JONAH Goldberg at National Review has a very good column on The Donald. An excerpt:

I’ll be as honest as I can about why I dislike Trump. A big part of it is I think he’s a fraud. I think he’s part of the grand and glorious tradition of bunk artists in American history. I think he’s always lied about how rich he is and is lying to this day. And bear in mind, I don’t care how much money he has. The point is he cares. Specifically, he cares that other people think he’s really rich. In fact, that’s his business model. Most long cons require convincing marks that the con man doesn’t actually need the mark’s money. That’s his schtick to a T.

But I can actually get past that. That con-man aspect of him is also kind of charming. It’s not remotely presidential, but as an American character, I can see why some people are amused by Trump, and on occasion I am as well.

The thing I don’t find amusing is that he’s an insecure bully. He really does strike me as Biff from Back to the Future (Part II). His cheap macho posturing and boasting is simply tacky. I see him as a sad and insecure man. And what I truly find so depressing is that millions of Americans see the same blowhard overcompensation and mistake it for strength. (more…)

  SEDEVACANTISM is the theological position that the popes since Vatican II have not been valid popes due to their public heresies. Sedevacantism first emerged at the seminary led by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre in Ecône, Switzerland in the 1970s. At that time, it was not considered a thought crime, as it is today. The archbishop himself made statements in favor of it, according to the Rev. Anthony Cekada, who attended Ecône. In 1987, to take but one example, Abp. Lefebvre, then in retirement, said: Rome has left the Faith, my dear friends. Rome is in apostasy. These are not words in the air. It is the truth. Rome is in apostasy... They have left the Church... This is sure, sure, sure. Fr. Cekada discusses the history of the sedevacantist movement in this video, which can also be found here with a brief summary.   In related news, here is the latest episode of Tradcast, an informative and fun radio program about sedevacantism. Some Catholics are so unhappy with "Pope" Francis that there is talk of "deposing" him. This episode explains that deposing a pope is absolutely impossible. There's also more on a new anti-sedevacantist book. Jorge Bergoglio will surely be tuning in to find out what these "self-absorbed Promethean neo-Pelagians," as he would put it, have to say:  

THESE Iraqis recently kissed the ground after returning home from a period as refugees in Finland. They wept with relief after leaving the cold, European country and arriving home. The Finnish government provided many with financial help to get home, rather than giving them help to stay. Ann Corcoran writes about the idea of flying refugees back to their home countries and providing them with starter funds. The same thing could be done here. Instead of the American government giving money to agencies who resettle refugees and other immigrants it could set up a generous Repatriation Fund. Wouldn't this be true multiculturalism? All people are meant to be home. The fund could, in addition to resettling African and Middle Eastern refugees in their own countries, encourage illegals from Mexico and Central America to go home. Obviously for many it would not be an incentive and obviously there would need to be strict limits on this idea, but it has potential, provided the border is secured (troops or a wall), applicants haven't committed crimes and they agree to relinquish all hope of returning. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many of those who come to America are actually disappointed when they settle here. It is harder and colder than they expected. But they often have no way to get home. They are only provided help to stay. Air fare and a one-time stipend might induce them -- especially if the alternative were a complete cut-off of…

  IN THIS video posted at Refugee Resettlement Watch, Simone, a resident of Calais, France, describes the transformation of the town after President Nicolas Sarkozy allowed the establishment of a refugee squatter camp of migrants waiting to cross the English Channel and enter the U.K. It's a horrifying story. Many of you have heard some bits of what has gone on there, but she gives an insider's account. The camp was just closed by a French court. Here's a look inside the camp.

A BLOG is like a garden. It needs a lot of weeding and tending. Please help this garden survive by donating today. Your contributions during my once-a-year fundraiser are greatly appreciated. Thank you.

  ANNIE writes: Thank you for addressing this important topic of pornography and marriage. I am very grateful to God that my husband was raised by a God-fearing father and mother and that he has never viewed pornography.  I know this is very rare nowadays. However, our marriage has grown tremendously because of the teaching of the marital debt which must be paid generously.  Wives, be generous to your husbands.  Husbands, be patient, kind and selfless with your wives in all things. Regarding healing from past sexual sin, I have seen many couples benefit from a devotion to the Precious Blood and the Rosary. Praying the rosary with fervor and devotion will heal the brain damage incurred by pornography. There have been studies done. (Perhaps someone knows the source of this; I heard it in a sermon while on vacation).  Asking the Precious Blood to wash over us, heal us, and cover all our wounds and insecurities is also quite powerful. We must remember that the health of our marriage has a great impact on all of society, whether we realize it or not.

TIM writes:

It always intrigues me to dig deeper beyond the symptom of a given issue to the root of the problem.

Researcher and author Michael Hoffman exposes the root of all of modern societies‘ problems: the love of money. We are overwhelmed with external problems that affect us at all levels: individually, our families, our work, our local communities, state and federal governments, the entire world. Why is all this happening? The love of money.

