, as it would contain little more than authentic papers and information from such sources as the editor would be willing to risk his own reputation for their truth. The second would contain what, from a mature consideration of all circumstances, his judgment should conclude to be probably true. This, however, should rather contain too little than too much. The third and fourth should be professedly for those readers who would rather have lies for their money than the blank paper they would occupy.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:225

* “I have been for some time used as the property of the newspapers, a fair mark for every man’s dirt.” –Thomas Jefferson to Peregrine Fitzhugh, 1798. ME 10:1

* “I really look with commiseration over the great body of my fellow citizens who, reading newspapers, live and die in the belief that they have known something of what has been passing in the world in their time, whereas the accounts they have read in newspapers are just as true a history of any other period of the world as of the present, except that the real names of the day are affixed to their fables. General facts may indeed be collected from them… but no details can be relied on.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Norvell, 1807. ME 11:224

* For the present, lying and scribbling must be free to those mean enough to deal in them, and in the dark.” –Thomas Jefferson to Edmund Randolph, 1792. ME 8:411

* “These people [i.e., the printers] think they have a right to everything, however secret or sacred.” –Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, 1815. ME 14:345

I get the distinct impression that if Jefferson were alive today, his outhouse would be abundantly supplied with NT Times, and his commode shaped like a television.

Dim Bulb said...

From what I have gathered from the profiles of the two frontrunners, Catholics who are voting their moral conscience cannot choose either Obama or McCain.

Unfortunately, as is so often the case in moral theology, things are not that simple. From the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops:

"34. Catholics often face difficult choices about how to vote. This is why it is so important to vote according to a well-formed conscience that perceives the proper relationship among moral goods. A Catholic cannot vote for a candidate who takes a position in favor of an intrinsic evil, such as abortion or racism, if the voter’s intent is to support that position. In such cases a Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in grave evil. At the same time, a voter should not use a candidate’s opposition to an intrinsic evil to justify indifference or inattentiveness to other important moral issues involving human life and dignity. (My emphasis)

35. There may be times when a Catholic who rejects a candidate’s unacceptable position may decide to vote for that candidate for other morally grave reasons. Voting in this way would be permissible only for truly grave moral reasons, not to advance narrow interests or partisan preferences or to ignore a fundamental moral evil."

Is voting for a pro-life candidate who, sadly, doesn't have chance of winning the morally responsible thing to do? Especially if the two most viable candidates have vastly different records on life issues? McCain's stand on life issues (e.g., embryonic stem cell research) is less than admirable, but far better than Obama's.

1. McCain and the Obama are in a very tight race, with Obama slightly leading. 2. A third party candidate doesn't have a chance in hell of winning.
3. Is it, in such a case, moral to vote for an unviable candidate (Dr. Keyes)? if the only realistic outcome is greater evil rather than lesser, should one vote for the lesser (McCain), or waste a vote on the unviable and allow the greater evil to come to power (Obama)?

Dim Bulb said...


Independents are allowed to participate in presidential debates, Ross Perot did so in the 1992 debate. John Anderson did so in the 1980 debate.

Tom in Vegas said...

It's astounding just how gullible people can be here in America. They follow Obama with the same "Dear leader" veneration that the North Koreans apply to their headman.


ignorant redneck said...

Thank you for posting this!

Cygnus said...

If this is a fast for God's will to be done in the elections, I'm for it. If this is a Defeat Obama fast (and I loathe him too), I'm against it. Is this a case of "my will be done" instead of "Thy will be done?"

ignorant redneck said...


You pose a very good question! I personaly think that God wants us, as Catholics, to oppose the murder of 40 million unborn babies, and to live according to the teachings of our faith. But I make no pretension of knowing, exactly, how to do that-so much relies on prudential judgment!

It was and is my hope that Obama be defeated. But it is my duty to oppose evil--and there's plenty to go around among the major parties.

I'm fasting, so that the result of the election will be pro-life, and not result in an admistration inimical to the practice of faith.

I think that with prayer and fasting, we can achieve that, who ever wins.

ignorant redneck said...


Your comment raised two seperate issues, so I'm posting two comments.

The second issue is one that boils down to prayers of petition. our Lord told us to ask for things. And there is a long tradition of prayers of petition acompanied by prayer and fasting. To include using the Rosary befor the Battle of Lepanto, The prayers of the People at Vienna and numerous other instances.

I'm replying seperatly, because I wonder if you're actually comfortable asking God for help in all things. Many of us get the feeling we should petition for others, or what others want, or for spiritual things, but not for the things in the temporal realm. I think this is a mistake.

For we learn about God and ourselves in prayer, and when the Lord grants a petition, or with holds it, we learn something of his will for us. That may especially be true, in my experience, in granting petitions I shouldn't have made!

Cygnus said...

IR: Thanks for your prompt answers, which I find reassuring. I will seriously consider this!