Drinking Liberally

The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Come join me for a hoppy Manny’s and some hopped up conversation.

I’m also planning to stop by tonight’s kickoff event for Friends of Seattle, 6:00 PM at Twist Restaurant & Lounge, 2313 First Ave (First & Bell). Hope to see you there.

Not in Seattle? Liberals will also be drinking tonight in the Tri-Cities and Vancouver. A full listing of Washington’s eleven Drinking Liberally chapters is available here.


  1. 2

    proud to be an ass spews:


    I plan to hit every DL session in this state in June. Sorta’ like the fabled Boville run.

  2. 3

    YOS LIB BRO spews:




  3. 4


    What was it that Dick Morris said on the Faux News Channel last night? They were talking about the ’08 presidential elections, and the prospect of a Republican being elected. He said “Not a chance. They are already lining up at the polling places to vote democratic”. And this coming from a confirmed Clinton hater (hey they fired his ass) Morris.

    Anyone that thinks Republicons can legislate, should be in a straight jacket. I know Democrats have problems, but at least they recognize there are people in this country that matter other than billionairs, and defense contractors.

    Maybe the next Republicon candidate will get luck. All the “regular” Republicon voters will remain in their caves for the next 2 years, and not watch the trials, and investigations……

    I saw a license plate cover today that cracked me up. It said “My next license plate will be made by Bush and Cheney”. Awesome…..

  4. 5

    Dan Rather spews:

    The only way a democrat will get elected is if they can split the republican vote. It has been proven time after time that democrats can not get a majority (over 50% of the vote). The only reason Clinton got elected was because of Perot. Meanwhile the Senate is flopping big time because of the lack of leadership from the democrats. Everything that goes wrong in congress will be blamed on the dems and they will lose power in 2008. All the republicans have to do is obstruct, sit back and wait for the inevitable.

  5. 6

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    Now we know the REAL reason Nancy went to Iraq

    So, looks like the Leftards have a new Muzzie friend. This one spoke at the DNC Winter Meeting last Friday and he had some lovely things to say. Husham al-Husainy is an Islamo-nutter who has a long record of support for Islamo-nutters at war with America and Israel.

    1)\”Al-Husainy\’s words before the Democrats – asking God to \”help us stop . . . occupation and oppression\” – were jarring enough, since he was likely referring to either American soldiers in Iraq or Jews in Israel.\”

    2)\”During last summer\’s Israel-Hezbollah war, al-Husainy led rallies in Dearborn in support of the Lebanese terrorist group. Protesters displayed swastikas as well as anti-American and anti-Semitic posters.\”

    3)\”…at Dearborn\’s Bint Jebail Cultural Center – named for the stronghold in south Lebanon from which Hezbollah rockets rained on Israel. Al-Husainy was among several who delivered hate-filled, anti-American rhetoric. He cheered as others called for the hastened destruction of the Jews.\”

    This guy is a WINNER for the Dems. They love him.

    Giving comfort to America\’s enemies, nice. The Leftards\’ blind hatred of President Bush seems to keep expanding. Shocking though it may seem, they appear to hate America more each day.

    Thanks for saying it so succinctly, Jenn

  6. 9

    Colonel Tucker "Biff" O'Hanrahanrahanrahan spews:

    Nancy Pelosi’s e-mail address is: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

    I’ve e-mailed her asking her to impeach Bush/Cheney.
    Add your voice to the growing movement to impeach, convict, and jail these bastards.

    We’ll give the wingnuts a preview of ’08.

    Start building your personal e-mail list now of people who know you. An e-mail blitz in ’08 plus the phones and blogging of millions of dedicated progressives will crush the GOP.

    Then it’s time to rein in the goddamn corporations.

  7. 10

    Dan Rather spews:

    K says:

    Dan @ 5- if my memory serves me, Gore got more votes than Bush.

    02/06/2007 at 8:58 pm

    Yes he did but Gore got less than 50% of the popular vote. Bush more than made up for it being the first president since his Daddy to win with over 50% of the popular vote in 2004. Clinton or Gore never got close to the percentage or number of votes Bush received in 2004. Bush would have won by an even a bigger margin if we were to throw out all the fraudulent votes, but hey will take it.

  8. 11


    C’mon trolls. There is no way any Republicon candidate will be able to fool enough cowardly American Traitors into voting them into the white house.

    The Republican Party is DEAD.

