Everything Donald Trump touches is a bust. He makes everything about himself!

Everything Donald Trump gets involved in is a bust for the American people- It's always all about him

Echo opinion letter published in the Milwaukee Journal

Reporters and headline writers, and the entire USA Today Network, are feeding Donald Trump's narcissistic ego and doing our nation a great disservice when referencing what happened in Washington on June 14, as "Donald Trump's parade." "Wisconsin Republicans cheer Trump's military parade but do not plan to attend" June 12.


The U.S. Army has been planning a celebration of its 250th anniversary for years, under more than one president.

In fact, the anniversary dates from the Continental Congress authorizing an army for the United States of America as a whole. True, Trump has been trying to make it "All About Me" as he does just about anything happening in the world.

But, by calling it "Donald Trump's parade" you are ceding the ground, aiding and abetting his well known narcissism.

Next you will be making it impossible to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence without making that "Trump's declaration."

The better approach is to report on the 250 anniversary of the army of the United States, and leave Trump entirely out of the story, except perhaps for brief mention that he was there to watch.

Also note that the 250th anniversary of American independence is an eight year rolling celebration which has been notably absent from most press coverage, with rather limited official observance.

A few towns in Massachusetts celebrated the 250th anniversary of the battles of Lexington and Concord, but hardly anyone anywhere else did, including in Washington, D.C.

This is our celebration of the origins of our common country and all the contributions people of every race, creed, color and national origin made to bring it about.

And yes, there were Americans of African descent among the Minute Men, there were Irish Catholics willing to rise against the British Empire, there were Jews devoting their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor to the cause, and there were Oneida, Stockbridge, Tuscarora, among other nations playing vital roles throughout the war. Also there were women serving in the army, although they had to do so under disguise.

From Charlie Rosenberg, in Milwaukee

Donald Trump never appeals to the “better angels of our nature” but almost always appeals to our darker demons.

Echo opinion by John F. Crosby, published in America, is professor of philosophy at the Franciscan University of Steubenville in Ohio.

"First, one might reasonably hold that the first article of Mr. Trump’s impeachment in 2019, (abuse of power) has merit, and that Trump did indeed abuse his office as president by putting pressure on a foreign government to help him collect dirt on a political rival."

Catholics do not have to vote for Trump: Three points to consider:

America the Jesuit Magazine point of view. 

Contrast all the pro-life measures of Trump these last four years with the pro-abortion measures to which Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are committed, all along keeping in mind the centrality of the life issues for Catholics: You get the result, many Catholics say, that a serious Catholic has no choice but to vote for Mr. Trump. It does not matter if you think that Mr. Biden has the better position on health care, on the environment, on taxation policy, on immigration reform; even if you are right, how can these strengths of Mr. Biden outweigh the wickedness of his support of the abortion license? 

Abortion is not on a level with these issues; if you respect the hierarchy of goods and evils, you cannot not vote for Mr. Trump.

Much as I feel the force of this line of argument, I do not think that it is conclusive. For e argument wrongly assumes that the critics of Mr. Trump are giving more weight to questions of the environment and immigration reform than to the protection of unborn human life. The really serious opponents of Mr. Trump do not make this mistake; they rather base their opposition to him on fundamental things like disrupting the rule of law; perpetuating racism; and spreading a culture of amorality. Is it true that we do not have to worry about Mr. Trump’s complicity in these evils, as long as he delivers the pro-life goods? No, and let me explain why not.

Do we have to ignore the fact that our president sometimes behaves more like a mobster than a president of the United States?

First, one might reasonably hold that the first article of Mr. Trump’s impeachment in 2019, (abuse of power) has merit, and that Trump did indeed abuse his office as president by putting pressure on a foreign government to help him collect dirt on a political rival. 

But it is not to my purpose to defend the first article of impeachment. Rather, I want to argue that a voter who conscientiously believes, as Senator Mitt Romney believed, that Mr. Trump committed an impeachable offense acquires thereby a major impediment to voting for Mr. Trump. For if the first article of impeachment gave a good reason for removing him from office, it a fortiori gives a good reason for not bestowing on him a second term of office.

I ask: Do we have to ignore the fact that Mr. Trump sometimes behaves in a manner unworthy of a president of the United States, and ignore the damage that he inflicts on the rule of law in our body politic, just because of his good pro-life policies?

For President Trump, the George Floyds of America are invisible.

