Pope Benedict Reads Riot Act to Pelosi – Will the Pope Rock the Catholic Vote in 2010?

Photograph: Catholic News Agency

Nancy Pelosi, U.S. Speaker of the House, and third in line to the Presidency (lest we forget), met with Pope Benedict on Wednesday. The Pope met with Ms. Pelosi as the Head of State of the Vatican, specifically not the “Head of the Church”, which, in itself was significant. Pelosi, along with other pro-abortion Democrat candidates, consistently use their Catholicism during campaigns, either by professing to be “ardent Catholics”, or making “newsworthy” appearance at churches; while vigorously campaigning for a women’s “right to choose”, and receiving endorsements from pro-abortion organizations such as N.A.R.A.L. CNA (The Catholic News Agency) has been reporting this meeting and printed the following from the Vatican:

Immediately after the meeting, the Holy See’s press office released a statement saying, "following the general audience the Holy Father briefly greeted Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, together with her entourage."
"His Holiness took the opportunity to speak of the requirements of the natural moral law and the Church's consistent teaching on the dignity of human life from conception to natural death which enjoin all Catholics, and especially legislators, jurists and those responsible for the common good of society, to work in co-operation with all men and women of good will in creating a just system of laws capable of protecting human life at all stages of its development."

Further, Pope Benedict allowed no camera’s or press during the brief meeting, taking away any opportunity for Ms. Pelosi to use the press to further political ambitions. (It is estimated that Catholics make up one of the largest voting blocs in the United States and are a key “swing vote” in U.S. elections. , Additionally, 70% of Hispanics identify themselves as Catholic )

Benedict's Vatican, has been, by far, the most vocal in opposition to politicians and abortion worldwide. In October of 2008, the Prefect of the Vatican's Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature, labeled the Democrat Party – “the Party of Death” in response to the pro-abortion policies of the majority of the party’s figureheads. The Pope’s statement issued after the private meeting with Pelosi, constitutes a strong rebuke of all Catholic Politician’s who profess their faith and then, to pacify their backers and some constituents, rely on the excuse of “choice”. Benedict is clearly not buying any of this.

Reuters reported that Ms. Pelosi issued a very brief statement after her meeting at the Vatican, however, did not mention abortion, rather praised the Catholic Church on its stance on peace and global warming.

A Catholic “pro-choice” group (oxymoron) “Catholics for Choice”, headed by Jon O’Brien, in an interview with “The Hill” hoped that the meeting with Pelosi would focus on “bigger” issues than abortion: “That would be a real conversation about choice, instead of this micro-obsession with abortion,” O’Brien said. “They made a very intelligent, diplomatic move.”
The Groups Website Article entitled “Catholic Voters and Policy Makers Lead the Way” written this past November by Mr. O'Brien praises the election of Barack Obama and the role Catholics played in electing such a pro-choice President, the following excerpt is chilling to this Catholic:

As pro choice Catholics, we celebrate the election of a pro choice President who has been a strong supporter of abortion rights, comprehensive sexuality education and access to reproductive health care. The next administration will have to work hard to repair the damage done to reproductive right during the last eight years: the Global Gag Rule, abstinence-only-until-marriage programs, subordinating science to personal belief, and a pervasive program against family-planning efforts. Undoubtedly, concerns about America’s economic security and military engagements overseas will garner a great deal of attention. However, we urge the next administration and Congress to also work for advances in reproductive health care in the US and abroad.

In other words, Mr. O’Brien and like-minded politician’s who are staunch advocates of abortion – against the teaching of a Church they profess to follow faithfully - merely use the Church to promote their agenda.

What Mr. O’Brien and politician’s like Ms. Pelosi, Biden, John Kerry, etc. had banked on in the past was the disconnect between Catholics, specifically, moderate politically minded Catholics and more traditional Conservative Catholics, as well silence from the U.S. Church and the Pope. However, Benedict is far removed in temperament from John Paul, and the growing evangelical base within the Catholic Church, the inclusion of a very conservative Hispanic Catholic population coupled with an increasingly vocal group of U.S. Bishops, may actually put an end to the game of mixing politics and church by pro-abortion politicians seeking re-election.

The following AP Video puts the meeting and the Pope’s view of Politician’s and their role as “Catholics” into perspective: (Note: there are 1,057 articles in a Google Search: “Pelosi and the Pope”)


Speaking as an Evangelical Catholic, and a values voter – to cast a vote for a politician who pro-actively campaigns on the abortion ticket – regardless of religious affiliation would run counter to conscious for this Hispanic, first generation American. To use a phrase form one of the commenter on CAN’s article regarding the Pope’s stand: “Benedict Rocks!” It remains to be seen, with the 2010 elections on the horizon, how this will play out in states that have a significant block of Catholic voters.

