Cluster of wheat image Grapes and vines image Cluster of wheat image
October 27th, 2011


Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life and Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics have, for years, been in the forefront of the fight to save the lives of innocent unborn babies. We who know them well are confused and worried about Father Pavone’s recent recall to the Diocese of Amarillo. It would be nice to have one more video to add to these three, telling us all is well. The last we heard about Bishop Zurek was that he had requested to see Fr. Pavone on October 13.

AMARILLO, Texas (CNA/EWTN News) — The Diocese of Amarillo confirmed that despite an invitation from Bishop Patrick Zurek, Father Frank Pavone did not meet with him on Oct. 13 and has instead asked for mediation.

“I advised Father Frank not to have this private meeting until the process of mediation is underway,” Father David Deibel, canon lawyer for Father Pavone and Priests for Life, said in an Oct. 14 statement

Mark Crutcher on Father Pavone

Father Pavone speaks out (Part 1)

Father Pavone speaks out (Part 2)


Mark Crutcher of Life Dynamics
Setting the Record Straight
October 7, 2011
Contrary to what some of his supporters contend, not everyone who criticizes Barack Obama is a racist. The fact is, unless these Obama apologists are complete morons, they know that this is nonsense – even while they are in the midst of making the charge. It’s a shabby little game in which the “race card” is deployed as a way to cut off any criticism of Obama.
There is a parallel phenomenon in the Christian community and, in recent days, I have seen it first hand as a result of my defense of Father Pavone. Because I have helped to expose the contemptible actions taken against him by his bishop, the “anti-Catholic” card is now being played against me.
Let me be perfectly clear about this. While the people doing this are certainly entitled to their own beliefs, they are not entitled to their own facts. Here is just a tiny part of what they are conveniently leaving out of the equation.
Since I started Life Dynamics, well over half my employees have been Catholic, including three of my personal assistants. The attorney who represents us is Catholic. The majority of our donors are Catholic, and the only person I have ever given authority to make major decisions for Life Dynamics other than me is Catholic.
In addition to Priests for Life, I also work hand in hand with groups like Human Life International (HLI), American Life League, Pro-Life Action League and numerous other Catholic organizations. I was very close to HLI founder, Father Paul Marx, and remained in regular contact with him until his death. It may also surprise some to know that Father Marx was a faithful and long-time donor to Life Dynamics. In 2002, I received the first annual Cardinal Von Galen Award from HLI and, in 2004, I was given the Cardinal O’Connor Pro-Life Hall of Fame Award by Legatus. I was also given the 2009 Blogger of the Year award by American Life League.
Moreover, I have consistently made it clear that the Catholic Church and its associated organizations were on the frontlines of the pro-life battle when the vast majority of my fellow Southern Baptists were perfectly comfortable looking the other way. I have also shown no reluctance to publicly defend the Catholic Church or state that, without its commitment to this cause, there would have never even been a pro-life movement.
I could go much further down this track, but the point is that these efforts to portray me as “anti-Catholic” are absurd and despicable. The people doing this are motivated by the fact that I do not ascribe to the view that the Catholic hierarchy, or any other church’s hierarchy, is to be installed upon a pedestal and given authority that is absolute and beyond scrutiny. In their minds, that makes me “anti-Catholic” in the same way that criticizing Obama’s stimulus plan makes someone a racist in the minds of some hardcore Obamanistas.
In fairness, it should be noted that self-pious bigotry is not a disease that only infects Catholics. Over the years, many non-Catholics have felt the need to call my office and warn me that if I continue to associate with Catholics – or as they describe them, “that cult of cloven-hoofed heretics” – I will eventually find myself with a window seat on the Hell Bound Express. Regrettably, a couple of these nitwits have checked in with me in the last couple of days. It seems they are quite amused that a bunch of Catholics would like to see me rotating over a low flame because of my aggressive defense of a Catholic priest.
The irony about this is that none of these people would now be attacking me if I had simply abandoned Father Frank when Bishop Zurek dropped him in the grease. Of course, it may not be ironic at all. It could be that it reflects the simple reality that these people are just opposite sides of the same coin – though both would become enraged at such a suggestion.
Before closing, I want to bring up a couple of other issues. First, notice how quiet the pro-choice mob is being. Obviously, these people understand the concept that when your enemy is in self-destruct mode, the smartest thing to do is keep your mouth shut. My prediction is that, once all of this is resolved, they will have plenty to say.
Second, I can assure you that if the things that are going on behind the scenes of this regrettable situation are ever made public, the people who are now blindly defending Bishop Zurek are going to be stunned at what they learn. I can also assure you that these revelations will not be coming from me.
Finally, I want to make you aware of an interesting phone call I received yesterday. It was from Dr. Levon Yuille who is an African-American pastor in Michigan and unwavering defender of the unborn. He told me that, a couple of years ago, he was giving a speech at a pro-life banquet and that, afterward, he was milling around chatting with a small group of attendees. He said that he can’t remember why but, for some reason, Father Frank’s name came up. At some point in the conversation, he said this well-dressed woman standing nearby suddenly blurted out that, “Father Pavone is getting too big for his britches and we’re going to take him down.”
Dr. Yuille said he found this incident bizarre but that he had forgotten about it until he heard what Bishop Zurek was doing. After some discussion, we both concluded that it is a long shot to assume that her statement and this situation are related. But who knows?


October 22nd, 2011


The Left likes to claim that Occupy Wall Street (OWS) and other Occupiers are not that different from the Teapartiers. I hold that they are quite different.

1. The Teapartiers assemble for a day and depart. They leave the grounds cleaner than before. The Occupiers arrive with tents and baggage and Occupy. They stay and won’t go home.

2. The Teapartiers are interested in upholding constitutional law. The Occupiers don’t seem to like America or our laws. They talk revolution. If there is a particular law they want to change, we don’t hear about it.

3. Groups like the young Nazis, Communists, Socialists and Atheists seem to fit right in with the Occupiers. They are made welcome. They would never consider joining the Teapartiers.

4. This is the defining difference: The Teapartiers on the whole believe in God. The Occupiers on the whole do not.


BUT – A comment from Mary Rose suggests that there may be common ground.

> This is a open letter to OWS from FedUpUSA, one of the original Tea
> Parties:
> We support you in exercising your First Amendment Right. We are
> outraged that any peaceful demonstrator would be assaulted or abused
> by any authorities.
> If you are protesting because there are no jobs— We stand with
> you.
> We are for a free economy and recognize that what we have now is NOT
> a free economy; it is not capitalism – what we have is a fascist
> state or crony-capitalism. There is nothing free about doing
> business with Countries that manipulate their currencies to attract
> cheap labor. We agree that these jobs need to come back to America.
> If you are protesting because no one has gone to jail— We stand
> with you.
> Regardless of what is being said from the white house and media, we
> know that there are many in the financial district and the banks
> that have committed fraud and outright theft and we too want to see
> them prosecuted. We support: STOP THE LOOTING; START
> If you are protesting because everything costs more— We stand with
> you.
> We see prices rise in our food, gas, clothes yet our wages have
> stayed the same or have decreased. The Federal Reserve has bailed
> everyone out but us and not only are we going to have to pay for
> that, those bailouts make the price of everything else go up because
> it devalues our currency. We support monetary reform.
> If you are protesting because you are tired of our bought and paid
> for government on both sides— We stand with you.
> We are also against the banks and big corporations buying our
> politicians and writing laws that favor their special interests. We
> understand that our economy is broken BECAUSE of this and that all
> of our other issues will never be addressed as long as the financial
> elite control OUR government.
> We understand that these issues cross party lines and ideologies and
> effect each and every one of us. We also understand that these
> issues will never get fixed as long as we continue to let the media,
> the elite, and members of the government separate us by our
> differing ideologies.
> Only Together, can we Implement Change
> It is time, We Americans, put our ideologies in our back pocket and
> not let them separate us so that we can work together for this ONE
> COMMON GOAL: to get the special interest money and elite out of OUR
> Government and return it to US— the people.
> As long as the banks, largest corporations, and wealthy elite
> control our government, we will never have a representative republic
> and laws will continue to be passed that only benefit the few 1% at
> the expense of us 99%!
> Demand that NOT ONE MORE LAW gets passed until they pass:
> Lobby reform:
> It is a Federal Offense punishable by a minimum 5 years in prison
> to:
> Lobby any member of the US Congress outside of the district you
> live, work, or own a business.
> Lobby a member of congress while they are physically outside the
> district they represent.
> Campaign Reform:
> It is a Federal Offense punishable by a minimum 5 years in prison
> to:
> For any one person, corporation, enterprise, group, union or the
> like, to donate more than $2,000 to any one candidate during one
> campaign period.
> For any member of the media to deny equal access to competing
> candidates.
> These two laws will cut the control the Financial elite have on our
> government by leveling the playing field. You will have just as big
> as a voice with your representative as the big box retailer that
> resides in your town. Simply, it will end the Crony-Capitalism that
> is strangling our economy.
> I encourage all my fellow Tea Partiers to join Occupy Wall Street
> protesters in their non-violent, peaceful protests and together
> demand that the Government be returned to the people. After all,
> this is precisely what the Tea Party was intended to be before it
> was taken over and marginalized by the establishment politicians.


