[NYer]

It came as quite a surprise today to hear Rush run on about the pope's new document. Rush noted that he is not a catholic but has considered investigating the teachings of the Catholic Church. He pointed to Pope JPII in his rant today, citing how the pope had been instrumental in eradicating communism from his homeland. He has great respect for the Catholic Church.

While he did not cite the sources for his material, one can readily see from the above post that he relied upon the mainstream media, the very group he often lambasts. He also applied what he read to the US, without recognizing that the church is universal and hence the pope's message is for catholics in all countries.

I'm sure some of you are Rush fans .. was he hoodwinked by relying on msm sources?

[omega4179]

The Pope really is a socialist.
He is completely wrong, capitalism is not Tyranny, and its not worship of money. Socialism is worship of government and the pursuit of collective SALVATION through collectivism. It crushes individualism and replaces God with the state.
God wants individuals to love him,not a collective.
The Pope is completely backwards in these beliefs.

[navymom1]

I think Rush was referring to the Washington Post. We have the article here at FR. It’s from the New York Daily Post.

As a new Catholic, if what I read is what the pope said and meant, then I’ll be the first to say to him, “Remove the log from your own eye before telling me to remove the splinter from mine.”

[Tax-chick]

There’s no way that Rush read the whole Exhortation and thought it through at this point. He could have said, “I haven’t read all of it and thought it about in the context of the entirety of Christian teaching from the first century until today, so I have nothing to say except, ‘Pope Francis sent out a document.’ “ But he didn’t, so he’s added to the noise.

[ToastedHead]

I love Rush and the Pope. Rush wasn’t bashing Francis, he was just pointing out the obvious, that Francis is incorrect in his assessment of capitalism. If that’s what he even said in the first place, which I’m guessing was doctored in translation to cause as much trouble as possible.

[BfloGuy]

I'm sure some of you are Rush fans .. was he hoodwinked by relying on msm sources?

Did the Pope say something different than reported? If not, then, no.

[what's up]

was he hoodwinked by relying on msm sources?

No #54 of the Pope's statement in his own words:

“In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world,” Pope Francis wrote.

“This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system,” the 76-year-old pontiff added.

[lacrew]

I think when the Pope denounces the ‘idolatry of money’, he is talking about the exact people that liberals love - pop singers who buy multi-million dollar mansions, pay $20k for a bottle of champagne, etc.

He is merely pointing out that, while Jay-zee enjoys blinging it up, he has completely forgotten that there are people in near starvation poverty all over the world.

In other words, he is ‘guilting’ people into being more charitable.

Now I don’t know how the liberals are making this leap of logic - the Pope is encourage people to be more charitable in their daily lives, and to seek enrichment from something other than money or material goods. How on earth do they translate that to mean “the government should take money from the rich and give it to the poor?”.

I also think liberals are making a huge mistake, with what they consider poor. The Pope is talking about people who live in terrible conditions, often under brutal governments, with no hope of improvement, and a primary concern is not starving to death. The liberals are taking him to mean the poor in western first world nations. The poor people in our cities aren’t really that poor. They get welfare, foodstamps, etc. And more importantly, they have hope - if they want money, they can walk down to a fast food place of 24 hr gas station any day of the week and apply for a job...this is very unlike the poor that the Pope talks about.

I don’t think the Pope cares one bit about whether or not we raise taxes to subsidize our growing walk about class. He is talking about real poverty.

[stanne]

I have been reading the original document. There’s nothing hoodwinking

It is so hard to defend the pope on this it is disturbing.

[hinckley buzzard]

yes.

[Longbow1969]

No, Rush wasn’t hoodwinked. Rush is pointing out that Pope Francis is an economic dimwit. I am sure he is a good man and there is much to admire about Pope Francis, but on economic issues he is a traditional South American Jesuit leftist.

I see the predictable crowd are here trying to make excuses for this Pope’s leftist economic statements, but it is no longer possible for them to cover for Pope Francis’ leftwing views on conservative forums like this one. Some of us knew right away that Pope Francis was a radical leftist on economic issues and were shouted down when we pointed it out. At this point it is obvious to pretty much everyone except those with the strongest set of blinders on. Rush is not happy that he has to tell people that Pope Francis is bad news when it comes to economics, but at some point he probably felt he had to comment.

[ADSUM]

I don’t believe that Pope Francis is against capitalism, maybe he is against some of the excesses.

He is certainly is against communism and socialism as he was in Argentina.

Pope Francis is for freedom and opportunity for all individuals, especially the poor. Capitalism is the best government economic system that provides for this. Are there problems and excesses. Of course. But capitalism is based on fair play for all by voluntary agreements to conduct business. Sometimes people exercise their powera in an excessive way over others in a capitalism system.

I think we need to follow this and determine the actual intentions of Pope Francis.

Capitalism has its problems, but it better than other system and has provided greater opportunity and freedom for all.

[GreyFriar]

After skimming the article, I see Rush talking at two levels: 1) What is the Pope’s understanding of ‘trickle down capitalism’ as used by Reagan’s enemies. 2) what is the role of socialism in the greater economic scheme of things. I think that Rush is examining the larger issue of socialism and also is thinking of how Francis may view it versus JPII, who lived under its ‘ultimate form.’

From my own experiences I can say that the American Left/progressives/Democrat liberals, see Socialism as the best way to get everyone under their control and to make everyone ‘equal.’ The disregard that failed communism of the USSR as, ‘they just didn’t get it right.’ And through socialism only they, as the enlightened progressive elite, is capable of running the country. Or to quote Napoleon in 1984, “Some of us are more equal than others.”

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The last crusade was against the Orthodox Church...

Part IV. Of the Kingdom of Darkness
Chap. xlvii. Of the Benefit that proceedeth from such Darkness

[21] ...For from the time that the Bishop of Rome had gotten to be acknowledged for bishop universal, by pretence of succsession to St. Peter, their whole hierarchy (or kingdom of darkness) may be compared not unfitly to the kingdom of fairies (that is, to the old wives' fables in England, concerning ghosts and spirits and the feats they play in the night). And if a man consider the original of this ecclesiastical dominion, he will easily perceive that the Papacy is no other than the ghost of the deceased Roman empire sitting crowned upon the grave thereof. For so did the Papacy start out of the ruins of that heathen power.