Manufacturing the News: NY Times’ Laurie Goodstein Predictably Obliges Church Cranks In Effort To Oust Missouri’s Bishop Finn

Laurie Goodstein : Laurie Goodstein NYT

Free publicist for Church malcontents: Laurie Goodstein from the New York Times

How do you get the attention of America's newspaper of record?

First, find a handful of others to form a group declaring yourself opposed to sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Second, put together a third-rate website (even if it is not even online) announcing your intention to solve the now largely nonexistent problem of sex abuse. Finally, phone the New York Times National Religion Correspondent Laurie Goodstein to obtain all the free public relations you want.

So appears the strategy of a fringe group of dissident priests, nuns, and other left-wing zealots called Catholic Whistleblowers, which Goodstein proudly promoted on the Times' front page just last year.

The premise of the group is simple but inane: the diabolical hierarchy of the Church is still covering up widespread abuse of minors by priests, and it is up to these select and valiant malcontents to blow the lid off the cover-up.

Goodstein: Always at the ready for Church malcontents

Lacking any real conspiracies to blow the lid off of, however, Catholic Whistleblowers recently decided to now petition Pope Francis to discipline Kansas City-St. Joseph Bishop Robert Finn over his handling of a priest who was found to have child pornography on his computer a couple years ago.

Seizing upon overheated media coverage, the local prosecutor brought questionable misdemeanor charges against Bishop Finn for waiting too long to report the priest, to which Finn later pleaded to a suspended sentence.

And while Catholic Whistleblowers knows that their petition will likely go nowhere at the Vatican – as rightly it should – they know that it will go a long way in Manhattan, as they can always call on the reliable Goodstein for some free public relations.

And Goodstein always obliges, as she recently penned a high-profile article giving Times-like gravitas to the group's silly petition and once again rehashing the story of Bishop Finn's sentence.

The hidden agenda of Church cranks

Bishop Finn conference, 021714

Basking in the publicity: Church misanthropes meet the press in Missouri

In her article, Goodstein also quotes a local Missouri rabble-rouser named John Veal, who predictably wants Finn thrown out of Missouri. But Goodstein never reveals to her readers that Veal has already been using the episode about Bishop Finn as a vehicle to promote "women ordination" and having the Church abandon the celibacy requirement for priests.

In a wild-eyed piece for the Kansas City Star back in 2011, Veal illogically tried to connect the Bishop Finn episode to the Church's all-male and celibate priesthood, as if somehow there were a connection between the two issues. And since Veal's agenda aligns perfectly with that of the Times' editorial board, Goodstein is more than happy to promote Veal without revealing his agenda.

[By the way, any time someone feels the need to identify himself as a "devout Catholic" – as Veal does – it's a safe bet that the last thing they are "devout" to is the teachings of the Catholic Church.]

The Times' real agenda exposed – once again

As we have stated several times before, Laurie Goodstein is utterly obsessed with the Catholic Church sex abuse story. Nearly one out of every three articles she has authored or co-authored so far this decade for the Times has been solely about sex abuse in the Catholic Church.

Meanwhile, Goodstein has authored exactly zero articles about sex abuse in any other religious organization during this same time period.

And the Times' never-ending fixation with decades-old scandals in the Church – while ignoring the scandals happening today in local public schools right in its own backyard – reveals that it is not really the sexual abuse of children that bothers the Times. What bothers the Times is that the Catholic Church offends the Times' collective ego, as it does not adhere to the paper's own radical, secularist worldview.


[An additional note ... In her article, Goodstein also makes reference to a "a German bishop who spent tens of millions building his opulent quarters." Well, that has been a story that the mainstream media has proudly trumpeted in past months. But, yet again, the truth about this episode involving Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst is another matter. Check out the must-read "The Real Scandal in Germany" over at Crisis magazine, which corrects the record about this story. It is written by Marie Meaney, who actually knows what she's talking about.]


  1. Sam says:

    Maybe Goodstein doesn't have anything else to write about?

    • Delphin says:

      Goodstein has plenty to write about right there in her own backyard in NY, Sam.

      She could write about the religious Hasidic communities in Brooklyn, and Westchester, Rockland, Orange, Bergen, Essex and Ocean Counties that are infested with real ongoing sexual abuse of minors by their rabbis/rebbes.

      Perhaps to Goodstein, the conservative-Jewish radical leftist, Hasidim isn't the 'right' place on which you desire to hammer.

      She could also write about the filthy little not-so-secret Muslim communities practices that permit 'marriage' of 9 year old girls to 90 year old pedophiles, female genital mutilation and honor killings of women, according to Sharia Law, that are rampant in these Asian-African immigrant communities in the local NY area.  Maybe she's afraid to go there.

      Remember, none of the NYT's leftist is about protecting minors anywhere, it is all about ideology.

  2. Dennis Ecker says:

    Your reporting on Finn is nothing new. Check out my posts on 2/17 and 2/21. The only thing we may see that maybe new is TMR changing the Laurie Goldstein scoreboard to 80.

    What I think is funny though is the comment "anytime someone feels the need to identify as a devout catholic its a bet that the last thing they are is devout."

    [edited by moderator]

  3. Iris says:

    No wonder the New York Times is losing readers.

  4. Oumou says:

    Has Goodstein ever written about anything else?

  5. Delphin says:

    Oumou- maybe Goodstein might want to run this story? It's got all the religion a 'religious reporter' could ever dream of. Problem is, it isn't about bashing Catholics so neither she nor her editors will be interested in informing the world of these ongoing horrors.

