Kerry’s Katholics hurl mud-ball

By WND Staff

Liberal Catholics are Kerry’s Katholics. Kerry is the first Catholic candidate nominated for president by a major party since John F. Kennedy. Does it matter? You bet – it may well determine who wakes up Nov. 3 as the next president of the United States.

Approximately 25 percent of Americans are Catholic. According to an Aug. 10 Gallup news story, “Historically a solid Democratic voting group, in the past three decades Catholics have become a key swing voting group in American presidential elections.” The report noted that Catholics who infrequently attend church are Kerry supporters.

But the Gallup report makes this distinction: “Among practicing Catholics – those who attend church on a weekly basis – Bush leads Kerry.” Several influential and faithful Catholics are responsible for Catholic support of George W. Bush. One of them was the target of a Kerry-Katholic mud-ball last week.

Like presidential candidate John Kerry, liberal Catholics sneer at the Catholic Church’s teaching on sexual morality, abortion and medical ethics. Kerry and his cohorts vote for abortion and defend same-sex unions. Kerry-Katholics include Sens. Joe Biden, D-Del., Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., and Tom Daschle, D-S.D., and whining apostates such as Michael Moore.

Soon after it became apparent that Kerry would be nominated, his ratings went up among Catholics, perhaps because voters came to learn that Kerry was a Catholic. Then the “communion question” hit the newsstands. Some influential conservative (faithful) Catholics made public Kerry’s kinky theology that is in reality anti-Catholic. Kerry’s rating among the crucial Catholic “swing vote” slipped.

The public pushing and shoving between Catholic factions – liberal vs. faithful – makes political strategists nervous precisely because the Catholic vote counts more than ever in 2004.

Faithful Catholics (those loyal to the teachings of the Church) pointed out that Kerry’s support of abortion was a scandal. Rome sent a message to U.S. bishops indicating that public dissent on abortion was not to be ignored by prelates. Denver’s Archbishop Chaput said of pro-abort politicians: “They may try to look Catholic and sound Catholic, but unless they act Catholic in their public service and political choices, they’re really a very different kind of creature.”

No Catholic can support abortion and be a Catholic “in good standing.” And a Catholic politician who flaunts his faith while smirking at the teaching that life –from conception – must be protected, does so at his peril. Just ask Gray Davis, the dropkicked ex-governor of California (see “Will the Real Catholic Please Stand Up?” WND, Jan. 28, 2003).

That’s why Kerry-Katholics gnashed their teeth and looked around for a face-saving ploy to rescue their boy whose Catholicism is about as deep as his patriotism. Whap! A fast mud-ball popped Catholic publisher Deal Hudson “up-side the head,” as we say in the South.

Hudson served as an unpaid adviser to the Bush campaign during the election of 2000. His conservative Catholic journal Crisis was the first to detail the fault line of the “Catholic vote.” Hudson’s advice to Bush strategist Karl Rove was simple: Catholics who attend church vote more often and will vote for a candidate whose pro-life, pro-marriage message is clear and uncompromised. It worked in 2000, but the question now, in 2004, is will Catholics vote against a Catholic candidate?

Hudson’s political influence chaffed Kerry-Katholics – among them, another Catholic publisher. Digging up dirt to sling at spokesmen who defend moral standards has become a liberal art form. Witness the bruising “Book of Virtues” author Bill Bennett sustained when his gambling activities were exposed. The glee of the moral midgets when “virtuous” Bennett was shown to have a personal Achille’s heel was just short of demented.

Now, Hudson is rubbing his jaw. After penning a preemptive confession for National Review Online, Hudson resigned from his unpaid position for the Bush campaign before his rival publisher could expose Hudson’s decade-old extramarital activity with a student in hopes of wilting the president’s appeal to Catholic voters.

Why do we voters care? Is there some political algebra where conservative Hudson’s exposed clay feet balance the equation for the Kerry’s support of abortion and homosexual “marriages”? Hardly. Catholic voters are not monolithic, but they are not stupid, either. Hudson’s personal struggle with moral absolutes does not invalidate the conservative values he espouses. Think of it this way: Is the health advice “don’t smoke” invalidated because the cigarette-puffing adviser has lung cancer? On the contrary, the advice is all the more urgent.

Political influence and power come at a price, as Hudson noted. Some will smirk at his predicament, others will wish him well as he works through this situation. But even Hudson would say that his public embarrassment is not the point of the Kerry-Katholic attack. The real target is the conservative Catholic voice. Kerry-Katholics have sent an intimidating “shut-up” message to anyone who is not immaculately conceived. Kerry-Katholics are attempting a coup – their goal is to “own” the Catholic voice for the election of 2004.

Americans can ill afford to disqualify every voice for virtue and moral character simply because the speaker is still working toward his or her own virtue.

And that is the difference after all, isn’t it? Kerry-Katholics and their brothers in the liberal establishment are too flaccid to mount a personal moral struggle, so they define morality down. For them, there is no personal morality, only societal morality – the fate of the spotted owl and tax codes. Homosexual “unions,” abortion and euthanasia are their trendy sins made “holy” – not at the altar, but in the Supreme Court.

So let’s hear from Hudson, Bennett and all others who, despite their personal flaws, are not willing to give up on setting the highest moral standard for America.

Mary Jo Anderson is a contributing reporter to WorldNetDaily.