The American Spectator

FIND ME IN ST. LOUIS
Re: George Neumayrs A Man for Ball Seasons:

As a graduate of Saint Louis University, its law school, and a fine high school of the same name, I must concur with Mr. Neumayr’s astute analysis of the sorry state of affairs there. Still, I will always love the Jesuits and pray for their conversion daily.
— G. Tracy Mehan, III
Vienna, Virginia

I taught at St. Louis University from 1967-75, just at the time that fine university was starting to pull away from its Jesuit roots. Ironically, they hired me thinking that an old Yankee two-“l” Willson had to be a Protestant, which is what they were looking for to complement their “lay” Board of Trustees. That I turned out to be a Catholic was not held against me.

The old generation of Jesuits I encountered there was made up of some of the finest men I have ever known. They could out-think, out-pray, and even out-drink most mortals. The new generation, on the other hand…It’s sad to see the present SLU not only turn away from its inheritance, but run away as fast as it can. It is a great institution, however, and the Holy Spirit will not abandon it.
— John Willson
Professor of History, Emeritus
Hillsdale College

My money is on Bishop Burke. He has won twice before in a tussle with the “defenders of the faith.”

1. Biondi had to resign from the board of directors of a health organization that performed abortions.

2. Vagina Monologues is now “off” campus.

Members of the Cardinal Newman society sent emails etc. for five years protesting with no results. In comes Savonarola Burke and things begin to happen. Hallelujah, hallelujah.
— Annette Cwik

I understand Mr. Neumayr’s frustrations with Rick Majerus and St. Louis University, but his protests go a bit too far. He may not like the fact that this has become a free speech issue, but it is. Whether or not you agree with Majerus and his ideas about abortion, I think he has every right to express those ideas at a political rally. If the church can stop him doing that, what’s next — telling him what political views he should hold?

Besides, it seems that the church allowed things to get out of hand at this institution, so it is a bit late to suddenly decide that they are not following church ideas closely enough. If the church wanted to have control at these institutions, the opportunity was there from the beginning; the church should have imposed its will here long ago. Once the church allows the secular to take over the running of the institution, it cannot pretend to be upset when the institution begins to exhibit secular traits.
— Eric Edwards
Walnut Cove, North Carolina

I find it interesting how many people, mostly liberal (Coach Majerus in particular) feel that the Catholic Church must accommodate them, even if their beliefs are contrary to church doctrine. It is not the job of any church to change its positions for you. Rick Majerus has the right to say whatever he feels without government restriction. But if the university or the church decide to deem his belief as objectionable and he is reprimanded by the university, they most certainly have justification. It is not a matter of whether one agrees or disagrees with Catholic Church Doctrine. It is doctrine, and one can simply choose not to belong to the church if he or she disagrees. But don’t ask thousands of years of religious principle to be altered for one’s own secular views.
— Scott Cason

For those of us who have grown up and old in the Roman Catholic Faith it comes as no surprise that St. Louis University cares not a whit about the pro abortion comments of its basketball coach. I, like many others who have watched the American wing of the Church stumble leftward these many years since the promulgation of Vatican II, have pretty much given up the idea that what is wrong for me is wrong for the high profile Catholics such as Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, just to name two. I suppose I better add Mr. Majerus’s name to the list now that he has been given the imprimatur to speak for the Jesuits.

I was especially enamored of the Jesuitical defense of Mr. Majerus by the powers that be at the university. To say that asking him to keep his views about abortion to himself would be a violation of his constitutional right to free speech is as great a cop out as I have ever heard. I wonder what stance these “men of God” would take were he to wax eloquent about abortions for Blacks, or forced sterilization for Catholic priests, or barring Muslims from entry to the University.

Perhaps the Jesuits should go back to attempting to determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Now that would be interesting.
— Joseph Baum
Garrettsville, Ohio

Thank you, theologian Majerus, for your stunningly brilliant treatise on the exercise of personal conscience in the Catholic tradition. Maybe the real source of your elderly Mom’s consternation is that she raised such a blithering jackass!

If all of the bishops in this country were in the model of the great Archbishop Raymond Burke, who not only actually subscribes to Church doctrine, but has the cojones to smack down public Catholic figures who flaunt dissent like adolescent brats, then there never would’ve been a scandal!
— Francis M. Hannon, Jr.
Melrose, Massachusetts

Archbishop Burke is the same person who said he would deny Holy Communion to John F. Kerry as a result of his pro-abortion beliefs and actions. God bless Archbishop Burke. We need more principled theologians like him.