    By the way, how many warnings did Bush flatly ignore before 9-11? I can think of at least 100 “WE ARE ABOUT TO BE ATTACKED” warnings that were completely ignored. They Tenet and Black even drove to the white house in the middle of the night to try and rattle them into doing something.

    Bush did not even call a meeting to discuss possibly protecting Americans.

    Even the retarded greedy cowards that usually vote for republicons have figured it out. After 2 years of investigations, prosecutions, and convictions, it will be hard for a republicon to find anyone stupid enough to vote for them.

    The Conservative scam has ended. You say the Democrats lack leadership, but Nancy has over a 50% approval rating, something no republicon speaker has had in the last 50 years.

    Long live the people.

    By the way wingnuts, explain how outing CIA undercover agents, and destroying the front companies (Brewster Jennings) they work for is not treason?

    Read a little about the Libby trial.

    The whole thing is about traitors committing treason. Anything to silence critics, and sell a needless war for profit to cowering Americans.

    Bush got his war. Order extra coffins, and flags.

    I only wonder how long the Chinese will fund it…..

  9. 12

    Roger Rabbit spews:


    Yes! Yes! Yes! My oilfield services stock, NOV, was up $5.65 a share today!! If Mark the Welshing Pigfucker keeps pouring my gas into his Hummer, I’m gonna be a rich fucking bunny!!!

  10. 14

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @5 “The only way a democrat will get elected is if they can split the republican vote.”

    We don’t have to. You guys already have.

  11. 15


    #10 ” Bush would have won by an even a bigger margin if we were to throw out all the fraudulent votes, but hey will take it. ”

    I wonder how Bush would have won florida in 2000 if the 90,000 legitimate minority voters Jeb took off the rolls were allowed to vote.

    Gore won Florida.

    Kerry won Ohio.


    The very notion of democracy is at risk.

    By the way, when are they gonna count the 3.5 million machine spoiled, and supplemental ballots cast in 2004?

    The best thing Americans can do is investigate, and prosecute the organized crime family called the GOP. It has already started to happen.

    When is DeLay’s trial anyway? Most of the rest of them, Ney, Noe, Safavian, Abramoff, Cunningham, and the rest have already plead guilty, or have been found guilty, and are spilling their guts. I forget, what was the name of that Florida congressman who tried to IM the underwear off of teenagers?

    We can only hope they can build enough prisons to hold all the corrupt republicons, and enough mental institutions to hold their supporters. God only knows they are a danger to themselves, and their country.

    If you disagree with me, please read Armed Madhouse, Fiasco, State of Denial, or a few other good books describing the actions of the Bush Crime Family, and their co-conspirators.

  12. 16

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    If a Guiliani – Gingrich ticket somehow gets elected, the First Ladies can form their own basketball team.


  13. 17

    Dan Rather spews:

    I wonder how Bush would have won florida in 2000 if the 90,000 legitimate minority voters Jeb took off the rolls were allowed to vote.

    Easy… just count all the military ballots thrown out by the liberal voting districts. Hell the Florida voters were so pissed that Bush was elected in 2000 they gave him a 300,000 vote margin in 2004. heheehheehee

  14. 19

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    10, 15 It’s well known that Republicans solicited soldiers who didn’t vote to submit ballots after the election was over because they knew the Democrats wouldn’t dare to challenge “military ballots” and they were right. Bush was “elected” with illegal votes.

  15. 20

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    Colonel Tucker \”Biff\” O\’Hanrahanrahanrahan says: Nancy Pelosi’s e-mail address is: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

    What a coincidence! I emailed her too! And it does suck to have to use her cowardly webform!

    I figured she needed to be reminded that many of us are all too aware of her hypocrisy and self-serving bullshit!


    Open letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi

    Nancy, you are fooling yourself and many good Catholics: don\’t take communion until you make the choice in favor of life.

    Sunday, February 04, 2007
    By Rev. John Malloy

    Nancy, you are fooling yourself and I fear fooling many good Catholics. You are simply not in sync with the Catholic Church and until you change your non-Catholic positions should stop calling yourself Catholic. Your record shows that you support embryonic stem cell research, Planned Parenthood, contraception, family planning funding, allowing minors to have an abortion without parental consent, and are against making it a crime to harm a fetus, etc. etc.

    The fact that you favor married priests and women priests certainly would not classify you as conservative, but here is your answer to the question: “Are you a conservative Catholic?”

    “I think so. I was raised, in a very strict upbringing in a Catholic home where we respected people, were observant, were practicing Catholics and that the fundamental belief was that God gave us all a free will and we were accountable for that, each of us.