Afghanistan – Revisited – Obama’s Political Troop Deployment

President Barack Obama has ordered the deployment of 17,000 troops to Afghanistan , the LA Times notes that the increase is part of a campaign promise made by Obama to refocus efforts in that arena. Afghanistan, however, has a long history of giving the boot to outsiders, the various tribal factions which cause constant friction aside; one has to add to the mix, the religious zealots of the Taliban and the long-standing relationships between the tribes and the “camps” that house the “so called terrorists” (One has to wonder what Helen Thomas is smoking).

Afghanistan has a long history of repelling “invaders” , a condensed, easy to read, treatment on the subject by Frank W. Thackery and John E. Findling can be found online at , Google Books. The Soviet Union, the last country to make a military excursion into Afghanistan, spent ten long years battling the terrain and a people entrenched in Islamic Fundamentalism. In an attempt to prop up a communist regime, the Soviets found that simply giving more freedom to women, for example, resulted in a backlash that resulted in a pounding defeat. The incursion is often referred to as the Soviet’s “Viet Nam”.

The question remains, therefore, have times changed so dramatically in the course of 20 years, that an increase in U.S. Military on the ground in Afghanistan will fare better? The government is, for all intents and purposes, a Democracy (thank you President Bush), and is working towards improvements in a country that’s terrain makes for safe havens for those pesky Islamic Fascists. The fact that the culture is deep rooted in tribal relationships, and many of those tribal leaders have responsibilities to either members of Al Qaeda or the Taliban adds to the problem. From the perspective of History, even the great Genghis Khan found Afghanistan to be problematic, therefore one would reason, that, given the fact little has changed, the addition of 17,000 troops will do little to put a dent in the continuing carnage.

The U.S. Military in Afghanistan, under General David McKiernan, requested an entire brigade (60,000 troops) - the President is “thinking about it”. It might be wise to recall that Lyndon Johnson, and his struggle with the Viet Nam war. Johnson avoided the initial call for major troop deployments. The difference between the two Presidents, Johnson inherited the mess from Kennedy, however, Obama campaigned against Bush and his involvement in Iraq, and focused his rhetoric on the “missed opportunity” of capturing Bin Ladin in Afghanistan. The rest, as the saying goes, is history.

Pelosi and the Pope – Nancy goes to the Vatican

Photo: Reuters - Catholics Protest against Pro-Choice Politicians

The Vatican has confirmed that Pope Benedict will meet with U.S. Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi on Wednesday. The report was confirmed by the Catholic News Agency yesterday. The Pope, in meeting with Pelosi, will do so in his role as Head of State, rather than his role as the Head of the Church – further, the article notes that the meeting will be private, giving no chance for Ms. Pelosi to turn this “audience with the Pope” into a “photo opportunity”. Pelosi is characterized in the article as a self-described “ardent Catholic”; however, she is also, contrary to church teaching, an ardent supporter of abortion – which is a sticking point with church leaders in the U.S. as well as those within the church who are pro-life.

During the general election of 2008, the Catholic vote played a significant role in the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency, regardless of his support for abortion. Catholics, for the most part, have traditionally voted Democrat, and with an estimated 30 million Catholics living in the United States, they are a voting bloc politicians would be best to court. It was not insignificant that Joe Biden, taking on the role of running mate to Barack Obama, was touted as a “Catholic”, in most news articles - this was noted as a direct attempt to attract the Catholic vote. Additionally, the support of Caroline Kennedy (another big Catholic name), in the early stages of the campaign, went a long way towards doing the same, especially in the Northeast where the family dynasty has the most support.

With 2010 elections on the horizon, it behooves the Speaker (who, incidentally appears to rule the roost in Washington), to do her part for the Party, and appear to be devout enough to meet with the Pope. (Granted, one is not supposed to be judgmental regarding another’s religious inclinations, and it could very well be that Ms. Pelosi is seeking to be exonerated, in the Catholic tradition of confessing sins (Abortion support), in order to be absolved. The crux of the matter is that once forgiven, Ms. Pelosi would have to become an ardent pro-life advocate – which flies in the face of traditional Democrat Party values and not-insignificant financial support from pro-abortion groups such as NARAL.)

In the Machiavellian world of U.S. politics, the meeting between Pelosi and the Pope, may be the result of the election of Michael Steele to the Chair of the RNC. Steele, a devote Catholic, who is pro-life, and has a Catholic pedigree that features a strong Catholic education, including “a few years at the Augustinian Friars Seminary at Villanova University, in preparation for the priesthood, before deciding instead on a career in civil service.” Therefore, the opposition party (Republicans) now have a bonafide Catholic at the helm, both an historical event and political boon that has been grossly overlooked (or under-reported).

What to look for in the coming days: Glowing reports of the meeting between Pelosi and the Pope from sources such as the New York Times, CNN and CBS, unless of course, the meeting either offered no press coverage, or is truly a personal visit of repentance. Alternately, the Vatican has a YouTube channel, updated frequently, for those who would follow this particular meeting. The most recent video from the Vatican appears below and focuses on the need for – confession. Timely.