Speaking with EWTN personality Father Benedict Groeschel after the Vigil Mass for the March for Life on January 21, the saintly priest said, "I'm praying that the present Administration may fool them all and have a conversion. Why not pray for that?" Just plain old hope you might say. But the co-founder of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal added: "And it’s interesting, that one of New York's prominent newspapers - we generally refer to it as the Gray Lady - has criticized Obama almost every day for four weeks for being too conservative. Isn't that an interesting turn of events? So let's see how that one plays out."

So, in this context, does "saintly" mean the same thing as "gullible"?

Let me explain something to the good father. I'll do it in point form so it is clear.

- The New York Times is the world's most important engine of the left in the newspaper world.

- Obama is playing a political game, pretending to be the one who "unifies" the "polarized factions" in US politics. It is why he had Rick Warren and Vicky Gene as the representatives of the God Squad at his inauguration.

- The NYT doesn't like it when their darling boy makes these meaningless kissy noises to the right.

But of course, it works doesn't it? We've got Benedict Groeschel, the darling of the oh-so-desperate-to-fit-in-with-the-cool-kids Neo-Catholics and "religious conservatives", thinking it means Obama is going to "convert". Works on the other side too, with Kmiec and his ilk saying that Obama wants to "reduce" abortion by improving welfare handouts.

Obama's warm reception and engagement with Evangelical Pastor Rick Warren did much to render that image. 'If he can get along with pro-life and pro-family Rick Warren', the logic goes, 'then he can't be all that bad.' Indeed Obama is not a raving anti-Christian lunatic who wouldn't give the likes of Warren the time of day. Rather Obama is measured, friendly, even “spiritual,” a hero for worldly wisdom, if you will.

However, given Obama's steadfastness in pursing the anti-life and anti-family agenda this image of friendliness, of being a 'good guy', could turn out to be one of his most dangerous attributes. Worse than a raving madman who would target pro-life and pro-family Americans, displaying, as it were, his “true colors,” would be an affable and apparently good-hearted man who could convince America that for the greater good of the nation, pro-life and pro-family Americans should be 'converted' to the new morality, even coercively, under the pretense that it is in their own best interests.

Is anyone awake at the switch over there?


Helloooooo?