    Each person had that accountability, so it wasn’t for us to make judgments about how people saw their responsibility and that it wasn’t for politicians to make decisions about how people led their personal lives; certainly, to high moral standards, but when it got into decisions about privacy and all the rest, than that was something that individuals had to answer to God for, and not to politicians.”(National Catholic Reporter, 1-22-03)

    That sounds fair and tolerant, but your record belies high moral standards.

    The NARAL rates you 100% pro-abortion. Your statement in Newsweek Magazine (10-23-06): “To me it isn’t even a question. God has given us a free will. We’re all responsible for our actions. If you don’t want an abortion, you don’t believe in it, [then] don’t have one. But don’t tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities. My family is very pro-life. They’re not fanatics and they’re not activists. I think they’d like it if I were not so vocally pro-choice.”

    We elect politicians to make laws that help people honor their responsibilities, such as protecting life itself. Can politicians tell someone else not to kill?

    I fail to understand why you can favor partial birth abortion. How can you explain that it is proper to bring a baby part way out of the birth canal and then stick a scissors in its head to suck out the brains? Is it possible that votes mean more to you than life itself?

    Yes, Nancy, we would all like it if you were not so vocally pro-choice, i.e. pro-death. Until your choice is in line with Catholic doctrine, please, Nancy, do not receive the Eucharist when you attend Mass.

    Rev. John Malloy, SDB, a Roman Catholic priest, is pastor of Saints Peter & Paul Church in San Francisco, CA.

    Hmm, gee, how many Catholics across the country are forwarding that scolding?

  16. 21

    Dan Rather spews:

    By the way, when are they gonna count the 3.5 million machine spoiled, and supplemental ballots cast in 2004?

    Never. The DNC can never forge that many ballots.

  17. 22

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    17 Isn’t it funny how Bush’s Florida margin went up by 299,500 votes after paper ballo6ts were replaced with no-paper-trail electronic voting machines made by GOP-controleld companies.

  18. 23

    Dan Rather spews:

    The best thing Americans can do is investigate, and prosecute the organized crime family called the GOP. It has already started to happen.

    If America ever got serious about voter fraud you dems would only win the most liberal districts in the nation and would lose a lot of elections. There is no way the democrats will let this happen and since most of the lawyers are in their back pocket it never will happen. It would be to costly for democrats to actually ensure legitimate,fair elections.

  19. 24

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    Are you whiners still crying about the 2000 election??

    How many years ago was that?

    Can you name even 1 legal authority that does not/did not agree with the result of the 2000 election?

    Remind us, who won the 2004 election? Tell us again, how big was margin of that particular victory?

    Congratulations! You all are members in good standing of the Fucking Idiots Club!

    By the way, let\’s rehash the glory days of the McGovern Presidency.


  20. 25

    Dan Rather spews:

    17 Isn’t it funny how Bush’s Florida margin went up by 299,500 votes after paper ballo6ts were replaced with no-paper-trail electronic voting machines made by GOP-controleld companies.

    02/06/2007 at 10:07 pm

    No, it just means that liberals were not able to add ballots for them and throw out ballots from military voters.

  21. 26

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    “After the election, the New York Times conducted a six-month investigation and found that 680 of the overseas absentee ballots were illegally counted, and almost no one has publicly disagreed with their assessment.”


  22. 27

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    @23 “If America ever got serious about voter fraud you dems would only win the most liberal districts in the nation and would lose a lot of elections.”

    How’s that working out for you retards? Can you say “Speaker Pelosi?” ha ha ha ha ha ha

  23. 28

    Dan Rather spews:

    10, 15 It’s well known that Republicans solicited soldiers who didn’t vote to submit ballots after the election was over because they knew the Democrats wouldn’t dare to challenge “military ballots” and they were right. Bush was “elected” with illegal votes.

    02/06/2007 at 10:05 pm

    Wrong, democrats didnt want to count military ballots arriving after the election even if they were post marked in time. Of course it makes perfect sense why the dems would not want those votes counted because none of our fighting men and women vote for democrats.

  24. 30

    Colonel Tucker "Biff" O'Hanrahanrahanrahan spews:

    re 20: I think : Impeach Bush/Cheney will have more resonance with her. But thanks for reprinting her e-mail address so that more Progressives can get out the message.

    Nancy Pelosi’s e-mail address is: sf.nancy@mail.house.gov

  25. 32

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    Hey Dan Blather — if RepubliCONS like the military vote so much, why do they work so hard to keep soldiers from voting?