I was admitted to St. Louis University in 1975, but its tuition was cost-prohibitive. In hindsight, I am happy that I wasn’t inculcated with watered down Catholicism.

As a practicing Catholic, I am confounded by the fact that most political bumper stickers that I see in the parking lot when I am attending Mass support pro-abortion candidates. I guess that Marxism trumps the pro-life movement when it comes to Catholics and political candidates.

I vote exclusively pro-life, and I simply cannot understand how any practicing Catholic would not do the same.
— Christopher A. Hall

It all goes back to the First Political Law of the Universe: It all depends on whose ox is being gored (no reference to Majerus’s weight intended).
— Dave Stanczak

HONK IF YOU LOVE GIULIANI
Re: Philip Klein’s Honking for Rudy:

As the article “Honking for Rudy” suggests, many here in Florida believe Rudy Giuliani has the best credentials for leading America. He is a decisive conservative who doesn’t mold his beliefs around popular media pablum. Perhaps this is the true reason the media is writing him off here and elsewhere. Rudy’s proven independence makes him anathema in a culture of spin, slant and media co-option. He isn’t afraid to disagree, to stake a position and hold it and to ignore public punditry that offers garner free campaign coverage. No matter the pre-primary polling that tries to steer us like sheep, this voter stands with Rudy!
— Tim O’Neill
Pompano Beach, Florida

THERE GOES FLORIDA
Re: The Prowler’s Heavy-Handedness Backfires:

Hey, Prowler, why don’t you try to get serious in your reporting? There was never any doubt that Sen. Martinez was going to endorse Sen. McCain. It was only a question of timing. Martinez was one of the leading lights in the McCain-Kennedy-Bush illegal alien amnesty debacle. If you believed any disinformation that Martinez might remain neutral, then you are too naive to be let out of the house without a chaperone/guardian. As for Crist, he is proof that Florida is finally tipping into the squishy moderate column after decades of the Cuban community and the North Florida/Panhandle area keeping it in the conservative column. Even the Dems in North Florida and the Panhandle were relatively conservative until recent years. At least Romney has the cajones to use hardball politics. He has learned a little something. The Dems have been playing hardball for decades while the GOP elected politicians cowered in the corner.
— Ken Shreve

You state that Romney’s campaign “has been able to use its candidate’s unfettered wealth to run a successful absentee ballot program, something the other campaigns have not been able to do.”

Unlike the Kennedys, Romney earned his wealth (yes, I know his father was also wealthy). Running a campaign in an organized, successful way, indicates to me that Romney is definitely prepared to take over the reigns of an office as complex as the President of the U.S.
— Lucille McClure
San Jose, California

Hailing from Florida and being very familiar with the Romney team there, it is despicable on your behalf to write such blatant lies about the Romney team.

Governor Crist and Senator Martinez have been on the McCain bandwagon since the 2006 election when McCain was campaigning for Charlie Crist. And, Crist would never endorse Romney because the people who work for him are Jeb Bush operatives, all of the which the Governor really dislikes. After Crist won the governor’s seat in 2006, he wouldn’t even think about hiring any of the Jeb Bush operatives even though they are well respected in Florida.

I know some of you staff writers dislike Romney, but to lie about why Crist and Martinez endorsed McCain causes me to lose respect for your establishment.
— Lyndsi Thomas

There it is again! That damnable, jealous reference to Romney’s wealth. Did you know he has raised more money than any other Republican candidate? I bet you didn’t. You are too busy playing the small minded, class-warfare card. Shame on you.
— Judy Beumler
Louisville, Kentucky

ME FIRST
Re: G. Tracy Mehan III’s Hunting in Pairs:

Bill and Hillary Clinton are “shining” examples my own contemptible generation of Baby Boomers: lying about one’s opponent is OK because all morality is “relative;” “terminal adolescence” — the temper tantrums, the intemperate remarks, and the phony apologies — is OK because being a Boomer means never having to grow up. And who practices the First Commandment of Boomers — “it’s all about me” — more diligently than these two?
— Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida

One thing the double teaming of Obama illustrates very clearly is the fundamental racism that is one of the books of Democrat theology. This is called the Book of Lyndon.

Lyndon’s book is the new testament of this theology. Lyndon sayeth:

Thou shalt economically enslave the Black people by giving them money for nothing save their blackness.

Thou shalt speak in condescending terms about them to create a belief in them that are inferior to others.