    For the victim-claimants here; this is actually what violent rape is, in case you needed an example.

    Also, imbedded link to Walid Shoebat site has interesting (factual for those who respect the truth) piece on "Those 'damned' Catholics" -

  6. LDB says:

    Goodstein? More like Lauire Greatstein.

    • Delphin says:

      Why is it Ms. Greatstein isn't concerned for the Jewish children being abused in synagogues, Hebrew schools, Hasidic communities and public schools?

      Why does she care so much more for the Catholic 'children'?

  7. Jim Robertson says:

    What is the largest christian religion in America? It's the catholic church. What percentage of the  American population is Hasidic jews? Less than.05%? Therefore who has more influence over more children. The largest christian religion or the smallest Jewish one?

    • Delphin says:

      The public sector has more influence over more children than any other entity, but no one seems to care at the NYT (in synch with victim-claimants here).

      And, again, in Goodstein's own backyard there are minor abuse scandals going on in several places (not just in the Hasidim community, as I clearly mentioned) besides the Catholic Church.  Is it, as some claim here, because she was abused in the Church so therefore that is why it is her great focus- you know, to save little Catholic boys from the clutches of those evil (homosexually active) priests? Perhaps she could allocate her time, accordingly, if she wasn't practicing her trade in such a highly biased way?

      Why is that Laurie Goodstein?


    • Dennis Ecker says:

      Question – Why does Goodstein care so much about catholic children ?

      Answer – Because some catholics adults do not, and it takes an ex-catholic, a homosexual atheist, and others to do it for you. ITS NOT EVEN OUR JOB.

  8. Jim Robertson says:
  9. Dennis Ecker says:

    If TMR wishes to give this reporter some free advertisement and attention it maybe worth picking up a New York Times paper and reading what she has to say.

    I have never read any of her articles before but she is rattling the rosary rattlers.

    I wonder if TMR will make me a fan of hers like Donahue made me a fan of Bill Maher ?

    • Delphin says:

      Are you sure you wish to maintain that your are not an antiCatholic bigot, while demanding (and threatening legal action) that your are believed about anything on face-value?

      It is difficult to see how Bill Maher or a toddler afraid of Pope Francis has anything to do with minor abuse.

      Can you explain the link,  or finally man-up and admit, as did LDB, that you pound on the Catholic Church and her 'rosary rattlers" for no other reason that you are just another bigot?

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Lol Dennis. Bill Maher, catholic raised and educated; atheist now. We share a birthday. He can hit the nail on the head.

  10. Dennis Ecker says:

    Someone who is making it loud and clear he does not want this person to be his role model.

    • Delphin says:

      What an ignorant comment, even for someone of your astoundingly low intellect.

      But, let's not lose sight of your admiration for Bill Maher.

      You are the gift that keeps on giving-

    • Dennis Ecker says:

      Did I or did I not in a past post tell you or anyone else if it floats your boat and makes you feel better call me that anti-catholic church hating bigot.

      You let me know how far that gets you or satisfaction you obtain. I bet you it would not even get you a stick of gum.

  11. Julie says:

    Laurie Goodstein is a useful idiot and a bigot. I suppose that is why the New York Times employs her. It is sad to see journalism becoming yellower and yellower. From someone who toils in the vineyard.

  12. Rondre says:

    Wonders why I got a heads up today to go read the latest on mediareports .


    Anyone have any popcorn?

  13. Delphin says:

    And, what is it that "Rondre" does when she isn't being directed to swing by TMR and engorge Her Highness on popcorn?

    How 'common'.

    Have anything of value to contribue? Perhaps you, too, can share with the unclean masses here how you were savaged by some evil Catholic priest, perhaps even a pope, when ye were just a mere tyke on ye Daddy's knee?


    • Jim Robertson says:

      "How common"? How common? What are you a nanny? What were you raised by? royalty?

      What the hell is wrong with you? no really, there's some serious wrong here." Love your neighbor as yourself" unless they've been raped by priests then any thing goes? How do you begin to call yourself a christian? You are like an ever bursting pimple of anger.

    • rondre says:

      Do you really think I would stoop that low to contribute to this?


      back to eatng my popcorn.


  14. Publion says:

    On the 27th at 432PM we get a contentless and ungrammatical telegram from Abusenik ‘Rondre’,  who has previously claimed to teach media classes. So much for the probable reliability of Abusenik claims.

    Then along comes “Dennis” on the 27th at 1017PM, who has managed to skirt any of the serious issues and find one that is more his speed: Goodstein “cares so much about catholic children” because – waittttt for ittttt – “some catholic adults do not”.

    In the first place, as a reporter for the national newspaper-of-record (such as it may be) Goodstein’s own personal concerns must take a back-seat to larger national issues; so this attempt by “Dennis” to excuse her on the basis of her “care” for Catholic children fails. If she is concerned for sexual-abuse of children there are a number of venues that should receive her attentions. And yet they do not.

    But I won’t be too quick to suggest any lack of insight on the part of “Dennis”, even though on first glance it might appear that he should have given a bit more thought to Ms.Goodstein’s larger, professional responsibilities.

    I won’t do that because I don’t think “Dennis” was really interested in Ms. Goodstein at all in the first place. Rather, he was – characteristically – simply using her as a pretextual mule to carry his own preferred bits: that today’s ‘heroes’ are “an ex-catholic, an atheist homosexual, and others” who have to drop their own valuable life-projects to do the work that Catholics – we are to believe – can’t or won’t do.