I am the good shepherd; and I know mine, and mine know me.  — John 10:14

October 21st, 2011


In the 1950’s and ‘60’s the fluoridation of the public water supply was a hotly debated subject in the public forum. Fluoridated water was supposed to prevent dental caries and I was in favor of it until I learned that a doctor friend of mine who was both a health commissioner and Professor of Preventive Medicine at Loyola University was against it. I proceeded to study the matter and learned that most people who opposed fluoridation knew a good deal more about it than those who favored it. I learned that among those who opposed it were Dr. James Sumner and Dr. Hugo Thiorel, both Nobel prize winners in the field of enzyme biochemistry.

As is my wont, when I get fired up I write,  and here is my subsequent letter to the editor:

There is at least one town in this country that boasts of the fluoride content of its water with a sign reading, “Water Fluoridated by God.” It is to towns like this that fluoridationists point when they maintain that people have been drinking naturally fluoridated water for years without harm–and with decreased dental decay. There are three things I would like to say about naturally fluoridated water.

First, the fact that a thing occurs naturally does not mean that it is desirable. There are areas, as in India, where people are hopelessly crippled with endemic fluorosis because of the high content of fluorides in their water and they are seeking ways to lessen the fluoride content of drinking water to below one part per million.  Perhaps they might appropriately put up a sign saying, “God Goofed.”

Secondly, fluorine is present in naturally fluoridated water as the relatively harmless salt, calcium fluoride, and, moreover, is accompanied by the minerals that are invariably presesnt in naturally fluoridated water which may affect the activity of the fluoridation. Sodium fluoride, which is used in artificial fluoridation, is a highly toxic chemical, a few grains constituting a lethal dose, and is 400 times more soluble and 400 times more easily picked up by body tissues. There are no lifetime studies of the effect of sodium fluoride added to soft water on the people who drink it.

Thirdly, whether fluoridation occurs naturally or artificially, even at the recommended optimum of 1 ppm, about one-sixth of the children examined show mottling of the teeth. This is a dental defect, and such mottling, according to the AMA, is “the first delicate criterion of excessive intake of fluorine.” When this occurs, the intake of fluorine should be decreased. How? By buying bottled water? The dosage of fluorides would be more satisfactorily controlled by administering them to individuals, not a whole city.

It should be clearly understood by everyone that fluoridation of a community’s water supply is a new frontier in compulsory mass medication. It is not in the same category as the addition of chlorine in the water to prevent the spread of water-borne diseases such as typhoid. Dental caries is not a water-borne disease. Nor is it in the same category as compulsory immunization to prevent the spread of contagious diseases. Caries is not a contagious disease. Neither of these comparisons can be used to justify the forced medication of 100 percent of the population for the possible benefit of 1 percent, especially when one man’s medication may be another man’s poison.