Let us consider the events unleashed by the murder of George Floyd. This was not the isolated crime of a single rogue police officer but rather a crime that symbolizes a vast pattern of crimes committed against Black men and women. This dreadful crime is, as it seems to many of us, of a piece with other crimes against Black people that occurred around the same time, crimes such as the murder of Ahmaud Arbery, a Black man jogging in a white neighborhood in Georgia, and of a piece with the lynchings of Black men and women in the early 20th century. It belongs to the moral fallout of slavery and reminds us of how much healing has still to take place between Black and white Americans.

For Trump, the George Floyds of America are invisible. Look at his Fourth of July speech this year at Mount Rushmore in which he surveys U.S. history down to the present and addresses the burning concerns of today. He does not even mention George Floyd and his aggrieved fellow Black people; they do not even exist for him. He just speaks up for the statues that were being taken down this summer and declares his support for the police. He cannot hear the cry for justice that resounds throughout the world in the wake of the brutal murder of Mr. Floyd. In the protests, he can only discern lawlessness and rioting. He wants us to feel threatened by the protesters, not to be morally challenged by them. He has nothing more to say to us than to tweet, in all caps, LAW AND ORDER! He thinks he has nothing more to do than to call in the dogs and to issue threats.

The partisans of Mr. Trump will say that none of this interferes with the moral imperative to vote for him: “Questions of racial justice are entirely secondary in relation to the life issues; Trump is pro-life, and that is far more important than that he is weak on race relations.” To which the obvious answer is that the murder of George Floyd or of Ahmaud Arbery is no less a murder than the murder of unborn babies. But more than that: These racial murders, as I said, represent generations of violence perpetrated against our Black brothers and sisters; this violence should burden the pro-life conscience as much as abortion does. But it does not seem to burden the president’s conscience.

Finally, here is another fact relevant to our voting deliberations. It is the most important fact of all. Mr. Trump rarely appeals to the “better angels of our nature” but almost always appeals to our darker demons. When has he ever appealed to the noble ideals on which the U.S. is founded? When did he ever wax eloquent on the proposition that “all men are created equal”? When did he ever deplore the fact that we often fall short of our founding ideals? When did he ever call us to repentance for our national sins, as President Lincoln did in 1863?

Mr. Trump rarely appeals to the “better angels of our nature” but almost always appeals to our darker demons.

Trump simply does not live in this moral universe within which our national history has unfolded. When he speaks of American “greatness” he is speaking not of the high moral ideals of our founding but of keeping foreigners out, of not being taken advantage of by China and of making Germany pay its “fair share” of the NATO defense of Europe. When he criticizes a political opponent he almost never makes the argument that the opponent has betrayed some important ideal of our nation; he rather insults the opponent, calling him or her “a loser” or ridiculing him or her as he ridiculed the dying Senator John McCain.

Peter Wehner has well argued that Mr. Trump sounds more like a follower of Nietzsche than of Christ; like Nietzsche*, Mr. Trump lives by the “will to power” (that is, wanting above all else to be the winner and to trample on the loser) and is largely unmoved by the “will to truth.” Mr. Wehner’s analysis helps us to see that what is at stake in Trumpism is something far more ominous than the fact that Mr. Trump is “obnoxious” or “embarrassing. Of particular concern: The president seems to encourage violence against his political enemies.

I grant that the president seems to speak of our higher moral ideals when he defends the unborn, as he did at the March for Life. The amorality I mentioned seems to give way for a moment to something higher. But still, the amorality dominates his words and deeds, as we can see by setting aside the speeches that other people write for him and examining his tweets: The voice of the Nietzschean Trump can be heard throughout his tweets.

When I vote in the upcoming election, do I have to ignore the amorality of Mr. Trump simply because he appoints conservative judges and supports pro-life measures? Is the evil of abortion so great that our duty to resist it outweighs our duty to resist the brutalization of our public life that derives from Mr. Trump? 

Could it be that what we might call his “systemic amorality” (that is, an amorality that permeates his deeds, his utterances, his omissions, his unguarded reactions) makes him morally toxic for the whole country? Could it be, in a word, that we lose more in the long run than we gain for the pro-life cause by binding that cause to him? Pro-life voters have to take these questions seriously before voting for Mr. Trump, and they have to run the risk that the answers may keep them from voting for him.

I am not defending a vote for Mr. Biden. I can just as well put my analysis in the service of other voting strategies, such as voting for a third-party candidate. What I want to say to the partisans of Mr. Trump is this: Beware of being so fixed on life issues that you accept too much collateral damage to our institutions and our traditions.

Disrupting the rule of law in our body politic or lending support to a malignant racism or disseminating the poison of amorality are not “secondary issues about which good people can disagree” but are as important as any of the issues that we take into our electoral deliberations.

But it is not to my purpose to defend the first article of impeachment. Rather, I want to argue that a voter who conscientiously believes, as Senator Mitt Romney believed, that Mr. Trump committed an impeachable offense acquires thereby a major impediment to voting for Mr. Trump. 

Finally, here is another fact relevant to our voting deliberations. It is the most important fact of all. Mr. Trump rarely appeals to the “better angels of our nature” but almost always appeals to our darker demons. When has he ever appealed to the noble ideals on which the U.S. is founded? When did he ever wax eloquent on the proposition that “all men are created equal”? When did he ever deplore the fact that we often fall short of our founding ideals? 

When did Trump ever call us to repentance for our national sins, as President Lincoln did in 1863?

For if the first article of impeachment gave a good reason for removing him from office, it a fortiori** gives a good reason for not bestowing on him a second term of office.

What John F. Crosby in America says to the partisans of Mr. Trump is this: Beware of being so fixed on life issues that you accept too much collateral damage to our institutions and our traditions. Disrupting the rule of law in our body politic or lending support to a malignant racism or disseminating the poison of amorality are not “secondary issues about which good people can disagree” but are as important as any of the issues that we take into our electoral deliberations.

*Friedrich Nietzsche was a German philosopher, essayist, and cultural critic. His writings on truth, morality, language, aesthetics, cultural theory, history, nihilism, power, consciousness, and the meaning of existence have exerted an enormous influence on Western philosophy and intellectual history.

**A fortiori in Latin literally means "from the stronger (argument)". The term is used when drawing a conclusion that's even more obvious or convincing than the one just drawn.

"shocking and horrifying, and I have felt myself close to weeping at times" - Sister Simone Campbell

NPR's Scott Simon spoke with Sister Simone Campbell* about the Catholic Church's reaction to this latest sex abuse scandal. 

Sister Simone Campbell

She leads NETWORK, a "progressive voice within the Catholic community."

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

Pope Francis is in Ireland this weekend as part of the Meeting of Families, a Vatican-sponsored gathering of Catholics. Today in Dublin, the pope addressed the crisis of sexual abuse among clergy around the world. In prepared remarks of his speech, the pope said the failure of ecclesiastical authorities - bishops, religious superiors, priests and others - adequately to address these repellent crimes has rightly given rise to outrage and remains a source of pain and shame for the Catholic community. I myself share those sentiments.

Nuns are also speaking out. We're joined in our studio now by Sister Simone Campbell, who was part of the ministry of the Sisters of Social Service and executive director of NETWORK, a Catholic social justice group. Sister Simone, thanks so much for being with us.

SIMONE CAMPBELL: Great to be with you.

SIMON: I have to ask - how do you feel this week about the church to which you've devoted your life?

CAMPBELL: Well, I have to say over the last few weeks, it's been really shocking and horrifying, and I have felt myself close to weeping at times. This week, I took a little solace in the letter from Pope Francis to the world saying - acknowledging the extent of the horror that has existed and a commitment to change. And I take heart in these remarks in Ireland as his very first statements that it is included because there was a worry he would not include this in his very first statements. So what this says to me is that the Vatican is beginning to get it in all its departments that this is not just those concerned with clergy, but the whole church needs to be changed. And I think that's what we're beginning to see.

SIMON: I note you said close to weeping but not leaving. What keeps you in the church and what kind of changes do you think are mandated?

CAMPBELL: Well, the thing is for me church is not about the institution. It's about the Gospel and Jesus, and that's much more powerful - 2,000 years of history of the contemplative life. And we've had all kinds of scandals and all kinds of horror in the structure, but it's the faith that's deeper than that. But it's the community that makes the difference. And this was the hard part in Pope Francis' letter is he acknowledged clericalism and clericalism as being the righteousness on the part of the ordained clergy, that they were always right, that protected them as opposed to caring for kids or for the others who were abused by the clerics. And so Pope Francis attacked clericalism and said that had to change. I totally agree. It's part of the problem with - as men have approached women in the church. It's the lack of access to everybody to power. That's true. But then in the end of it, he said, well, we all need to do prayer and fasting. Well, that part kind of made me mad, quite frankly, and - because I thought that was tone deaf for the fact that I think our leadership has some special responsibility. But in the end, for me, it's about Jesus and the Gospel. It's the way I find the fullness of life in community together, that we're not individualistic, we're not isolates. I can't do this without you, without everyone else. And so it's the place where I find people who nourish me.