    Once again, we see here the payoff of being (or claiming oneself to be) the Hero-Victim (for which a double-Wig, suitably bouffant and bespangled, has no doubt been added to the collection). And – the horrific horror! – these heroes are working, despite the life-wrecking consequences of their own victimization, for people who clearly don’t appreciate them, and who instead ask questions and (conceptually) kick-tires and generally do other ‘un-empathic’, ‘sociopathic’, ‘immoral’, and ‘idiotic’ stuff like that.

    Of course, it might well be suggested to “Dennis” that a) we still aren’t even sure of how much ‘it’ there is for which the “job” must be done and/or that b) “Dennis” and the rest of I Virtuosi are really doing so much that it is clear that they are indubitably up to the “job”. Aside from the material we have seen on this site and perhaps the BigTrial site, upon just what else are these erstwhile heroic activists basing a claim to heroic activism at all?

    And they are all ‘interested parties’ (and some of them qualify as such on more than one level) and they clearly are not interested in any sort of “normal dialog”. Rather, they prefer simply i) trying to manipulate our responses to their own stories and claims or to the various media bits they have selected or ii) prevent any assessment or sustained analysis of their stories and claims and conclusions and allegations. And always with the weird undertows of cattiness or scatological expression forever lurking beneath the surface of their already shallow profferings.

    So I agree with “Dennis”: it’s not your job. Also I would add: you appointed yourselves to your heroic task, you don’t seem to be doing much in the substantive commenting department, you don’t seem to be doing anything at all in the activist-action department, and you haven’t done much to dispel the increasingly obvious probability that you are in it for ulterior purposes.

    The only sense in which ‘heroic’ may apply here is in the somewhat limited medical usage of a sterotype: a ‘heroic’ surgeon may choose ‘heroic’ measures – cutting off a leg, say – simply because he feels the need to cut off a leg just now.

    You are doing this “job” you talk about because you need to; and in order to fulfill that need you have to make your “job” seem as impressively important as possible; and in order to do that you have to make the “job” seem as if it’s dealing with a monstrously huge and never-to-be-conquered problem. And thus you can be a ‘hero’ from now until the Last Trumpet.

    Nice “job” if you can get it; or if you make it for yourself. But it’s all become rather obvious now.

  15. Jim Robertson says:

    The 4 D's, Deny; Disrupt; Degrade; Deceive. I have P and D down for all 4 of the 4 D's. They've behaved that way from the very begining towards any victim posting here; and we all know why: for money. Exactly what they accuse us of doing; but they do those things daily.


    • Delphin says:

      I dont think the real victims, Julie and KenW,  would agree with your dopey (another D for you- feel like you're back in school?) statement.

  16. Jim Robertson says:

    When did Saul Alinsky become a catholic priest? When was he made a bishop?

  17. Delphin says:

    Let's hope the strong-arm (the left one, of course) of the US LGBTXYZV community activates to itself to face-off with the Ugandan law as vehemently as they did for the benign Arizon law (SB 1062); and let's pray that the Catholic Church does not comply by this unjust law and throw their homosexual priests to the Ugandan wolves.

  18. Delphin says:

    I guess he would have been doing harder time in Minnesota, land of the Church-eaters, had he been Catholic-

    • Dennis Ecker says:

      If your link is accurate and I have no reason to doubt that it is not. I still have some questions that I would like answered.

      Otherwise if this is a cut and dry case with DNA evidence gary hegna should face the ultimate punishment. Something you should be comfortable with since your church has done it for centuries.

      This is someone that society will always have to have a watchful eye out for. If your article is correct he started raping this child when she was 2 years old. He will never prove to be an asset to the world, unless we can give him cancer or the hiv virus and use him for a search for a cure, like he used an infant for his own personal sick enjoyment.

      I do not discriminate because of race, color or creed. You do something like what hegna is accused of doing you will hear the words "get your affairs in order".

      Now, if you are really tired of the sexual abuse children suffer not only by your catholic clergy, school teachers, and anyone from any organization I left a link you might find interesting.

      Unlike you and your sidekicks who think they are defending your "innocent" priests or are concerned about all children get up and do something. I'm involved in this 24/7, no lunch or dinner breaks and you know who you have to thank for that ? Your late fr. hermley.



  19. Publion says:

    On the 28th at 1155AM JR provides an almost textbook example of what is known in certain professional circles as ‘projection’: in claiming to most clearly and certainly perceive some X and Y and Z in others, he marvelously – though utterly unintentionally – reveals the actual locus of X and Y and Z in himself.

    Thus the “4 D’s” (from wherever he got this little list) provide a nice-enough take-down of the Abusenik Playbook (most of the elements of which, I am coming to think, JR had mastered long before Anderson started putting his strategies together).

    And – as always – I really don’t know if there actually are any genuine victims posting here and nothing I have seen demonstrates clearly to me that that assessment should be changed. 

    The rest of the comment – about “for money” and the rest trails off into incoherence of expression (and perhaps of content as well), but nothing new there.

  20. Jim Robertson says:

    Dippy, The catholic church controls half the christians in the country of Uganda. Are we to have Holocoust Deux? Will Frank behave like Pius or will he do something? Or will he do nothing and pretend it's to protect catholics? The way Pius did.