A recent issue of GP (quite a respectable medical journal for the general practitioner) contains an article on “The Prescription Use of Fluoride to Control Tooth Decay,” which quotes a study of Feltman showing “fluorine sensitivity caused a 1 percent incidence of eczema, urticaria, epigastric pain, vomiting and headaches. These symptoms disappear when a placebo was given.” To me, this alone is sufficient reason for vetoing the fluoridation of our water.     D. Vining

Later I also learned that in 1956 Dr. Ionel Rapaport of the Psychiatric Institute of the University of Wisconsin, upon observing that Mongoloid children (nowadays called Downs Syndrome) had less tooth decay than normal children, made statistical studies to determine whether there was any relationship between the amount of fluorine in the water and Mongoloid births. He compiled figures from the Boards of Health of Illinois, Wisconsin, North and South Dakota which seemed to indicate an increase of Mongolism with the amount of fluorine in the drinking water.

Mongolism (Down’s syndrome) is known to be associated with trisomy of the 21st chromosome, a genetic mutation. Fluorides have been proven to be enzyme inhibitors and to interfere with normal metabolism. It has been postulated that the increased number of Down’s births in women over 35 is due to impaired maternal metabolism with advancing age. As a sidelight, in tea-drinking England one child in 700 was Mongoloid as compared with one in 2925 in fluorine-free areas of Illinois. Tea is high in fluorine (over 161 mg/kg) and a chronic tea-drinker (like the English?) can ingest as much fluorine as is present in artificial fluoridation

All these data piqued my interest in the subject and I corresponded with the Editor of Prevention magazine (against fluoridation) and A.L. Russell, Chief, Epidemiology and Biometry Branch, National Institute of Dental Research (for fluoridation), as well as others.

I also bought two batches of mice, some of which I gave tap water to drink and the others got tea to drink, hoping to learn if they gave birth to defective babies. I soon concluded that my casual approach to this experiment was not scientific enough and I had other things to attend to (like seven children and a part-time job) so I abandoned the project. To this day, I wonder what such a study would reveal.


I had thought that after fifty years of paying no attention to the subject of fluoridation (all the while merrily drinking my fluoridated, chlorinated tap water), we would have learned a thing or two.   My first stop was Wikepedia where I learned that “In 2006, a 12-person U.S. National Research Council (NRC) committee reviewed the health risks associated with fluoride in the water[16] and unanimously concluded that the maximum contaminant level of 4 mg/L should be lowered. Although it did not comment on water fluoridation’s safety, three of the panel members, namely Robert Isaacson, Kathleen Thiessen and Hardy Limeback, expressed[citation needed] their opposition to water fluoridation after the study[17][18] and the chair, John Doull, suggested that the issue should be reexamined.[19]

Wikipedia also provided me with a list of countries which had begun water fluoridation and discontinued it (the latter date being the date of discontinuation.)

  • Federal Republic of Germany (1952–1971)
  • Sweden (1952–1971)
  • Netherlands (1953–1976)
  • Czechoslovakia (1955–1990)
  • German Democratic Republic (1959–1990)
  • Soviet Union (1960–1990)
  • Finland (1959–1993)
  • Japan (1952–1972)

I then came across Why I Changed My Mind about Water Fluoridation by John Colquhoun* © 1997 University of Chicago Press.

Most of the world has rejected fluoridation. Only America where it originated, and countries under strong American influence persist in the practice. Denmark banned fluoridation when its National Agency for Environmental Protection, after consulting the widest possible range of scientific sources, pointed out that the long-term effects of low fluoride intakes on certain groups in the population (for example, persons with reduced kidney function), were insufficiently known [70]. Sweden also rejected fluoridation on the recommendation of a special Fluoride Commission, which included among its reasons that: “The combined and long-term environmental effects of fluoride are insufficiently known” [71]. Holland banned fluoridation after a group of medical practitioners presented evidence that it caused reversible neuromuscular and gastrointestinal harm to some individuals in the population [72].