    “Soldiers Scrubbed by Secret GOP Hit List
    “by Greg Palast

    ” … A confidential campaign directed by GOP party chiefs in October 2004 sought to challenge the ballots of tens of thousands of … residents of Black-majority precincts.

    “Files from the secret vote-blocking campaign were obtained by BBC Television Newsnight, London. They were attached to emails accidentally sent by Republican operatives to a non-party website.

    “One group of voters wrongly identified by the Republicans as registering to vote from false addresses: servicemen and women sent overseas.

    “Here’s how the scheme worked: The RNC mailed these voters letters in envelopes marked, ‘Do not forward’, to be returned to the sender. These letters were mailed to servicemen and women, some stationed overseas, to their US home addresses. The letters then returned to the Bush-Cheney campaign as ‘undeliverable.’

    “The lists of soldiers … were transmitted from state headquarters … to the RNC in Washington. The party could then challenge the voters’ registration and thereby prevent their absentee ballots being counted.

    “One target list was comprised exclusively of voters registered at the Jacksonville, Florida, Naval Air Station. … [See this scrub sheet at http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.g.....038;size=o ] …

    “A soldier returning home in time to vote in November 2004 could also be challenged on the basis of the returned envelope. Soldiers challenged would be required to vote by ‘provisional’ ballot. Over one million provisional ballots cast in the 2004 race were never counted; over half a million absentee ballots were also rejected.

    “The extraordinary rise in the number of rejected ballots was the result of the widespread multi-state voter challenge campaign by the Republican Party. …

    “The BBC obtained several dozen confidential emails sent by the Republican’s national Research Director and Deputy Communications chief, Tim Griffin to GOP Florida campaign chairman Brett Doster and other party leaders. Attached were spreadsheets marked, ‘Caging.xls.’ Each of these contained several hundred to a few thousand voters and their addresses.

    A check of the demographics of the addresses on the ‘caging lists,’ as the GOP leaders called them indicated that most were in African-American majority zip codes. … The party has refused to say why it would mark soldiers as having ‘bad addresses’ subject to challenge when they had been assigned abroad.

    “While the party insisted the lists were not created for the purpose to challenge Black voters, the GOP ultimately offered no other explanation for the mailings. …”


  26. 33

    Roger Rabbit spews:

    What kind of LOW-LIFE SCUMBAGS would exploit a soldier’s deployment to Iraq to interfere with the soldier’s right to vote? LOW-LIFE REPUBLICON SCUMBAGS, that’s who!

    BTW what the GOP did to these soldiers is prosecutable as a felony.

  27. 36

    RightEqualsStupid spews:

    I hear that Puffybutt and all seven of his personalities were going to finally show up at DL but there were so many of them the pub kicked them out due to space limitations.

  28. 37

    Ricky Gervais spews:

    Can you please tell me the southern state that will give their electoral votes to Hillary in ’08?

    Are you having a laugh?

  29. 38

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    re 29, your delusion that there are more progressives that want to impeach Bush/Cheney than there are Catholics who care about hypocrites using their faith for political gain is amusing. FYI: Of the 63% of Catholics that voted in the 2004 election only 43% of those voted for your loser.

    Furthermore, your Nan gal already bowed down to the polls when she announce on 60 Minutes that \’Impeachment is off the table\’.

    Personally, I hope your Nan gal and her lemmings bring it on, just as hope Bush has the balls to force Congress to put their votes where their big mouths are on Kyoto.

    Put up or shut up.

    You remember the Kyoto vote don\’t you? Voted DOWN in the senate by a count of 95-0… including NO votes by the bigmouth tiplets, Kerry, Kennedy and Boxer.

    Remind us, weren\’t Slick Willie and HotAir Gore in charge back then?

    How very inconvenient!

  30. 39

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    re 30: Do you ever comprehend what you read or do you just knee-jerk?

    The letter was written to your Nan gal by a Catholic PRIEST, not by me. I merely forwarded it to every Catholic I know and alos made sure that your Nan gal knows (via her webform) that a whole lot of Catholics outside of SanFran are on to her and celebrate her very public rebuke.

  31. 40

    Tree Frog Farmer spews:

    Right. That would be from a Catholic Hierarchy that has spent the last ten years bankrupting itself paying off claims against child molesting priests. Priests they spent the previous forty years shielding and fostering. Right. Like they have a great deal of moral persuasion among the vast majority of the laity. Right. Keep dreamin’.
    Perhaps the Latin Rite nutjobs will care. . .
    Check your Catholic sister’s medicine cabinet. . .yeah, those are birth control pills.
    Get Real.

  32. 41

    RightEqualsStupid spews:

    Nancy Pelosi- Speaker of the House. I still get a kick out of saying that. MAN it sucks to be a right wing turd. HE HE!

  33. 42

    Libertarian spews:

    If the Catholic Church would get out of the Dark Ages and allow married priests and women priests, they’d have a chance to survive. And all that “dogma” about abortion and birth control – here’s a hint – nobody’s listening to the pope on that.

    (P.S. – Another way to improve Catholicism is to knock off the guilt-trip! We’re all sick and tired of that one.)

  34. 43

    Sphinctertitenrite spews:

    In the ‘oo &’04 elections, the way the GOP stole the Democratic SOLDIER VOTE was this: They mailed letters to the stateside homes of Overseas soldiers who were registered as Democrats and mailed them to their homes in official looking envelopes marked,”Return Service Requested.”

    Countless thousands were returned. The Gop then successfully challenged these voters because of faulty addresses.

    The Democrats, being aware of this ploy, didn’t want soldier’s votes from overseas counted because they would, of course, be RepubliCON voters.

    This scam appealed to the RepupliCONs because , on the one hand , they could dun Democrats for “suppressing” soldiers’ votes,and, on the other hand, actually suppress Democratic soldiers votes.

    That’s evil. Don’t wave that bloody flag again. We’ve still got two years to educate the voters about RepubliCONs.

  35. 44

    Sphinctertitenrite spews:

    re 36: If you told me to my face that I love Islamo Fascists, you’d be making a quick emergency visit to the dentist, asshole.

    If you go there, that’s what you’ll find, and we all know RepubliCONs are physical cowards.

    “When they’re playin’ Hail to the Chief, they point the cannon at you.” John Fogarty

    Who you think you are kiddin’, Slick?

  36. 45

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    @38 Tsk, tsk, tsk.

    Pathetic try at subject change.

    It\’s not about the \”Catholic Hierarchy\”, it\’s about the boots in the pews faithful.

    But you knew that inconvenient fact.

    \’Finger in the wind, hoping to be elevated to Archbishop Wuerl\’ is in a world of controversy because those inconvenient faithful are petitioning Rome en masse:

    February 2, 2007

    A Plea to the Pope for Help

    Do you agree that Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. should obediently enforce Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law as the Vatican has explicitly instructed all bishops to do?

    Of the many attacks against the Catholic Church today, most all come from members within the Church. In fact, reports from Rome indicate that the Pope is isolated and resisted at the Vatican. Phil Lawler of Catholic World News translates Italian journalist Ignazio Ingrao as saying, “The Pontiff has faced stiff resistance in his effort to reform the Roman Curia and to broaden access to the traditional Mass.”1

    To add to the Pope’s suffering there is the gravity of scandal caused by a large majority of U.S. Cardinals and Bishops who aid and abet hundreds of U.S. ‘Catholic’ politicians, both Democrat and Republican, in their support of abortion while continuing sacrilegious reception of Holy Communion.

    Because the Pope has no prisons for disobedient hierarchy, the Catholic faithful have no other recourse than to write en masse to the Pope regarding out-of-control U.S. bishops such as Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington.

    Do you agree that Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl of the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. should obediently enforce Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law as the Vatican has explicitly instructed all bishops to do? If you agree, would you be willing to write the Pope a letter, asking him not to appoint activist Archbishop Wuerl to the College of Cardinals? Then, perhaps, Archbishop Wuerl would become obedient to the Pope. Why reward a disobedient Archbishop who gives scandal to millions of faithful?

    I will show you at the bottom of this column how there is a way our letters might actually be read by the Pope.

    This is an important time for such a letter writing campaign. There is usually a consistory of the Cardinals called by the Pope in February or in June for the purpose of naming new Cardinals. Usually, an Archbishop will not receive the red hat as long as the previous Cardinal is still alive (in this case, that would be Cardinal Theodore McCarrick). However, Washington, D.C. is too important a Cardinal \’See\’ for the Pope not to make an exception to the usual practice.

    Therefore, a letter writing campaign to the Holy Father may be most effective at this time, explaining why you believe Archbishop Wuerl’s disobedience should not be rewarded with the red hat of a Cardinal.

    Below is a wealth of information or \’talking points\’ that you could use in your letter to the Pope. However, we must discipline ourselves to keep the letter brief and concise, preferably one page in length.

    Also provided herein are very helpful, substantiated hyperlinks. Each of these links could be printed out and attached to your letter to the Pope, if you so desire.

    It is important that we keep our letter to the Pope very polite and kind. Our letter should show it is written by a faithful Catholic who has grave concerns regarding Archbishop Donald Wuerl\’s disobedience.

    Here are the talking points. Use some or all of these points in your letter to the Pope:

    – Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington recently told journalist Allyson Smith that he would not discipline nor deny Holy Communion to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, nor to other Catholic politicians who promote and legislate procured abortion.2 Wuerl knows well that Pelosi, a dissident Catholic who calls herself a ‘conservative Catholic,’ has repeatedly voted 100% to uphold abortion and abortion of partially born children who are up to 9-months of age in the womb, as well as voted against parental notification when minor girls seek murderous abortions.3 Congressman Nancy Pelosi told reporters during a 2004 press conference:

    I fully intend to receive Communion, one way or another. That’s very important to me . . . I believe that my position on choice [abortion on demand] is one that is consistent with my Catholic upbringing, which said that every person has a free will and has the responsibility to live their lives in a way that they would have to account for in the end. I’m certainly concerned when the Church comes together and says it’s going to sanction people in public office for speaking their conscience and what they believe.4

    – Archbishop Wuerl recently told reporters it is his policy that those who are manifestly [publicly] obstinate and persistent in their grave sins are not to be disciplined but are to be catechised in the faith.

    – How is it that Archbishop Wuerl can refuse to discipline Nancy Pelosi? He is in obstinate opposition to Cardinal Ratzinger\’s (now Pope Benedict XVI) Eucharistic instruction to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) during their June 2004 Denver conference. Entitled \’Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion,\’ Cd. Ratzinger warned the U.S. Bishops regarding pro-abortion politicians trying to receive the Eucharist sacrilegiously: \”The minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it.\” Cardinal Ratzinger did not say \’could,\’ or \’may,\’ but that the minister \’must\’ refuse to give it.

    – It is time for U.S. Catholic laity to ask the Pope if Archbishop Wuerl can continue to ignore what His Eminence Francis Cardinal Arinze, Prefect for The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, strongly warned the U.S. bishops in April 2004, that a pro-abortion politician \”is not fit\” to receive Holy Communion, adding, \”If they should not receive, then they should not be given.\”

    Inside the Vatican magazine interviewed Francis Cardinal Arinze, asking the question: “Should those Catholic pro-choice politicians be given Holy Communion?” Cardinal Arinze answered:

    You are asking me if a politician says, ‘I vote for abortion, and I will continue to ask for abortion.’ Then you ask, should he or she be given Holy Communion . . . My reply is, do you really need a Cardinal from the Vatican to answer that question. Can a child having made his First Communion not answer that question? Is it really so complicated? The child will give the correct answer immediately, unless he is conditioned by political correctness. It is a pity Cardinals have to be asked such questions.6

    – In June 2004, Bishop Donald Wuerl, then Bishop of Pittsburgh, was a member of Cardinal Theodore McCarrick’s Ad Hoc Committee that drafted the USCCB\’s Denver Spring Meeting statement regarding denying manifest grave sinners of the Eucharist. The Committee statement falsely told all bishops that Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict) left it up to the USCCB whether to deny the gravely manifest sinner the Eucharist. The instruction from Cd. Ratzinger that the minister ‘must deny’ the Eucharist was not incorporated into the Ad Hoc Committee’s statement:

    On the question of calls for denying Communion or public calls for refraining from Communion, our conference is not united, with several bishops sincerely convinced this is necessary and many others who do not support such actions . . . I would emphasize that Cardinal Ratzinger clearly leaves to us as teachers, pastors, and leaders WHETHER [sic] to pursue this path. The Holy See has repeatedly expressed its confidence in our roles as bishops and pastors. The question for us is not simply whether denial of Communion is possible, but whether it is pastorally wise and prudent. It is not surprising that difficult and differing circumstances on these matters can lead to different practices. Every bishop is acting in accord with his own understanding of his duties and the law.

    – For the past several years, the USCCB has denied ‘Rainbow Sashers’ from receiving Holy Communion. These are persons publicly wearing the ‘gay and lesbian’ rainbow colors and who either live the ‘gay’ and ‘lesbian’ lifestyle or who promote it. Why is it that the USCCB will not deny public politicians promoting and legislating procured abortion from receiving Holy Communion? Is not murder of the child just as evil as sodomite lust in the eyes of God?

    – In August 2005, as Bishop of Pittsburg, Wuerl released a statement entitled: “Episcopal Pastoral Decisions and Ecclesial Communion.” In his statement, Bishop Wuerl called for all bishops of the USCCB to consult with each other on ‘controversial issues’ before taking individual action. Then, having arrived at a majority consensus, a decision would be imposed by the USCCB upon all bishops. Wuerl’s statement clearly confronted Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, Archbishop of St. Louis, and 11 other active U.S. diocesan bishops, plus 2 inactive bishops. Out of the 226 dioceses in the U.S., only 14 diocesan bishops publicly stated they must deny the Eucharist to persons who obstinately persist in their grave manifest sins.7 In other words, the 14 active diocesan bishops who opposed Holy Communion for persons who were persistent and obstinate in their grave manifest sins caused real difficulties for the other 212 active diocesan bishops. In addition, Bishop Wuerl\’s proposed statement wrongfully intended to silence and restrain those 14 faithful bishops in their own Sees, especially during a time when the Catholic Church in America desperately needs for its bishops to not be afraid to lead.

    – Bishop Rene Gracida and Fr. J. Patrick Serna wrote a most revealing essay entitled, ‘A Mechanism for Restraint: An Analysis of a Proposal To Rein in Activist Bishops.’ The well-documented and important essay explains Archbishop Wuerl\’s statement as a source of confusion couched in obfuscating language and an attempt to silence faithful bishops.

    – Canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law definitely teaches the person who is persistently obstinate in his or her grave manifest sin must be denied the Eucharist.8

    – Archbishop Raymond Burke, Juris Canonis Doctor,9 Archbishop of St. Louis, told this writer in a recent interview:

    When a \’Catholic\’ pro-abortion politician knows the actions he or she has taken are gravely sinful in a public matter like supporting and legislating abortion, the only way to uphold church teaching is to withhold Holy Communion from them. It is not right for one bishop to give the Eucharist and for another not to, according to Canon Law, Canon 915.10

    – Canon Law expert Archbishop Raymond Burke said: \”Canon 915 is not an option. Those persons who obstinately persist in grave manifest sin after having been spoken to by their bishop, must be denied the Eucharist.\”

    – The period of time that it takes a bishop to privately warn the sinner is relatively short, a matter of days or weeks. A letter is sent to the obstinate sinner in question, asking to meet with the bishop who will clarify the church\’s teachings and remind the manifest sinner he or she is jeopardizing the life of their eternal soul. If the sinner refuses to meet with the bishop, the bishop further informs the public sinner of the gravity of his or her actions. If the sinner still remains obstinate and persists in his or her mortal sin in a manifest way, then the bishop notifies his priests and deacons that the sinner should be denied Holy Communion. The catechesis of the faith will continue from the Bishop to the sinner for however long it takes, but until the public sinner\’s public conversion, the Eucharist is to be denied.

    – If Archbishop Wuerl remains disobedient, the result will be the continued disintegration of the Catholic Church\’s infallible teachings regarding the right to life for the unborn.

    – In a recent address, Archbishop Burke spoke about the importance of causing scandal to others:

    So serious is the moral obligation to avoid scandal that we are admonished not only not to do wrong but also not to appear to do wrong. When a person acts, he or she must always consider the appearance of the act to be done.

    – Recently, Fr. Tom Euteneuer, president of Human Life International, a prominent worldwide pro-life organization, told LifeSite.com: \”I don\’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job,\” and that Ms. Pelosi should be excommunicated.11

    For this work of letter writing to be effective, Pope Benedict himself must read the letters. With a billion Catholics in the world, you can see the problem one has; it is simply impossible for the Pope to see, much less read, the thousands of letters that pour into the Vatican every day addressed to him. Letters addressed to the Pope that are not from a bishop get delivered at the office of the Secretary of State where they are read by monsignors and are answered by the Office of the Secretary of State or are delivered to the Nuncio to be answered by him or are delivered to the Ordinary of the diocese of the writer to be answered by him.

    I have reasons to believe that a letter written to the Pope concerning Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, enclosed in an envelope addressed to the Pope\’s private secretary, Monsignor Georg Gäenswein, would in fact reach the pope. In addition, within the same envelope addressed to Monsignor Gäenswein, wisely write a separate and very short request to Monsignor Gäenswein, \’begging\’ him to give your enclosed letter to the Pope. When the Monsignor reads your polite letter to the Pope, it may compel him to give the Pope your letter.

    For all that I have read and have been told about how mail delivery works at the Vatican, I believe that mail addressed to Monsignor Gäenswein actually reaches Monsignor Gäenswein. Therefore, may I repeat, we should address the outside envelope to Monsignor Gäenswein, put our concise letter to the Pope (including any attachments you have printed out) in the same envelope, and lastly include a short request to Monsignor Gäenswein begging him to give your letter to the Pope.

    Be sure to put the following postage to Italy on your envelope:
    Up to 1 oz. = $ .84
    Up to 2 oz. = $l.70
    Up to 3 oz. = $2.55
    Up to 4 oz. = $3.35
    Up to 5 oz. = $4.20
    Up to 6 oz. = $5.05
    Up to 7 oz. = $5.90
    Up to 8 oz. = $6.75

    Address your envelope to:

    Msgr. Georg Gäenswein
    Private Secretary to Holy Father
    00120 Via del Pellegrino
    Citta del Vaticano

    Note bene: Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen said:

    Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, and the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops, and your religious act like religious.12


    1. “Vaticano, Guerra per bande,” by Ignazio Ingrao, 1/12/07, published by Panorama.it. Cf “Curia resists papal policies,” Catholic World News, 1/19/07. Cf “Benedict seen as isolated at Vatican,” by John Phillips, The Washington Times, 1/21/07.

    2. Cf. “HLI Leader Says: “I don’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job,” 1/16/07, LifeSite.net

    3. Cf. “A Look at Pelosi’s Voting Record,” 11/3/06, WashingtonTimes.com.

    4. Cf. “Pelosi says she’ll take Communion in spite of Vatican policies,” 4/29/04, USAToday.com.

    5. Cf “Cardinal Ratzinger said, ‘The minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it.’ He did not say ‘could’ or ‘may’ but that he ‘must,’” by Barbara Kralis, 6/6/04, RenewAmerica.us.

    6. Cf “Inside the Vatican Interview: What will be the Consequences of the Synod?” 11/12/05, Pub. By Inside the Vatican Magazine, by Andrew Rabel

    7. The list of 12 active and 2 retired Archbishops and Bishops and their dioceses:
    Archbishop Raymond L Burke of St. Louis, MO
    Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz of Lincoln NE
    Bishop Joseph A. Galante of Camden, NJ
    Bishop John M. Smith of Trenton, NJ
    Bishop Michael Sheridan, Colorado Springs, CO
    Bishop Robert F. Vasa of Baker, OR
    Bishop Gerald Gettelfinger of Evansville, IN
    Bishop Robert J. Baker, Charleston, SC
    Bishop Peter J. Jugis Bishop of Charlotte, NC
    Bishop John Y. Yanta, Bishop of Amarillo, TX
    Bishop Samuel Aquila, Fargo, ND
    Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Phoenix, AZ

    Bishop Henry Rene Gracida, Bishop Emeritus of Corpus Christi, TX
    Archbishop John F. Donoghue Archbishop of Atlanta, GA

    8. Code of Canon Law, Canon 915 states: “Those upon whom the penalty of excommunication or interdict has been imposed or declared, and others who obstinately persist in manifest grave sin, are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” Cf “A Primer on Canon 915,” by Barbara Kralis, 2/5/04, Catholic.org.

    9. The highest degree of education in Canon Law is the J.C.D. [Juris Canonis doctor, Doctor of Canon Law], which would apply to Archbishop Raymond Burke, Archbishop of St. Louis.

    10. Cf “Archbishop Raymond L. Burke, the new ‘John Fisher’”

    RenewAmerica.us, 8/5/04, by Barbara Kralis

    11. Cf. “HLI Leader Says ‘I don’t believe Archbishop Wuerl is doing his job,’” 1/16/07, LifeSite.com.

    12. Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen, address to the Supreme Convention of the Knights of Columbus on 6/72.

    PS to moron @ 38: There are approximately 67 million Catholics in the US. 63% of them (42,210,000) voted in the 2004 election. Only 43% (18,150,300) of those swallowed the liberal swill and voted for your loser. Do the math dude… that leave 48,849,700 that DISAGREED with the swill. Think of the vatican mailroom if only 1% of them send a letter to the Pope…

    Another PS… have you noticed a Catholic faithful activist \”pattern\” here?

  37. 46

    Lefties Love Islamo-Nutjob\'s spews:

    SORRY: ’Finger in the wind, hoping to be elevated to CARDINAL Wuerl\\’ is in a world of controversy because those inconvenient faithful are petitioning Rome en masse: