PC was not wrong on Mary

I am no candidate for the Legion of Mary, but fail

    to find fault  when a Catholic college like PC feels

    compelled to defend her honor as a sacred symbol of  a

    RELIGIOUS  institution .

           Does Free Speech mean we have the  right to offend

    anybody anywhere  under any circumstances - with no

    negative feedback , no consequences ?

           Does not a Nazi also have the right to be evicted

    from a synagogue as well as to  communicate with

    newspapers , radio , and TV ?

             I have spent many hours at the PC library. The

    public would be amazed at the anti- Catholic periodicals

    that can be found there. " The Militant " and  "  The Humanist "

    - which no doubt believe in " immaculate abortion " - can

    be quietly appreciated there. And no doubt scholarly

    debate on Catholic sensitive  issues is not unknown

    there .

            Can one imagine a man like Father Lennon - both

    pious and intelligent - just censoring other points

    of view ?

              Somehow MANNERS can be reconciled with free

    speech.

           The offending students at least owe the school

    an apology. Myself  more and more offended by militant

    and erratic and obnoxious , I find the Virgin - myth

    or reality - an appealing figure.

           Intellectual immaturity must not be mistaken for

    ideological fervor. That irreverent poster was also

    a  crass loser as publicity gimmick.

         Brains will tell - even at PC !

Did Brown " affirm " Robinson ?

I read with amusement on page A-5 of the Providence Journal

    today ( March 22 )  : " Kennedy foe reveals past and loses GOP

    support ".  The 39 year old wealthy business executive -" a

    graduate of Brown University " - is perhaps a lush, a rapist,

    a non-intellect " flunking the bar twice in New York and

    once in Texas " , a plagiarist - perhaps ?

            Ironically Teddy Kennedy - whom I do admire - was

    always a big supporter of " affirmative action " . And

    so was Brown University .

            After reaping the benefits of the LIBERAL Ivy

    League,  people of color like Jack E. Robinson ( was he

    named after the great baseball player ? )  attach

    their loyal asses to the Republican Party .

           Perhaps compassionate conservatism can forgive

    them !

           I note that Jack E. " didn't really study  " for

    the bar exams . What  amazing self-esteem ! The

    most brilliant law student would have the humility to

    actually study for that fateful exam .

          Was Robinson puffed up with self-esteem at little

     cost at Brown University ?

          Have a drink on me Jackie . What will it be :

    scotch, gin or brandy ?

Protect " Open Records Law " !

  " They are trying to overhaul the state's Open Records

    Law with a bill designed to protect their privacy " , I read

    on your front page today ( March 16 )  . More  March Madness ?

           I agree  with opponents of the Bill - like Staci Sawyer of

    ACLU - that  the bill is dangerous and " incredibly vague " .

          " Open Records "  is a keystone of democratic " check "

    on government power. For example it may be used to investigate

    police brutality or corruption at Buddy's Place , Providence

    City Hall.

              Even in a fairly healthy democracy that are hundreds

    of entrenched would be J. Edgar Hoovers (  above " there are " )

    who  thrive in the dark : Don't you dare cross THEM ! They

    know  all about your dirty little secret !  "

            The ONLY check on these creeps is an informed

    public - and a news media that is unconstrained in investigating

    them .


             When newspapers like the Providence Journal go to

    court for "  open records " , the public is wise to

    support them . More often than not it is  corrupt

    power that just does not want to be embarrassed .

          Honest people have little to fear from our

    " Open Records Law " .

So democracy is tyranny - for gays ?

Yes, " once again, voters oppose gay marriage ". A silly

    letter in the Boston Globe today ( March 11 ) suggests that

    this democratic majority is really a tyranny: " Democracy

    exists to protect the minority from the tyranny of the

    majority. "  Well, I guess when we elect a president every four

    years,  this is a shameless  exercise in tyranny !

            Providence  Journal columnist, Charles Bakst - sulking

    from the California rout of gay marriage - says that the majority

    of voters are ignorant bigots . They know not what they do !

              The INSTITUTION of marriage simply was not designed

    for gay people. They have no more right to marriage than I

    have to a military funeral - which is prejudiced against non-

    veterans .

             Imagine a gay kid singing :

                   " I won't go to bed till

                     I'm legally WED "    ( a song from " Grease " )


             I applaud the common sense of the good people of California.


       And many married people associate " life, liberty, and

    the pursuit of happiness " with the unchained , carefree SINGLE

    state.

             That  will end with fateful words : " I now

    pronounce you Man & Man ! "

              Will the gay engagements and weddings be announced on

    the society page ?  Who will want a " shower " and who a

    bachelor party ?

                 Oh what a circus ! Gay marriage - a farce of a

    farce !