Environmental scientists, as well as many others, tend to doubt fluoridation. In the United States, scientists employed by the Environmental Protection Agency have publicly disavowed support for their employer’s pro-fluoridation policies [73]. The orthodox medical establishment, rather weak or even ignorant on environmental issues, persist in their support, as do most dentists, who tend to be almost fanatical about the subject. In English- speaking countries, unfortunately, the medical profession and its allied pharmaceutical lobby (the people who sell fluoride) seem to have more political influence than environmentalists.

It seems clear to me with just this very casual follow-up that the issue of safety of fluorides in the public water supply has not been settled.

As for the question of whether there is a relationship between the ingestion of fluorides by the mother and Down’s Syndrome in her children, I found this link, on Super Down Syndrome.

The presence of fluorides in tea is discussed here.

On mature reflection, I guess it was a good idea to discontinue my study of the tea-drinking mice vs. the water-drinking mice. If any of the tea drinkers had produced mice with Down’s syndrome, I don’t know how I would have recognized any of the markers of that disease in a mouse!

Are floridation and/or tea-drinking related to Down’s syndrome?  I pass the torch.

October 10th, 2011


As a former member of Operation Rescue it is my impression that 40 Days for Life is the effective continuance of that nationwide effort to save the lives of unborn babies scheduled for abortion. Prayer is the weapon that blesses both those inside the abortion mill as well as those outside. Prayer is the weapon that changes hearts and changes lives, that saves babies and converts clinic workers so they “can’t do that anymore.”

This year 40 Days for Life is active in over 300 cities in the United States and in foreign countries. Here Shawn Carney and David Bereit in Helena, Montana, tell how it all started and how far they have come in just a few years. Why not just pray at home? Why pray, even in the rain? Does it really make a difference?

This is an inspiring video. Please listen.

We can pray more than we have been praying. Pray for mothers, pray for babies, pray for abortion workers, pray for more people praying. Seek your heart and ask God what he wants you to sacrifice for 40 days in order to save lives and close abortion clinics.

October 4th, 2011


I’d call this hard-hitting. It speaks for itself. Michael Voris is not one to mince words!

Letter from Archbishop Timothy Dolan of New York to President Obama
written “with a growing sense of urgency.”

October 3rd, 2011


I’ve had three biopsies in my entire life, so it is not likely that this post will  be all about biopsies, but biopsies are what are happening in my life right now – so, for those who have never had one — here’s what I know.

My first biopsy was ten years ago of a small bump above my left eyebrow that refused to heal, sort like a small hard pimple.  My dermatologist just sort of scooped it out for examination.  The site healed quickly and beautifully. ” Why don’t we just leave it,”  I said.  “It would grow back,” he said.  The pathology report read “basal cell carcinoma.”    When I returned for a more complete excision with a “couple of stitches”, the doctor injected the site with anesthetic and took off, leaving me unattended on the table.  Could have been a coffee break – who knows!  When he finally returned and started cutting I said, “I can feel that!”  More injection of anesthetic and he finished the job.   Very neat – seven tiny stitches — and now, ten years year, I have a white almost invisble scar.  Mission accomplished.

Three months ago I presented with an array of actinic keratoses (AK’s) on my face, which we older folk tend to get, especially if we are of the fair, blue-eyed, freckly kind who burn easily.  AK’s are said to sometimes progress to malignancies.   This was not the first time I had had AK’s zapped (frozen) with a nitrogen spray.  The skin would redden, sometimes blister a bit, but in a few days it was off with the old rough, scaly skin, and in  with brand new skin.  This time the dermatologist (a different one) zapped over 15 areas and again, within a week, I was pretty presentable.

Last week, as new rough areas began to appear on my face I browsed through 38 photos that could save your life. As I browsed I came across of photo of a fingernail that seemed to have bluish flesh under it.  The caption read: ” Here’s a black-and-blue nail, right? Not hardly. It’s a melanoma of the nailbed, and lesions like this can be deadly.”  My immediate reaction was, “I have one of those!!!”  Just this past month I had noticed that it looked like I had a bruise under one of my toenails.  It was no trouble, did not hurt, and did not concern me until this very minute.

