This week’s sign that the Apocalypse is upon us

Driehaus and his Benjamins

Not sure if it was 30 pieces of silver, these 9 Benjamins, or the approbation of San Fran Nan that convinced Driehaus to yield his conscience and his vote on baby-killing Obamacare, but that smile makes it look like he likes the filthy lucre.

Catholic soon-to-be-former U.S. Representative Steve Driehaus voted for Obamacare, a law which all but the most willfully ignorant or deluded knew would fund abortions with your and my tax dollars. The Susan B. Anthony List, as is their wont, made it their business to target him and other pro-life turncoats. Driehaus lost his re-election bid.

Citizen Driehaus has filed a civil suit against SBA for “loss of livelihood.”

Full stop. Ponder that: an elected representative considered his posh post in Washington as his professional position, his “job,” to which he was entitled.

Never mind that he will forever be eligible for the gold-standard health plan Congress critters get, nor that he can always use the services of the Congressional credit union, among other lifetime benefits. He was entitled to remain a Congressman, and the free exercise of political speech by activist citizens deprived him of that right, so therefore he deserves compensation.

And before anyone claims he actually has a case, ponder this: there are no criminal libel or slander charges pending, and the ACLU has filed an amicus brief on behalf of SBA. So it’s entirely based in self-entitlement and gall.

In the original model of the Founders, Congress was a part-time job, and only met for part of the year–they never envisioned a professional elected political class, and would likely line up to take turns slapping this guy for his gall.

But then, a quick once-over of his biography (yes, from Wikipedia, deal with it) might shed some light on why he’s so frightened and shocked! by the election results (bolding mine):

Driehaus, a 1984 graduate and class president of Elder High School in Cincinnati (the same high school his father graduated from in 1951), studied political science at Miami University while earning a B.A. in 1988 and holds an Master of Public Administration (M.P.A.) from Indiana University earned in 1995. He served as a Peace Corps volunteer in Senegal where he worked with village groups and local schools as a natural resource volunteer to promote sustainable environmental practices from 1988 to 1990.

Driehaus then served as Associate Director of the Center for International Education and Development Assistance at Indiana University. While serving in this role, he coordinated the South African Internship Program, which was sponsored by the United States Information Agency that is the largest professional exchange program between the United States and the “new” South Africa.

Driehaus formerly directed and now serves as a consultant to the Community Building Institute, a collaborative effort of Xavier University and United Way & Community Chest that promotes citizen-led, asset-based community development. Driehaus is a member of the Price Hill Civic Club and serves on the Board of Seton High School. He was also a part time political science instructor at Xavier University.

Driehaus began his political career as an aide for Cincinnati City Council Member Todd Portune and former U.S. Rep. Charlie Luken in the 1990s.

Then from 2001 until being sworn in as U.S. Congressman in 2009 in he was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives.

I also found out that he’s the son of former Hamilton County Democrat party co-chairman H. Donald Driehaus–his family described as “a prominent Democratic Price Hill family”–so he’s been groomed in politics his whole life.

This guy’s been on the public dole since he was a kid. It doesn’t look like he has ever earned a dime that wasn’t taxed away from the people of Hamilton County, the states of Ohio or Indiana, or the entire U.S. [Author's note: I clumsily lumped Xavier University into the public sector which, as a Catholic University, it is not. However, being a part-time poli-sci professor and the director of a community organizer-ing group co-sponsored by a university and the United Way is the nearest thing imaginable to a government bureaucratic position. (Or it qualifies you to be President, apparently.) The point of the paragraph is unharmed.] He’s been running for Senator since he was in high school; you can clearly see why he is shocked! and dismayed! to find himself knocked off his 30-year planned career path. Thus, someone (else) must be blamed and punished for taking away that which clearly belongs to him.

I mean seriously: no one with a resume as paper thin as his, with such a dearth of real work experience, who has done nothing but campaign his whole life, should feel entitled to anything, even if they manage to convince enough people to vote for them once. And they clearly shouldn’t be entrusted with much power at all until they prove themselves either through many, and good years of public service (decades) or through leaving public service and working in the private sector for some time. That much is crystal clear, right? Right?

752 views

Categories:Uncategorized

9 thoughts on “This week’s sign that the Apocalypse is upon us

  1. Brian C says:

    This has nothing to do with the main point of your article, but I’ve never understood why people feel the need to apologize for using Wikipedia for something such as obtaining biographical information on a person who is not well known. That is one of the main reasons to use Wikipedia. Don’t use it as legal evidence, but feel free to use it for most other purposes without explaining why or apologizing.