SIMON: Should there be a greater role for women, religious sisters, in the church? Should nuns be made bishops and cardinals, for example?

CAMPBELL: (Laughter) Well, I actually am kind of worried about that. I mean, unless we change the system - if you just made us cardinals or bishops in the same system, we'd probably get as arrogant as they are. This is what we have to change - the culture of arrogance.

SIMON: And I'm sorry we only have half a minute left, but when you say talking about changing the culture of arrogance, you mean letting - not making clergy the moral arbiters that they seem to be right now.

CAMPBELL: Well, I don't know that they seem to be that right now. But yes, it's changing who are the deciders? Where do we share that insight into the depth and the meaning of the Gospel now? How do we make community together? It's up to us together.

SIMON: Sister Simone Campbell, thanks so much.

CAMPBELL: Thank you.

*Simone Campbell, SSS (born October 22, 1945), is an American Roman Catholic Religious Sister, lawyer, lobbyist and executive director of NETWORK. She belongs to the Sisters of Social Service.

Climate Change and Poverty- from Catholics Confront Global Poverty

"THE TIME IS NOW Climate change affects everyone. And in the United States, we have incredible power to encourage change through our elected officials. As people of faith, we have a responsibility to speak out with and on behalf of our brothers and sisters impacted by the changing climate."- Catholics Confront Gobal Poverty.

I've lived in a developing country, the Phillipines, where people went ot the market to buy one leaf of cabbage, or one egg at a time. It's beyond heartbreaking. There are plenty of people in the world who can create a meal oout of a leaf of cabbage and one egg, and a village could feast on the food I throw away during any one week.

An article in Catholics Confront Global Poverty brings more social awareness to the plight of the poor especially as climate change is impacting food production.

Marta Barrera awakens abruptly—not from the sounds of her six children, but from a pounding rain she hears on her thatched roof. She shakes her husband and rises quickly … only to realize that the sound was a dream. She shakes her head and frowns. The family needs the precious rain for their corn crop, cistern and daily living. Marta and her husband, Hugo, are Guatemalan farmers whose livelihood has been severely impacted by a monthslong drought. Like thousands of Central American farmers, they are experiencing the negative consequences of climate change in their work, family and community. “Our partners and the farmers we work with in the developing world are experiencing the effects of climate change now—and we can’t wait to help them adapt,” says Joan Rosenhauer, CRS vice president for U.S. Operations. “It’s a matter of survival.” Today, Marta and Hugo are part of a CRS agriculture program that is helping them learn how to enhance soil health and grow drought-resistant native crops. They’ll have a future with opportunity, even as the dry conditions continue. The pace of climate change has dramatically escalated in recent years. And the poor and most vulnerable are living with the consequences. In an interdependent world, the health of our environment cannot be separated from the well-being of our neighbor. Taking good care of our planet is necessary for the Earth to thrive as God intended. UNPRECEDENTED GLOBAL ACTION In December 2015, presidents, heads of state, prime ministers and others met in Paris to discuss the environmental impacts we are collectively responsible for. At this meeting, the 21st Conference of the Parties —or COP21—196 countries agreed to invest in green energy, while lessening dependence on fossil fuels. Recognizing their “common but differentiated” responsibilities, the United States and many other countries agreed to help countries struggling with crippling poverty and the impacts of climate change through the Green Climate Fund. WORKING TOGETHER Catholics Confront Global Poverty is part of a large group of Catholic organizations that support care for creation. 

Our prayers and actions make a difference in the lives of our brothers and sisters impacted by climate change throughout the world. Partners include the Catholic Climate Covenant, Catholic Rural Life, National Federation for Catholic Youth Ministry, and the Association of Catholic Colleges and Universities.

MORAL ISSUES ARE CONCERNS THAT AFFECT THE HUMAN FAMILY. CATHOLICS—LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE—WE CARE ABOUT CREATION AND THE GIFTS OF THE EARTH, THAT THEY ARE TAKEN CARE OF AND AVAILABLE TO ALL PEOPLE. IN OUR VIEW, AND CERTAINLY IN THE POPE’S VIEW, THAT’S WHY THIS IS A MORAL ISSUE: CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS THE VERY THINGS THAT KEEP PEOPLE ALIVE AND HELP PEOPLE PROSPER.’ —DAN MISLEH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, CATHOLIC COVENANT ON CLIMATE CHANGE.