Now I know of a girl who had a melanoma on her arm, and they took the whole arm off, including the shoulder joint!  Those things love to metastasize.  When I called the Dermatology office as soon as the office opened for an appointment, she was going to give me one in two weeks.  “I’d rather not wait,” I said.  “I’m worried about a melanoma.”   It was about 8:30.  “If you can get here by 9:45,” she said, “I just had a cancellation and we can see you then.”

I took the picture from the computer with me and showed it to the doctor.   After inspection he thought I  might have an “ecchymosis” under my toenail.   I had no recollection of injury.  ” Ecchymosis,” I said.  “Bruise,” he explained.   We decided we needed to watch it for a month or so.

Then on to my face.  “What’s this?” he said.   There was a little spot on the left side of my nose where my glasses tend to rest.   I had thought it was irritation from my glasses and had even put a bandaid on it to spare it annoyance.  He thought it looked kind of thick and was also  intrigued by another spot nearby.   He decided biopsies were appropriate and told his nurse to prepare.    She started by injecting anesthetic with the tiniest needle you could imagine.   “Are you taking aspirin, Coumadin, or other blood-thinning drugs?” she asked.  I wasn’t.   “You’re a bleeder,”  she said.   Doc returned and painlessly removed the two lesions, and nursie (Kate) put them in little vials she had already labelled.    He said I should have a call about the biopsy results in a week to 10 days.  If they were negative, I was all done.  If positive, I should make an appointment with their Mohs expert for removal.

It is now one week from the biopsies.   I was told to wash the area daily and keep it covered with bandaids.  For two days the two areas seemed to ooze just plain serum but finally settled down and today is the first day I though I could go out without  bandaids but just a little make-up over the scabs.

Also today I received a call to make an appointment to see the Mohs expert in mid-October.    Both areas were positive for squamous cell carcinoma.    Enough for now.  Check back in late October.


Squamous cell?  You’re Irish!  You never should have come to this country! — Mary W.










Mohs surgery for basal cell and squamous cell carcinoma

October 3rd, 2011


This just arrived by email.  Yep, that’s the way it is.

The folks who are getting free stuff,
Don’t like the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Because the folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Can no longer afford to pay for both the free stuff and their own stuff.

And, The folks who are paying for the free stuff,
Want the free stuff to stop.
And the folks who are getting the free stuff,
Want even MORE free stuff on top of the free stuff they’re getting  already!

Now….. The people who are forcing  people to PAY for the free stuff,
Have told the people who are RECEIVING the free stuff,
That the people who are PAYING for the free stuff,
Are being mean, prejudiced and racist and now Terrorists.
So …. the people who are GETTING the free stuff,
Have been convinced they need to HATE the people who are PAYING for the free stuff because they are selfish. And they are promised more free stuff if they will vote for the people who force the people who pay for the free stuff to give them even more free stuff.
And – – – – – that’s the Straight Stuff!

October 3rd, 2011


It was Grandfather’s birthday. He was 79. He got up early, shaved, showered, combed his hair and put on his Sunday best so he would look nice when they came.

He skipped his daily walk to the town cafe where he had coffee with his cronies. He wanted to be home when they came.

He put his porch chair on the sidewalk so he could get a better view of the street when they drove up to help celebrate his birthday.

At noon, he got tired but decided to forgo his nap so he could be there when they came. Most of the rest of the afternoon he spent near the telephone so he could answer it when they called.

He has five married children, thirteen grandchildren and three great-grandchildren. One son and a daughter live within ten miles of his place. They hadn’t visited him for a long time.

But today was his birthday and they were sure to come.

At suppertime, he left the cake untouched so they could cut it and have dessert with him. After supper, he sat on the porch waiting.

At 8:30, he went to his room to prepare for bed. Before retiring, he left a note on the door that read:

“Be sure to wake me when you come.”

It was Grandfather’s Birthday. He was 79.

–Rudy Joe Mano

I found this in my folder of “good things” but without an author.   Of course, Google promptly supplied one.  It was first published in Ann Landers’ column in 1985 and became one of the column’s most requested reruns.