    1. cfish says:

      because Wikipedia is something similar to polling twelve people around the water cooler for the collective opinion/ knowledge about a given subject and is usually created in much the same way. ( literally anyone can put anything up at any time which might be changed by anyone else at anytime).

      That being said, if it is sourced, i don’t see the point in apologizing for it either, after all the ‘water cooler’ is the place where the majority of the human race has always gotten most of their information. so unless you need scientific accuracy it’s a reasonable source and if it’s really important you can usually verify the article’s information by looking at the referenced links at the bottom.

  2. Jamie Ward says:

    This blog appears to be run by negative and argumentative people. Why can’t you write about the good things we can do as Catholic Voters. Every article is spiteful, negative, and snarky. Even that 10 reasons for hope video was negative – how ironic.

    Get up from the computer and go find someone to love. I think you will be much happier.

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      Not to be ironic or anything, but I dispute this characterization. The point of the blog is to engage the culture from a Catholic perspective. That sort of a thing usually requires, or at least encourages, being argumentative. And there’s nothing wrong with being argumentative per se, but you are correct that it can be done improperly (i.e., lacking charity). However, refusing to bring your Catholic faith to bear and engage a culture that is going down the tubes is also a form of uncharity, so here we are: imperfect human beings, prone to failures in charity, trying to do something which will necessarily anger a whole lot of people who disagree all together, while annoying many who may agree with the mission, but who disagree with the method. Ah well. I’ll keep trying to do better. I do hope you and yours have a very merry Christmas.

      1. cfish says:

        Is Jesus all about being positive and non critical lifestyle?

        How about I let him speak for himself on that one:

        Mathew 10: 34 – 39

        Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn

        a man against his father,
        a daughter against her mother,
        a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—

        a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’e

        Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

        Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

        What you seem to advocate is being ‘salt without being salty’ Luke 14:34

  3. Howard says:

    Well, I am a full-time university professor, and I’ve got news for you, bub: I WORK for a living. It’s not a “dole”, it’s a salary, and pretty crappy one at that, constituting not more than half what I could make in the private sector. If you’re the Republican type that thinks that a “person’s worth” is how much he has in the bank, I’m pretty worthless. By that standard, so is the Pope.

    I have my questions about someone who apparently writes blogs for a living, though.

    1. Tom Crowe says:

      Howard, I’m assuming you’re not a professor of rhetoric. You overstated my case, misrepresented my characterization of university employment, and didn’t do good research.

      First, I work full time for a small private university myself, which I stated in a previous post, so I know about working for the mission rather than the pay.
      Which also means that you are incorrect: I don’t write a blog for a living. Though I wouldn’t mind getting paid to sit and think and write about topics that interest me and discuss them with people and review comments and questions from thousands of peers and potential “students”… but I digress. ;-)

      Second, I characterized Steve Driehaus’ work as a part-time professor and temporary director of a “community organizer-ing” outfit jointly sponsored by a university and the United Way as part of his tableau of permanently running for Senate. I made no comment about all university employees, especially dedicated professors. Adjunct poli-sci professor for a short time? Director of a community development think-tank for a while? That’s resume candy for a Congressional candidate, it’s not dedication. No, I’m not “the Republican type that thinks that a ‘person’s worth’ is how much he has in the bank,” but I don’t expect you to believe that any time soon. (To tell the truth, I’m not sure where this line of response from you came from at all: I made no statement about levels of income, but about qualifications, private sector experience and the value thereof for one’s understanding of how the economy and the country actually work, and how Driehaus is behaving like one simply entitled to the ascendant career track he and his pedigree had plotted for him.

      But if you want to make it all about you, I suppose I can’t stop you. Bub.

      Merry Christmas.

  4. [...] Previous Full stop. Ponder that: an elected representative considered his posh post in Washington as his professional position, his “job,” to which he was entitled. via catholicvote.org [...]

  5. Cliff says:

    This guy reminds me of George Washington Plunkitt.

    For those of you that never read “Plunkitt of Tammany Hall”, Plunkitt goes on to make a big deal in that book that an education is worthless. You’re a loser and a nobody if you have an education. All you need is a vote. That’s how you really succeed, not by book-learnin’. If you have people that will vote for you, then you can do anything.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.