In this 34-minute video, Hoffman summarizes his book Usury in Christendom: The Mortal Sin that Was and Now is Not. For the first 1500 years of the Church, usury was severely condemned as a mortal sin, comparable to murder. (more…)

THE Irish priest, Fr. Denis Fahey (1883-1954), was one of the modern era’s greatest defenders of Christian social order. He is unquestionably one of my greatest heroes. His courage and clarity are deeply inspiring. (Ignore the negative things on the Internet about him. It’s trash. Trash and slander.) In this review, quoted at this excellent new website, Fr. Fahey criticizes Catholics who unthinkingly hurl accusations of anti-Semitism at other Catholics:

Two reasons can be assigned to the fact that Our Lord’s faithful members will often be betrayed by those who should be on the side of Christ the King. Firstly, many Catholic writers speak of Papal condemnations of Anti-Semitism without explaining the meaning of the term, and never even allude to the documents which insist on the Rights of Our Divine Lord, Head of the Mystical Body, Priest and King.  Thus, very many are completely ignorant of the duty incumbent on all Catholics of standing positively for Our Lord’s Reign in society in opposition to Jewish Naturalism.  The result is that numbers of Catholics are so ignorant of Catholic doctrine that they hurl the accusation of Anti-Semitism against those who are battling for the Rights of Christ the King, thus effectively aiding the enemies of Our Divine Lord.  (more…)

FROM St. Thomas Aquinas’s Meditations for Each Day of Lent, for today, the Feast of the Holy Winding Sheet:

Joseph taking the body, wrapped it up in a clean linen cloth and laid it in his own new monument.– Matt, xxvii. 59.

THE INTERNET is fantastic. There is so much great material available for free. But the web is also filled with trashy arguments, lots of porn and semi-porn, acres of ugliness, and intrusive ads. Give what you can to blogs you read regularly, especially blogs that do not have any of these things, so that they don't disappear. Thank you so much to those who've contributed so far to my latest fundraiser. I have a bad case of the flu so I haven't been able to respond personally, but your donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you! I still have a long way to go before I make the little I need to keep working here at this level.

[Warning: This post includes some explicit material of a sexual nature and should not be read while children or teenagers are in the room.]

A READER sent me the comment below a long while ago and I thought it justified pornography use so I put it aside. Still the male commenter made some good points. Let me restate the argument: Women can create the occasion for the sin of pornography use by denying their husbands marital intimacy. It is sinful for women to deprive their husbands of intimacy, a definite marital obligation. Women offend God when they don’t treat their husbands as the physical beings they are. Many people balk or laugh at that idea because it is so unfamiliar to them, yet it’s true. Pornography use is also sinful and the man who uses it is culpable. He offends God, his wife, and his children. Abstinence won’t harm him; pornography will. Pornography has damaged countless marriages. The makers and purveyors, the judges who have allowed it, are criminals, who have created a temptation that destroys.

Feminism and the burdens of the careerist life have desensitized some women to the needs of men. Men are generally disinclined to put their feelings into words and to let their wives calmly know something is wrong. Men may also encourage women in exhausting work outside the home, which leaves them with little energy at the end of the day, another serious factor in undermining marital intimacy, something the commenter below does not acknowledge.

I cannot recall whether the reader wanted his name published and I have lost his address, so I will omit it here. He wrote:

Many and various sources are talking about an epidemic of porn and many women, specifically, talk about this as though it has nothing to do with them.

But of course it does — it has everything to do with wives.  (more…)

My annual fundraiser continues. Blogs come and go. Support this one so it does not fade away. Thank you.  

JIM FETZER, author of a book on Sandy Hook (mysteriously banned by Amazon) who graduated magna cum laude from Princeton University, has a Ph.D. from Indiana University and was Distinguished McKnight University Professor at the University of Minnesota, is interviewed about the event by The Buzzsaw. It's an  uncontrolled (and casual) interview, but the first fifteen minutes focus on Sandy Hook. Fetzer calls Obama a "fake president" because of his open defiance of the Constitution. Paul Craig Roberts asks why the mainstream media does not respond to Sandy Hook skeptics. If these "conspiracy theorists" are trading in fantasies, it should be easy to debunk them. Why doesn't the media demolish their claims? The answer: The media is controlled.  

  It triggers moral superiority and resentment in dangerously miseducated non-whites.

Blogs come and go. Support this one so it does not fade away. Thank you.

  EVEN when there are no polls to prove that Donald Trump's supporters are hateful bigots, polls that show the opposite -- that's right, polls that show the opposite -- are analyzed into revealing the supposed white fascists in our midst. I'm not a Trump fan, but I'm not a fan of these characterizations of his supporters either. From The New York Times′s recent report, "Measuring Donald Trump's Supporters for Intolerance:" (Mind you, is there any need to read the article since right off the bat we are told it shows "intolerance?" Is there any need to read the disclaimer, buried in the text, that at least one of these polling operations is so obviously a tool of the Democratic party that even The New York Times must acknowledge it?) The P.P.P. poll asked voters if they thought whites were a superior race. Most Republican primary voters in South Carolina — 78 percent — disagreed with this idea (10 percent agreed and 11 percent weren’t sure). But among Mr. Trump’s supporters, only 69 percent disagreed. Mr. Carson’s voters were the most opposed to the notion (99 percent), followed by Mr. Kasich and Mr. Cruz’s supporters at 92 and 89 percent. Mr. Rubio’s backers were close to the average level of disagreement (76 percent). How is 69 percent an "only?" The headline, based on these figures, should be: "Trump Supporters Overwhelmingly Reject White Supremacy." But the show must go on. Even when the numbers do not add up.…

I HAVE MORE slices to sell. (Scroll down the home page for more details.)