RT America: SOS

For the past nine months we have become quite the RT News fans.  We originally found them on You Tube, then on the Pluto channel, where we could watch them live.  We especially found, "The News with Rick Sanchez" to be unique, as they seemingly presented a news alternative, that was not agenda-driven as the Main Stream Media.  They coined their fresh, somewhat unbiased, approach with the catch phrase, "It's Time to do News Again!"  

RT is constantly critiquing the major networks, thereby virtue-signaling their sole persistence to journalistic excellence.  Their two main criticisms are context and crickets.  Stories that are presented to convince the viewer, without providing the full "Context" of the issue, isn't real news.  And they rightfully criticize the selective ignoring of an issue, that has apparent news worthiness: no coverage.  All you hear...."Crickets".  Rick Sanchez even presented, a few months ago, at the Ron Paul Liberty Report's D.C. Conference, we attended.  He was good.

At the beginning of each show, RT presents three questions which they think the viewers will be asking, after they watch Rick and his guests "drill down" on various topics.  Well, we have three questions we believe our readers may ask, after we do our own drilling.

1. Does RT America have its own agenda?
2. "Is RT anti-Catholic?  
3.  Is RT America anti-Pro-Life? 

A couple months ago, Rick decided to "drill down" on celibacy in the Catholic Church.  His guest was some defrocked ex-Catholic Priest, supported by Rick's admitted "Catholic" misunderstanding of the need for celibacy.  "Context?"  After their hit-piece, I tried to contact their offices via Facebook,  to suggest several good  competent sources to present the real value in priestly celibacy:  No response.

This past Friday, "The March for Life" paraded several hundred thousand marchers, just a few blocks over from RT America's Washington Headquarters.  That evening, Rick went on for several minutes about the hundred thousand, that demonstrated in Iraq, to demand that the U.S. leave iraq.  This was a good story.  But, why wouldn't a crowd of three to five times as many, as a President of the United States, with all his security, for the first time in the March's forty-five year history, address this annual crowd "in person", not merit coverage?  "Crickets!"

My wife complained on their You Tube channel: No response.

RT America: "It's time to do the "Same Old Shit" again."

Hiding Behind a Pro-Life Label

Too often, politicians and talking heads play-up to the pro-life constituents to gain their socially conservative credentials, only to find them cave-in on a crucial life issue. Or, they may flip, and support an agenda or candidate that is counter to the pro-life cause, as Santorum did by supporting Spector.

How can this be? How can we be on guard against opportunistic politicians who have little if any allegiance to pro-life causes?

The answer came to me as a friend and I were producing a Pro-Life Unity radio program on Blog Talk Radio. My friend is a self professed atheist. He has been a regular on our radio program, over the past three years whenever we produced shows. As an atheist, he often disagrees with other pro-lifers on ancillary issues.

To avoid possible conflicts, he is constantly in favor of keeping abortion, as a stand alone issue. He believes that the other positions "bundled" with a pro-life position, only weaken the pro-life block. That may work well, if you could believe a simple statement of being pro-life. Because we cannot trust someone to stay the course, it behooves us to look at associated issues which may add credibility to, or provide a contradiction to, the logic of the person in question.

Those who would stand for the protection of innocent human life in the womb, might also be expected to stand in defense of all innocent human life outside of the womb. Should there be an expectation of pro-life candidates, to be appalled by unconstitutional, unjust, and undeclared wars that kill innocent people? The common response is to acknowledge the legitimate place for war, and recognize that there is collateral damage in war. The problem of course, is that our recent “wars”, have not been declared, not been constitutional, and not been just. This is especially true when our CIA has been doing the killing.

Is the innocent human life in the womb more valuable than an innocent person gunned down by government sanctioned thugs? So one might find a contradiction in a reported pro-lifer, who looks dispassionately as our military or its agents, kill innocent people.

I contend, that if we require a blind eye to other issues, to be bundled with our pro-life position as we evaluate leaders, our pro-life stance is doomed. Consistent Life Ethic!

A Non-responsive Church/State

There seems to be little, if any, separation between Church and State when it comes to answering direct questions concerning essential issues, such as doctrinal application or our constitution, respectively. I attempted to contact both Congressman Roscoe Bartlett of Maryland's 6th District, and Archbishop Edwin O'Brien of the Baltimore Archdiocese on the 18th of November, on two separate matters, both of which constitute essential policy. Congressman Bartlett's office was was originally contacted by phone, followed by a website e-mail. The Archbishop was contacted by e-mail, and then a personal mail. I have yet to receive a responsive answer to either.

Congressman Bartlett: (I left this e-mail through his website. December 2 at 8:38pm)

"I left a message at your Washington Office over two weeks ago as to why you had not spoken out on the TSA violations of our 4th amendment. Your staffer was unable to tell me where your position was on this critical issue. He also told me that I would be receiving a letter explaining... your position. I am still waiting! Do you support the 4th amendment of our constitution?"

(Summary of phone conversation posted on Facebook November 18th.)

"I called Congressman Bartlett's office to see what his position is on the TSA affront to our 4th amendment. His staffer said, "The Congressman will have to get back to me in a letter." A letter??? I don't need no stinking letter. I need someone to protect the constitution!!!!"

December 7th, 2010
Dear Archbishop O’Brien: (Follow-up letter to the e-mail)

"I sent you an e-mail on November 18th, under the subject of Election Supplement. It addresses my concerns with the presentation of candidate views in the Catholic Review’s, Decision 2010, Special Voter Guide insert. I have not received a reply.

As my party prepares for the next election cycle, my concern as to the political motivations of the diocese’s newspaper continues to fester. The Church preaches the truth on essential issues, and John Paul II the Great admonished the laity to become political. But, when we do, we are ignored and marginalized by the very Church that encouraged us to go forth and defend the essential matters of faith and morals.

It is difficult to defend a Church that preaches one thing, yet does nothing to direct the faithful, while at the same time, only contributes more to the tidal wave of media hype for politicians who promote state funded abortion, state funding of embryonic stem cell research, and gay marriage.

I guess you may not have seen my earlier e-mail. Be that what it may, I just needed to have a clear conscience, as I move forward making comments about the sincerity of the Baltimore Archdiocese."

(Original e-mail expressing my election concern.)
Archbishop O’Brien: Nov. 18th, 2010

I attended the dedication of the new chapel at St....

This November, I was on the ballot as the Lieutenant Governor, along with Eric Knowles for Governor under the Constitution Party of Maryland. Our party’s chairman, Mike Dawson requested that the Maryland Catholic Conference resurvey all the candidates before the general election, because the earlier primary survey was only done for the Democrat and Republican candidates. The Catholic Conference agreed. Thank you!

I was not however, appreciative of how the results were presented to the faithful: The Catholic Review’s Election Supplement. This supplement was given to all Catholic churches in the Baltimore Archdiocese just before the general election. The Catholic Church identifies defense of human Life, opposition to Stem Cell Research, and support of marriage, as being essential issues. The Election Supplement though, did not state in simple prose, that the only ballot access candidate to agree with the Church’s position on these three issues was Eric Knowles. Each candidate’s answers were presented in a line, and it was necessary to decode the “A, D, or blank space”, with the questions which were printed earlier in the supplement. Not one sentence in this eight page special insert stated this pure distinction of ballot access candidates on these non-negotiable issues. This inability to simply state a candidate’s positions was not an issue however, when it came to each of the two major party governor candidates. Both had a record in opposition with the Church’s teaching, yet both were provided a full page of print along with photos. What a deal? This had to be about $2,000.00 worth of print exposure.

To promote these non-negotiable principles, and fail to clearly and simply state each candidate’s position of these issues, while at the same time aiding and abetting those who have positions directly opposite of Holy Mother Church, is pure, in your face, dereliction of duty.

Respectfully,

Mike Hargadon

Consistent Pro-life Message

Jane and I attended the 30^th annual Maryland March for Life. The organizers did an excellent job, the speakers were great, and Steve Peroutka’s treat for refreshments, made this year’s event, the best.

Before the March, Archbishop O’Brien con-celebrated the Holy Mass with about a dozen priests. The Archbishop painted a dismally honest picture of our struggles ahead with this pro-abortion administration. He also challenged the pro-lifers’ positions on the death penalty and immigration. His plea was to have a “consistent pro-life message”. He concluded his homily with the statement, “We have much to pray about”. The Archdiocese of Baltimore is blessed to have a man of the Archbishop’s stature.

I am on board with his anti-death penalty position, but I have reservations about how illegal immigration warrants a mention, when trying to save unborn children? Either way, it is good news, that there will be consistency in how the Bishops deal with these issues.

Having seen Bishop Madden marching next to the Governor and Lt. Gov., to the “repeal the death penalty rally” in Lawyer’s Mall (C.R. 3/5/09), I expected to see a bishop at our March for Life, which rallied at Lawyer’s Mall. If one was there, I didn’t see him.

It is also good to know that Bishop Madden will take these repeal the death penalty events, as opportunities to specifically mention the need to “repeal abortion”. Let’s be consistent.