Thou shalt establish separate but easier standards for Black people in education and jobs to convince them they are inferior.

Thus shall they be forced to vote for Democrats for all of their days.

Now there exists a public Black man. Not simplistic like the Democrat creations Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton who whine in an approved Democrat lap dog tone, but one who is exciting and intelligent and Charismatic. Energizing to all people who hear him. In short, he refuses to bow to Democrat dogma and challenges the orthodoxy represented by John Edwards and Hillary Clinton.

Do the Democrats rejoice? Indeed, is not Barak Obama the emancipated Black man Democrats have long envisioned? Is he not the fruit of their labors?

No, he is just an uppity Black man. Not at all what the Democrats intended to create. Not submissive, mindless automaton kneelin abjectly before the Democrat party. Obama has risen on his hind legs and says I am as electable, smart, and intelligent as anyone. I am Black hear me roar!

The Democrat response is to trash him. To attack him personally. To lie publically about him. To call him a fairy tale. And what Democrats dare to do this? The two most prominent, powerful Democrats in America. The Clintons have defined the Democrat party for 20 years. The dastardly Clintons. The Clintons are the Democrats’ Karl Rove. Power-mad scofflaws and absolutely without principle. They are the proud face of the Democrat party.
— Jay Molyneaux
Denver, North Carolina

KNOWING FAR RIGHT FROM WRONG
Re: Christopher Orlet’s Over Molotov Cocktails:

Christopher Orlet would have us believe the intolerance of the right is as much of a problem as the multiculturalist, see-no-evil-Muslim acquiescence of the left when it comes to the increasing Islamification of Europe. Not a chance. Islamists know tolerance is far more exploitable than intolerance.

And while the far right’s attempt at “limiting dissent” is distasteful, Mr. Orlet apparently needs reminding that no one limits dissent more than the followers of the so-called “religion of peace.”
— Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida

Orlet wrote an article criticizing the “right wing” efforts in Europe to deal with the cultural clash between Islamists and the cultures of the countries to which they have immigrated. Apparently, the concept of requiring assimilation by the immigrants is out. For instance his article states:

“So what is the CAI’s agenda? Apparently it consists in telling Muslim schoolgirls that they cannot wear head scarves to school, banning forced marriages and the ritual slaughter of animals and slapping a moratorium on the building of new mosques.”

He left out genital mutilation of young girls. I am not sure why. Perhaps that is something that is unacceptable even to him. I hope so.

However, Orlet obviously doesn’t like what the terrible right wing is doing to try and require assimilation. But in the end, what he says is:

“European leaders will have to find a way to forestall this scenario, to neutralize the far right and the Islamic reactionaries, and bring two clashing civilizations together. Right now they seem to have concluded that the way forward is by limiting dissent. This should make the fundamentalists feel right at home.”

Wow! Pass on the responsibility for a solution to others. That is a great idea.

So, please ask Mr. Orlet to supply some detail as to how he would go about solving the clash between two competing cultures. And in the process, please tell us which culture he supports. Why leave it up the politicians that he so obviously believes are wrong. What is the great Mr. Orlet’s solution to culture clash? His solution ought to be fascinating to say the least.
— Jerome D. Bashinski
El Dorado Hills, California

Christopher Orlet replies:
I do not believe you can “require” a person to assimilate. Anyway what does Mr. Bashinski mean by assimilation? Accept Judeo-Christian values and refute, say, Islamic values? How does he suggest the government enforce this? In the few places where Islam and Christianity live peacefully side by side (say Albania) it is because the Islamic majority is largely secular with a strong national identity and a high degree of religious tolerance.

SLEEPING DURING HUMOR CLASS
Re: Larry Thornberry’s McCain Peaks:

I just read Larry Thornberry’s article in The American Spectator titled “McCain Peaks.” I don’t know Mr. Thornberry’s age but I suspect he’s not from my generation (first wave of the post war baby boom — 1946). We may not have had the best educational system in the world back then but at least we learned how to spell. If you are Larry Thornberrry’s editor please advise him when he wishes to write about “a lot of television cameras,” he should spell it “beaucoup” television cameras, not “bo-koo.” This is a French word which was heavily used in Vietnam by American GIs since French was a language used “beaucoup” by the Vietnamese. This may seem like a minor point, however, bad spelling only lessens the credibility of the rest of the article. Perhaps Mr. Thornberry was doing beaucoup sleeping during spelling class.
— Joseph A. Yturralde