Catholics Are Also Deplorable?
A look at what Hillary Clinton’s campaign thinks of political opponents.
According to WikiLeaks, we can add Catholics to the Clinton camp’s list of irredeemably deplorable Americans.
We begin with an email chain from March 2011 titled “Conservative Catholicism” in which Clinton campaign communications director Jen Palmieri and Center for American Progress fellow John Halpin reveal their contempt for the “backward” religion and ridicule News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch and Wall Street Journal managing editor Robert Thomson for embracing Catholicism.
“Ken Auletta’s latest piece on Murdoch in the New Yorker starts off with the aside that both Murdoch and Robert Thompson, managing editor of the WSJ, are raising their kids Catholic,” Halpin writes. “Friggin’ Murdoch baptized his kids in Jordan where John the Baptist baptized Jesus. It’s an amazing bastardization of the faith. They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy.”
“I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion,” Palmieri responded. “Their rich friends wouldn’t understand if they became evangelicals.”
Halpin agreed, adding a dollop of his own condescension to the mix. “Excellent point,” he writes. “They can throw around ‘Thomistic’ thought and ‘subsidiarity’ and sound sophisticated because no one knows what the hell they’re talking about.”
Apparently no one includes members of Congress and the Supreme Court, and a host of other intellectuals who embrace Catholic theology, much of which is completely at odds with leftist dogma. Dogma that embraces spiritually “uplifting” tenets such as abortion on demand, euthanasia and same-sex marriage — along with the non-negotiable stance that anyone who disagrees with such “tolerant” positions is, as our current president put it, a “bitter clinger.”
And as we learn from another email titled “opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing,” Sandy Newman, president and founder of the progressive nonprofit Voices for Progress, wonders if progressives could foment a revolution among such bitter clingers modeled after the Arab Spring, and whether “the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage even though 98% of Catholic women (and their conjugal partners) have used contraception” could be the leading agents of change. “There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages dictatorship and the beginning of a little democracy and respect for gender equality in the Catholic Church,” he writes to Clinton campaign manager John Podesta.
Newman, who is Jewish, admits he knows little about the Catholic church and “the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and priests who count on it for their maintenance, etc.” (emphasis added). Moreover he isn’t personally volunteering to carry out the mission. “Even if the idea isn’t crazy, I don’t qualify to be involved and I have not thought at all about how one would ‘plant the seeds of the revolution,’ or who would plant them,” he states.
No worries, Sandy. Podesta is leading the charge with organizations specifically created for the purpose, even if the time isn’t quite right yet. “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this,” Podesta writes. “But I think it lacks the leadership to do so now. Likewise Catholics United. Like most Spring movements, I think this one will have to be bottom up.”
Anne Hendershott, Director of the Veritas Center for Ethics in Public Life at Franciscan University of Steubenville, explains that since 2007 she and a number of other orthodox Catholic writers “wrote dozens of articles in an attempt to expose the funding and duplicitousness of … the George Soros-funded Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United.” What did they get for their efforts? “Some of us were punished by the Obama administration for our journalistic work through punitive political audits by the IRS,” she reveals.
Hendershott further delves into the machinations of these two groups and their efforts to neutralize the abortion issue in the 2008 presidential campaign, and help pass ObamaCare in 2010, despite its contraception mandate. The same contraception mandate the administration tried to impose on Little Sisters of the Poor until the Supreme Court rebuked the effort.
If the Leftmedia get around to covering this at all, one would imagine they will try to distance Hillary from the positions of her campaign manager and likeminded followers. Yet in a 2015 speech at the Women in the World Summit, Clinton indicated she was very much in favor of a revolution. “Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will,” she stated. “And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”
Clinton was speaking about “reproductive health care,” as in abortion on demand. Thus if one has a “deep-seated” belief life is sacred and begins at conception, or that abortion constitutes the taking of a human life, one is a moral Neanderthal.
And lest anyone think Clinton and her camp of religious bigots are outliers, it is worth remembering our current president took great pains to bash all of Christianity as a religion whereby “people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ,” he stated at the 2015 the National Prayer Breakfast. That would be slavery and Jim Crow (along with the KKK) embraced overwhelmingly by Democrats, even as it was Christians who led the charge to abolish slavery.
“If conservative Christians were plotting to sow divisions within the ranks of Judaism or Islam — setting up faux Jewish and Muslim organizations — there would be holy hell to pay,” said Catholic League President Bill Donohue. “But when left-wing secularists seek to crash the Catholic Church, the media yawn.”
Not left-wing secularists. Rabid, anti-Christian bigots seeking to impose their twisted worldview on Americans of faith by any means necessary.
Why? “Because any standard of right and wrong beyond the Ruling Class’ reach challenges its self-conception, its greatest concern has been to denigrate the American people’s devotion to God, because the Ruling Class accepts no standard it cannot control,” explains Boston University professor Angelo Codevilla.
It is a denigration heartily endorsed by Hillary Clinton and her supporters. Thus, a vote for Clinton is a vote for people who hold Christianity in utter contempt. It is a vote for the woman who praised Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger, despite the racist eugenicist’s ambition to eliminate “those human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”
In other words, Sanger also viewed certain Americans as “irredeemably deplorable” — as well as candidates for abortion to facilitate her ambitions.
A non-Catholic attorney writing to Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia aptly describes the loathsome ethos that would drive a Clinton administration. “These bigots are actively strategizing how to shape Catholicism not to be Catholic or consistent with Jesus’ teachings, but to be the ‘religion’ they want,” he writes. “They are, at the very core, trying to turn religion to their secular view of right and wrong consistent with their politics.”
They are, at the very core, progressive jackboots who would eviscerate the religious freedom that was the primary driver of our nation’s founding. That’s precisely what their vision of “fundamental transformation” is all about.
Start a conversation using these share links: