The Hound Of Ulster

THIS is most encouraging:

Rudy Giuliani should not have received Holy Communion during the pope’s visit because the former presidential candidate supports abortion rights, New York Cardinal Edward Egan said Monday.

Egan says he had “an understanding” with Giuliani that he is not to receive the Eucharist. The Catholic Church teaches “that abortion is a grave offense against the will of God,” Egan said.

The cardinal said Monday that Giuliani broke that understanding when he received the Eucharist during Pope Benedict XVI’s visit earlier this month. He received Communion during the April 19 service from one of the many clergymen who offered the sacrament.

Egan says he will be seeking a meeting with Giuliani “to insist that he abide by our understanding.”

As the head of the Archdiocese of New York, Egan’s a trendsetter by default. Hopefully, others will pick up on the trend.  (Also nice to see that he first spoke with Giuliani in private, as a prudent shepherd should.  And it was only after Giuliani went back on his promise that Egan spoke out.)

“America’s Mayor’s” mealy-mouthed response:

Giuliani’s spokeswoman, Sunny Mindel, said Monday that he is willing to meet with the cardinal but added that his faith “is a deeply personal matter and should remain confidential.”

Please.  I’ve had enough of that.  Who exactly is it that caused this to become public, again?

(And I wonder if it’s connected to THIS.)
 

That title works on a number of different levels, I think…
 

Shocking.
 

A reflective moment for James before meeting with his adoring fans for the first time.

The aforementioned fans, adoring.
 
 

Look what I found!

 

Sean is smitten…

 

…and starts planning all the mischief they’ll be getting in to. Soon.

 

Mark is very, very excited.

And also cute.

 

David is a bit unsure at first…
 

…and then a major fan…
 

…and now, he’s not even sure he wants anyone else to hold him.

 

James, however, is unmoved.
 

He looks worried.

He shouldn’t, though.  Everything went wonderfully smoothly.  Sarah got a full night’s rest, chased me out of the shower this morning with an “Um…I think I need you to hurry up,” and we arrived at the hospital at 7:45.

James arrived two hours later, all eight pounds and 12 ounces of him.  (Oh, and 21.5 inches.)

Thanks be to God!

(Awesome pictures of his older brothers meeting him for the first time to follow shortly/eventually.)
 

…by any stretch of the IMAGINATION.

Pope Benedict XVI called on U.S. bishops last week to “continue to welcome the immigrants who join your ranks today, to share their joys and hopes, to support them in their sorrows and trials and to help them flourish in their new home.” Mr. Tancredo’s response was to accuse the pontiff of “faith-based marketing” and claim that “the pope’s immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church.”

Sounds like Senator Tancredo has confused B16 with the Dems, who are interested in immigration at least partially for the purpose of recruiting new members to their party.  (And even then, I’m only willing to say “partially.”  I think there are a number of perfectly legitimate reasons to be way more “pro-immigration” than Tancredo would ever want someone to be, Pope or otherwise.)

A strange confusion, methinks.  Tancredo has always been more than a little “Johnny One-Note,” but this is a particularly unfortunate application of his “It’s the Borders, Stupid” principle.  Couldn’t possibly have chosen a less appropriate target, and his status as a “former Catholic” doesn’t help his argument one little bit.

WSJ had the definitive response, in my opinion:

The pope welcomes immigrants because he’s Catholic, not because they are. He isn’t “marketing” his faith. He’s practicing it.

One quick note: the WSJ headline is a bit misleading, because it sounds like Tancredo felt that he and his country had been ”insulted” by the Pope.  But that was actually Lou Dobb’s term.  Tancredo wasn’t “insulted,” he was insulting.
 

Or at least that’s what THIS guy thought a couple of days ago.

Course, then we get THIS.

This is first time Obama has had a statistically significant advantage over Clinton since the race collapsed into a dead heat late last week. Prior to that, Obama was enjoying his longest front-runner streak since the start of Gallup Poll Daily tracking in January.

Today’s results, from Gallup Poll Daily tracking conducted April 18-20, show Obama doing quite well in the last two days of polling (on Saturday and Sunday), suggesting the latest difficulties troubling his campaign — largely stemming from the April 16 Democratic debate in Philadelphia and the ensuing media coverage– are subsiding.

I continue to wonder why anyone every pays any attention to “dailies.”  Or to pundits, for that matter.  (I’m starting to feel a bit of “election fatigue,” I think.  And “my” party’s not even involved yet.)
 

UHaul Jason says “no,” because the economics of the situation will keep it under control.  But I still think THIS could be a very historic event.

Rookie third baseman Evan Longoria and the Tampa Bay Rays agreed Friday to a $17.5 million, six-year contract, a deal that could be worth up to $44 million over nine seasons.

Tampa Bay has a club option for 2014 and a second option that covers 2015 and 2016.

Taken third overall in the 2006 amateur draft, Longoria appeared in just six major league game before agreeing to the deal.

The 22-year-old was brought up from Triple-A Durham last Saturday and made his big league debut that day.

I can think of a number of “can’t miss” guys that would have gotten one of these: Mark Prior, Kerry Wood, Rocco Baldelli, and perhaps Edwin Jackson.  (That last one might be working out now, but it’s hard to say).

If the GMs guess wrong, or if the  “injury bug” pops up, it could really destroy (or at least seriously set back) a franchise.
 

…or perhaps that should be: “How far we’ve FALLEN.”

While Pope Benedict XVI’s historic visit to Washington received wall to wall coverage, Sen. Barbara Boxer briefly held up a Senate resolution welcoming the pontiff because she objected to language about how the pope values “each and every human life.”

Well, the Pope does value “each and every human life, does he not?  How could anyone possibly object to that?  (Oh, right.  We’re talking about Boxer here.  I am reminded once again of the fact that I am no longer a Californian.)

Boxer’s spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz has written The Crypt to say ”we are very pleased we were able to reach an agreement with Senator Brownback to remove the political language and pass this resolution welcoming Pope Benedict.”

“Senator Brownback also agreed to remove the political language referencing religious expression on public buildings,” Ravitz said in an email.

If those two things are “political,” there is nothing apolitical in this country.

Sure, I can see how the “religious expression on public buildings” is “political,” in a broad sense.  Or at least in the same sense the Consitution, Freedom of Religion, and the Founding Fathers are political, though that is rarely the way Senator-types use that word.  (They use it to mean controversial.)

The fact that the battle over human life has become a “political” issue maddens me, because the entire notion (and language) of “political issues” allows for legitimately held differences of opinion.  And there is no legitimate opinion on the opposite side of Pope Benedict here.

I also “love” the way the spokesperson spins this to have been Brownback’s fault: ”Oh, yeah?  Well, he put that nasty ‘anti-anti-life’ language in there.  We were being totally welcoming and friendly, and then he had to go try to make a point about the ’senseless killing of utterly innocent and helpless human beings.’  That wasn’t our fault.”

Actually, Ms. Ravitz and Co., it was (and sadly, still is) your fault.
 

 
I actually did it on purpose this time.  Not absolutely sure the results work; his right eye gets a bit lost, methinks.  But I really like the highlight around the right side of his face.  Just a little more bounce, and it would have been perfect.  (Course, it’s hard enough to get shots of Sean without setting up any equipment.)

UPDATE: This is The Vitruvian DUCK’S effort.

I like the compositional change, but I’m unconvinced about the rest of it.  He certainly figured out how to bring that one eye out of the “darkness,” and I’m pleased about that.  In contrast, mine looks fairly dramatically underexposed. 

But the side of Sean’s face is gone now.  More abstract, but I’m not convinced it’s the right route to take.  Very Janusz Kaminski-like, which would probably be easier for me to support if Sean wasn’t my kid.  Probably too close to the subject.

(Killer eyes, though, right?)

UPDATE TWO: More from The Duck.

 

Now it’s just starting to get creepy.  I’ll take Kaminski over Warhol pretty much any day of the week.  (Duck uses it to raise a serious question about art and the way an artist relates to his product.  And sneaks in an Andrei Rublev reference for good measure.)

…but I’m still creeped out.