    • Delphin says:

      Will the loud-mouth leftist gays in the US, like those who are chaining (although your 'playtime' handcuffs seem to be your calling card) themselves to altars/pews and desecrating the Eucharist in Catholic Churches, forcing their 'lifestyle' into local parades, schools and business, illicitly hijacking Federal and state legislation that affects all Americans (the other 98%), has controlling interests in Hollywood (and Washington) – will these radicals/anarchists now stand against the Ugandan government laws (not Vatican or Catholic Church law) that will actually, factually, persecute homosexuals?

      Or, as is usual, will these cowards stay silent so as not speak out against their perceived brothers in arms in the 'struggle' against the 'evil Capitalist, racist, colonizing heterosexual, male Caucasians'?

      And, how about those black ministers breaking ranks with the LBGT&%$ radical agenda as being imposed by Comrade Holder?

      Very interesting developments (or divisions), indeed-

  21. Jim Robertson says:

    My handcuffs were real handcuffs, I bought them at a yard sale. The cops asked me where I got them.

    If any one is desecrating anything here it's what you do to the golden rule.

    If half of the christians in Uganda are catholic; and they are, all Frank has to do is come out and order them to give asylum to any gay person under pain of excommunication.. To put the same amount of money up to fight the Ugandan state as he has fighting gay marriage.

    Then we'll see if you can live up to "Love your neighbor" or per usual, just be a hypocrite.

    • Delphin says:

      But, where are the lefty gay parades, marches, barricades, outcries, demands, fits, kniptions, fundraisers, demonstrations that we see in the US when these radicals oppose/object a US law, where is this response to the Ugandan state (not Catholic Church) law? 

      This law doesn't persecute Catholicism, it persecutes gays, your guys? If we follow your    [il]logic, …"if it didn't happen in the Catholic Church – what difference does it make…", ala Mrs Clinton, and you?

      This is secular law- your favorite kind, what will you do for your brothers and sisters in Uganda?

      I bet they could use a few of your Church bucks? Maybe this is why God permitted you to score off His back?

    • Delphin says:

      Guess I am not the only one noticing the sound of crickets back here in the US on the Ugandan anti-gay laws?

  22. Jim Robertson says:

    Where was the eucharist desecrated by gays? In your fascist wet dreams? How can god be desecrated? He can't he's god.  so?…….

    Your own popes are extremely critical of capitalism, colonializatiion, racism. You, by all you've said again and again here, are not against those things. [edited by moderator]

  23. Jim Robertson says:

    When will you compensate your own raped?

  24. Dennis Ecker says:

    You know Delphin for a minute and only a minute I thought that maybe we were on the same page. Looking at our justice system although it has to be respected the failures of it also.

    Then I read your latest post at 7:24

    I have never said it to him but the only person who I would like to meet from this blog is Jim. To shake his hand and say thank you, but now I would have to add you to that list. On my job as a FF/Medic I met people from the street corner bum to the multi millionaire, people who make the world go around.

    I have to look at you right in the eye and ask you if you wear a white hood on the weekends ? 

    We laugh about it now and say even the devil would not want this woman, but in your writings you remind so much of my wife's grandmother. (deceased Now)  That woman hated me with a passion, not because I did anything to her, or I harmed her granddaughter in anyway but what we learned later was because when she heard my Philly accent, I was the yankee she was taught to hate.

    You have this strange hangup with gay people. I don't think a TMR blog has gone by when your not in attack mode against them, it is so clear you would rather attack then defend your own church and its clergy.

    You took a break away from the computer about a month ago. I think its already time for another one. If you live in the Philly area once all this snow clears get outside, walk around, visit a mall and you will see nobody is a threat to you or your faith unless you or only you make them a threat. 

    Like my wifes grandmother she missed out on knowing a great guy.

    • Delphin says:

      The ideological/political left, comprised of Atheists, Communists, Socialists (and most Fascists), pagans, radical homosexuals (not the sane 25% of this community that are neither leftist or deviant), anarchists, antiCatholic bigots in the 'reformed' evangelical movement, and elsewhere (Judaism, Islamism), are all fair game for me -  they get equal time, as appropriate, and according to the topic.

      Any gratuitous attack on the Church is met with fair-play turn-about, her defense is required by faithful Catholics.

      I hit back – definitely not the other cheek type (don't bother to quote holy scripture to me, your comprehension of text and context in the simplest form is astoundingly deficient).

      Funny how you only notice my defenses and/or necessary and honest offenses against the radical homosexuals' baseless assaults and tirades (aka political agenda: have you been in a coma and not noticed the attempted social restructuring and lawlessness at the federal, state and local levels of government to appease this radialized <2.5% of the population?) against the Catholic Church.

      Relate much to this particular activist group (out of all those mentioned above) that you should single them out for your defense?

      Stop sucking up to your partner-in-shame here;  'he ain't gonna give ya none of his bling', stop checking the mailbox.

      Lefties are only generous with everyone else's money-

  25. Julie says:

    Jim Robertson, You are lying about Pope Pius. So why should we believe anything else you say?

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Don't believe anything I say. I don't care. You allready had your minds (and I use that word loosely) made up. I'm just here to laugh at your hypocricy at this point.

  26. Publion says:

    On the 1st at 926AM we get another useful bit for those keeping a notebook on the Playbook: ‘Rondre’ informs us that a) she would never “stoop that low to contribute to this”. Except that she puts in the occasional content-less one-liners. But apparently to actually put some coherent and rational ideas forward (she is, after all, an educator – so she said) is either beyond her competence or would actually constitute a ‘contribution’, which – as she now says – she would never stoop so low as to actually do.


    Not only the Stampede but even the Abusenik mind is a carnival midway hall of mirrors.


    Then b) she is apparently sufficiently pleased with herself that she shall instead go “back to eatng my popcorn” [sic]. It might have been modestly more encouraging had she said she was going now to correct papers instead, or to work up next semester’s syllabus or perhaps even do some fresh reading in her field. But no – this one is quite happy eating the popcorns as is apparently her habit. As is her right.

  27. Delphin says:

    Common Core, the leftists' gift to our children-

    No wonder that it is being rejected by most [faithful] Catholic schools.

    • Dennis Ecker says:

      NOW, I do agree with you 100%. That's nasty.

      But catholic children should not have to worry about that. Do they still teach in catholic school, yes in catholic schools that it is a sin and you would go blind ?

      I sure hope these kids never get any homework. Can you imagine some kid telling the teacher the next he did not do his homework because the dog ate it.


      I think you went off the deep end.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      So some (faithless in your opinion) catholic schools use the Common Core program? How bad can it be then? If you're agin' it. It must have some very good things. Better to keep children ignorant of sex?

      First or second graders know what the f word means. They don't know that's how babies are made but trust me they know what the word means. But we should let the local "bad" kid explain shtupping to them rather than an educated grown-up? I disagree. The more healthy info kids have the less likely they are to act out. That's what the science shows.


    • Delphin says:

      It is another lie, based in hate and bigotry, that Catholic schools ever taught that masturbation caused blindness. You will not find such teaching in any Catholic school curriculum, now or ever. The curriculum then, as is now, is the moral teaching of no fornication. Period. End of topic. All else was left to parents [or age and/or program appropriate educational curriculum], as it should be.

      If you'll lie about something so easily debunked, what else will you lie about?

  28. Jim Robertson says:

    Dennis i shake your hand right here and now. Sorry you and I were forced by the church into this sad brotherhood. But i am very glad to meet you.

    • Dennis Ecker says:

      Oh Wait, now its getting good.

      Delphin is trying to tell everyone I'm a liar.

      Sister Mary a nun for the Sisters of St. Joseph at St. Jeromes "YOU WILL GO BLIND"  I remember this because us kids during recess walking around with our eyes closed laughing.

      Another way the catholic church used fear.

      You know what I did hear Delphin about the act of self pleasure. I heard the more you do it the smarter it makes you. That would make you a GENIUS.

    • Delphin says:

      Given your idol's stated propensity to 'self-pleasure', you'd best rethink that hand-shake offer.

  29. LDB says:

    LDB aka Boston Survivor, aka Learned Counsel, etc. Jim and Dennis, I wish you both well and continued healing. Don't let the zombies get you down. Love and human solidarity.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Back at you LDB.

    • Delphin says:

      Thanks to "Zombie" ideology, based in/on Judeo-Christian [capitalism-subsidarity] theology and philosophy, we're doing pretty good on the global scale (even by perhaps somewhat skewed quasi-socialist European metrics).

      You know, that same ideology/philosophy/economy that permitted you to lounge in some ivy league school system most of your adult life, or 'retire' while still in the prime of your productive life or simply pursue a life dedicated to drugs, sex and rock-n-roll for decades.

      I wonder how any of you malcontents would have fared in one of the more corrupt nations?

    • Dennis Ecker says:

      I also wish you well LDB.

      Its a hard fight but I think in the end we will win over ignorance.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Dennis in all honesty it would make me, according to your analysis of D a qenius too. I'm going to do it till I'm Einstein.(or need stronger glasses) Practice makes perfect.

    • josie says:

      Can anyone explain why LDB uses the words "continued healing" when wishing his internet friends squishy well wishes? Everything I have read of late seems to indicate that they are the same-chronically sick people that they always were-sometimes they even sound a bit worse. Furthermore, how would healing come from these drama exercises-all the movie watching, stupid quotes, the manipulation of facts, spinning, etc. Why not go to a good psycho-therapist. I don't think that the comments from these two characters really have any affect on anyone here regardless of what they think  of themselves. For the most part, they annoy everyone with their absurdity. Is that the "continued healing" process? Doesn't seem like the puffed up "we are winning" attitude works. It is delusional at the least. .   

  30. Jim Robertson says:

    I remember my grandson when i met him( he was 12. His Dad's a psychiatrist) and he very proudly told me, he knew how babies are made and that he had known it for years. ( I think he was letting me know how hip he was.) He's a good kid and so is his sister. The honesty and the communication they have with their parents is excellent. Knowledge is a good thing.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      P.S. My daughter and her husband are born again, Georgia republicans. (I didn't raise her but I love her despite those 2 things) So it's not just the lefties educating the kids properly about sex.

  31. Dennis Ecker says:


    My mother-in-law who lives in North Pole Alaska, yes there is a real North Pole Alaska is a Baptist Missionary. She runs KJNP radio station, one of those Christian radio stations. You have to tune her in one time on your computer I have to admit she is funny as can be.

    Let me know if you would like to exchange relatives for the day.You will love that Texas accent. (Only kidding I luvs my mother-in-law)

    • Jim Robertson says:

      My daughter's wonderful.

      On the protestant side of my famly are heavy duty born again baptists. My cousin ran their local christian school system. He's taught at BIOLA and so has his son. We try to convert each other. Growing up I took jesus' teachings very seriously indeed. On some level I still do. But only as a man never a god, now. That's me.

      So when I see the local liars in a full tilt lie in. I think jesus never taught them to behave like this. Who did? Not the nuns I grew up with.

    • Delphin says:

      What have we 'lied' about, exactly, specifics please?

      Only you and side-kick and few other drive-by victim-claimants and bigots make any personal claims of 'gnostism', therefore, it is your credibility in play here, not anyone else's. Others here just comment on what is presented to us, whether from TMR, other media outlets or from commenters.

      Please, for the benefit of us all; what lies have we proffered here?

  32. Publion says:

    Sometimes it's instructive to let the Abuseniks run riot with each other, just to see what they do when they are allowed to run free. Thus the recent exchanges on this thread where we are allowed to observe the fry-flies when they feel they're on a collective roll.

    Readers may recall that a while ago – when 'LDB' first began posting – I had mentioned that his comments (in addition to and perhaps because of their pattern of conceptual problems and stylistic and tonal tics) somehow seemed 'familiar'. And on the 1st at 1047PM we are informed that 'LDB' is none other than former-'Boston Survivor' and then former-'Learned Counsel'.

    This little tah-dahhhh revelation elicits the usual queasy bonhomie from the usual queasy suspects and it's a lovefest all around.

    For his incarnation as 'LDB' we got none of the posturing as a Harvard Philosophy major or a (non-trial) attorney; in comments his philosophical chops weren't very sharp and matters of law never seemed to engage his mind at all; and instead we got that weird bit about some online flight school (the problems with which were never answered) and then some marvelously and vividly contentless one-liners that had once again gotten me thinking of somebody with his baseball cap on sideways hammering at the keys in front of the screen while wrapping his lips around a straw to suck down his supersize soda.

    His multi-layered screen-names do not bother JR, we notice. As I said in prior comments, this is due to the fact that since 'LDB' agrees with him then JR doesn't have to toss-plop at 'LDB' so he doesn't need to go looking around and trawling the bottom, which is the fate JR would like to visit upon anybody who doesn't agree with him.

    All so queasy. All so informative. But as reliablely credible  narrators and competent interlocutors … not so much.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      LDB doesn't lie like you do. You lie demean deflect and attempt to decieve daily. And do it all behind anonimity. LDB has said what he does where he works and that he's been compensated. About you we know nothing. About D, we know horses are involved and a crypto fascist political outlook, Frankly, the pair of you rightfully should be ashamed of being known. If I treated people like you both do. I wouldn't be able to raise my head from shame.

      How can any normal decent catholic relate to you two. Oh that's right according to the poles they don't. remember gay marriage?

    • Delphin says:

      These are total frauds that acquire any persona that will benefit themselves most.

      Just as the victim-claimants do very much the same thing.

      Despicable imposters.

      The devil is the premier liar and imposter.

  33. Dennis Ecker says:

    An attempt to receive pity ?

    In case anyone is unaware the Archdiocese of Philadelphia on March 22nd has planned a    so-called healing Mass 

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Dennis they threw "healing masses" at us out here. The first one was led by a perpetrator. Later discovered as one. Prayers are cheap. The church is cheap. Therefore no compensation for you. they're the compensation nazis. (I know they'll accuse us as they so often have of being the real nazis here. But I've never seen a picture of a bishop giving a hiel hitler salute to us like they did to adolph. There are loads of those very real photos.

  34. Julie says:

    Anti-Catholics who were raised Catholic like to pretend that any idiotic thing a nun told them is "The Catholic Church" and was the church speaking. When someone tells you they were raised Catholic, get ready for the dumbest claim you've ever heard in your life, a la Dennis and Jim.

  35. Jim Robertson says:

    Back to healing masses for a sec, this "healing" mass routine. They obviously have a plan of offering healing masses nationally. just like they obviously had a plan for healing the perpetrators. Rest homes pensions etc.

    The only plan they do not have is one that compensates their victims.

  36. Jim Robertson says:

    Delphin, I have answered you Ugandan law points 3 times. All not printed by Dave.

    85% of Uganda is christian and half of those are catholic. (Our childhood pagan baby dollars at work no doubt,irony) And life in prison for gay acts is the law produced by these devote followers of christ?

    pope frank could order excomunication for every catholic supporting that biggotry. Immediately. He could offer asylum to every gay person in Uganda right now before they are murdered in their homes. One gay activist already has been murdered. Frank wants to pretend he's different ; better; more humble; more in touch with people. Let him go to Uganda and put a stop to the roman catholic support of hate and murder.

    • Delphin says:

      What else is the Catholic Church either responsible for in the geopolitical world, or capable of 'fixing'?

      Maybe the Russian-Ukraine crisis, or how about the ongoing murder of thousands of Christians (and others) in Syria and Iraq and others Muslim nations; perhaps the murder of millions in North Korea and China?

      Is there anything you don't blame the Church for, including your own incredibly sad choices in life?

      Do you think that no one notices that when you can't respond intelligently, you deflect and then lie?

      Think again.

  37. Publion says:

    On the 3rd at 1256AM JR has a neat and quickie explanation for his indulgence and indeed pie-eyed embrace of ‘LDB’: ‘LDB’ – ya see – “doesn’t lie like you do”. So – ya see – it isn’t that anybody who disagrees with JR must be evil and must be plopped if at all possible. No, it’s just that anybody who disagrees with JR ‘lies’ pretty much by definition. And once such persons have proven their evilness by ‘lying’, well then JR is of course justified in his honest outrage and victimized indignation to do whatever it takes to strike at the evil! (Cue the heroic trumpets.)


    Neat. In the sense of a clinical symmetry.


    And can JR demonstrate – or has JR ever demonstrated – by accurate quotation any such “lie”? He has not.


    But he will quickly try to move us beyond that uncongenial point by going straight for the “anonymity” bit – although he has just locked-virtual-lips with an admitted triple-anonymous commenter.


    We are well into the rabbit hole here.


    JR says that “about [me] we know nothing”. Actually – since material reveals its author rather substantivelyy – any reader knows quite a bit about me from my ideas (and ditto about JR and the rest of the Abusenik orchestra). But – of course – “ideas” are not what plop-tossing Abuseniks want to know; they are not competent with ideas and they are not interested in ideas and in the Anderson Strategies and the Stampede they have found a niche where ideas are positively not-required and are even discouraged. JR doesn’t want to “know” ideas; JR wants to “know” plop because that’s the medium in which this artiste works and dwells.


    As far as his wondering as to how “any normal decent catholic” can “relate to” me, I think we can leave that hypothetical for “any normal decent catholic” – which by his own admission is a class that does not include JR himself. Not hardly.


    As for the irrelevant comment about gay marriage, of what use is it here to know what the Poles think?

    • Jim Robertson says:

      The use of poles to find out what the majority of catholics do and or think should be of paramount importance to democratically oriented catholics. Or does everything come from the top down in catholicism?( Everything but taking responsibility for the system that enabled rapists to rape again and again and again. This was the criminal flaw in your systems behavior. This is the fatal flaw in your behavior, denial of the truth of your church's criminally horrific behavior) Stick your head in the sand if you must; but to expect the world to do it with you, is nuts

  38. Jim Robertson says:

    P, your whole take on this situation is a lie. Your whole presence here is a lie.(you won't even say who you are) Pretending you support justice is a lie as well. You want information about our cases, our proof? Ask your church. They have all the cases. Demand all those cases be shown in detail. You've paid for them. (the few you've compensated). Find out why we were paid.

    You pretend victims have no proof of our rapes? Prove that. Where are your false claims? When will you compensate your raped?

  39. Jim Robertson says:

    "Locked lips" is a lie, naming just one of your pantheon of tall tales.  "Locked lips' never happened. Never happened = LIE! Therefor P = LIAR.

    Misson accomplished. Anything else I can do for ya'?

  40. Publion says:

    Well, JR’s problems continue to reveal themselves.

    On the 4th at 1045AM we discover – as best I can infer – that all along JR meant ‘polls’ (rather than Poles or ‘poles’ (this latter perhaps a spill-over from some other of his preoccupations). But a poll – like a survey – is an iffy thing: their validity can be compromised in many ways, not the least of which being a) a skewing in the selection of who is going to be polled or b) inaccurate or untruthful answers by those polled. For serious matters and serious information, polls and surveys are utterly unreliable. (Of course, if you already know what you want the poll or survey to reveal – why then a poll or survey may be the very thing for your purposes.)

    JR’s bits about Catholicism and democracy are there for any reader who considers them worthwhile.

    However, JR warns all readers that if they don’t buy what he is offering here, then they live with their heads in the sand. We have been warned.

    And he concludes with that diagnosis of “nuts”, which merely serves to remind folks of the never-distant reality of that concept whenever JR is in the room.

    Then on the 4th at 1056AM JR explains his “lie” comment by – waitttttt for ittttttt – merely repeating his assertion. Pitch-perfect. Or perhaps he would like us to infer that since everything I say (“your whole take”) “is a lie”, then poor JR just wouldn’t know where to begin with all the “lies” – so he will simply stick to repeating his continually unsupported assertions, claims, epitheticals and so on.

    But he also tries to bolster this play-dough position by repeating that I “won’t even say” who I am – although for triple-hider ‘LDB’ such a lack of information did not deter for a moment JR from the online lip-lock. Perhaps if my “whole presence here is a lie”, then JR’s whole presence here is a diagnosis … something like that.

    And in regard to “proof” and “evidence” JR simply repeats yet again the brush-off: “Ask your church … They have all the cases”. Well, see, those cases were put under seal at the demand of the torties (which I imagine is where JR’s case is also nicely hidden now). So – and are we to infer that JR didn’t know this when he wrote this comment here? – none of the information on the stories, claims, allegations, and so on is accessible. The torties, on behalf of their story-tellers – have made sure of it. And thus JR and a whole bunch of other story-tellers are the one most truly “hidden” from us here.

    Nor do I “pretend” that “victims have no proof of our rapes”; I point out that there is no proof and that instead there is the ever-increasing probability that there never was any proof. Perhaps it is JR who is pretending that they do have proof.

    And since it was the accusers/allegants who initiated the claim, then –and this must be repeated yet again – the burden of proof is on them to prove that it happened as they claimed.

    What very little JR knows, he has picked up from the Playbook, and that Cartoon literature was flawed from the get-go and remains so.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      But we have proof. I have proof. I'll send you his stained underwear. Shall I? I kept them. We all kept everything: the kleenex , the torn clothes, they are all here and available for inspection any time you are ready. They are in our minds. burned into them. The smells; the tastes; the fear. We can give the evidence of our memories. When we tell what happened people believe us. Just because we tell the truth. You might try that sometime.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Those cases were not put under seal of anything by either side here. We can tell what happened to us where ever we like. That's another reason why SNAP exists that those reports of the specifics of our rapes, should never be seen. Remember their fight in Missouri over releasing records of victims? Who benefits from that victims or church?

  41. Jim Robertson says:

    Sorry about the spelling.Polls. Writing is not my forte. I haven't done much till now. And frankly a homophone isn't the end of the world.

  42. Publion says:

    On the 4th at 1118AM we see JR at it again: he mis-quotes and then goes on from that false starting-point. The phrases I used included the words “virtual” and “online” – clearly putting the comment into the metaphorical, since it is taken as given then in a “virtual” or “online” scenario, there is no actual physical contact. And so the comment was metaphorical, and metaphorically “it” did happen, as is evident from a reading of the material itself.


    However, this 1118AM comment provides an opportunity to more closely observe the “logic” involved in JR’s “liar” bits.


    The ‘logic’ goes this way:


    JR is totally a truth-teller;


    Therefore any material that disagrees with JR is not-truth;


    Not-truth equals “lie”;


    Therefore anybody who disagrees with JR is a liar.


    Tah-dahhhhhh! All  so nice and neat.


    While this ‘logic’ will not elicit the professional admiration of a logician or a philosopher, it will most certainly evoke a twinge of recognition in certain types of clinicians.

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Really when did I become the subject. You a shrink? No I didn't think so. My logic is very sound, thank you. You don't like it , who cares? And you are not the subject here either.  You lied about" lip lock", that's one.

      The issue is: why do you call all cases false when you have no proof at all to back u up? You want to pretend your being singled out in some anti catholic showdown with satan, swell! Just don't expect the rest of the world to go along with that pov.. Are you just trying to convince catholics that they are being persecuted? If that's what this site is all about, is it working? Are you making headway with that line?


  43. Publion says:

    In regard to JR’s comment of the 5th at 1232AM: let us not imagine how JR might still be in personal possession of what was, it would seem, a vital piece of evidence.


    “We all kept everything” – referring to a group of students in his particular case or school? And they all a) were able to obtain materials from their ‘perp’, and yet even with such evidence they all didn’t think to report this to the police or anybody’s parents until the Stampede came along? And b) they were allowed to keep the evidence for personal purposes? Readers may consider all this as they will.


    Or is it that JR was only speaking figuratively and actually all the evidence is – marvelously – “in our minds”, where – like the ‘spectral evidence’ of 1692 – it has been all along? That seems to be what he’s going for here, reinforced then by the statement that “we can give the evidence of our memories” – precisely the theory behind ‘spectral evidence’ in the witchcraft era trials. But at least it seems that none of the ‘memories’ were ‘repressed’.


    Then the concluding refrain about truth-telling to cap this number and provide a snappy exit from the stage.


    Then a few minutes later at 1238AM JR claims that “those cases were not put under seal of anything by either side here”. If he is referring to Catholic Abuse cases generally, then he contradicts federal judge Schiltz. And readers may consider whom they might choose to find credible – JR or the federal judge.


    If – however – he is actually telling us that the settlement and documentation from that (and his) 500-plus Plaintiff case from LA half a decade and more ago is not under any agreement for secrecy or confidentiality, then why – after all this time – has he not simply given us some of the actual documentation – such as, to keep things simple – that part of the Complaint that contains his own sworn statement of the allegations and the claim? Wouldn’t that be nice?


    And then he sort-of almost reinforces that by claiming that “we can tell what happened to us where ever we like”. Which actually doesn’t quite cover the point in question here: can he actually provide the documentation? He has already ‘told’ us (several times and in several versions) but the court papers – if not under any restrictions at all – would be a big help.


    Then he pulls in the SNAP episode where – readers may recall – SNAP refused to turn over “records” and instead Marci Hamilton (if memory serves) simply dropped the matter. But a) the SNAP records would have been about SNAP’s interactions with ‘victims’, and would not cover the actual court filings. And b) are we now to believe that JR turned over to SNAP all of his materials and evidence?


    SNAP would not, I will say, have the court filings but would instead have whatever records it kept of interactions with this and that ‘victim’. Those records might be interesting indeed, but not for any immediate purposes here on this thread.


    Who would benefit by SNAP turning over its records (such as they might be)? Certainly not the ‘victims’ if the primary thrust of the material was simply recitation of the stories (before the tortie staffs got to the stories for some burnishing preparatory to filing a Complaint) and discussions as to where and how to find a good tortie; it would not be in any allegants’ interests to see those come to light. Anyway, if SNAP is – as it somewhat dubiously claimed – legally covered as a ‘rape counseling or crisis center’, then those records are indeed restricted by statute, at least in some States.


    Then a few minutes after that, at 1241AM JR once again tells us that “writing is not my forte”. And yet he was allegedly a grade-A student (except in the math and science where he was not doing well in the subject taught by the cleric he then accused). Are we to believe that in addition to all the many other possible derangements theoretically consequent upon an experience of abuse, one loses the ability to spell? And if he was a rapidly-promoted clerical staffer in the Army (dealing with no less a vital set of documents than those relating to passports and official travel documents) as he has told us, then clearly he would have been able to spell rather coherently for that stint, it would seem. Or is that also not so?


    Typos and some amount of a spelling problem are indeed not “the end of the world”. But if such a problem is perhaps a put-on, then – as I have said before – the spelling issue does raise a rather substantial question about reliability and – not to put too fine a point on it – ‘truth-telling’ in general here.

  44. Publion says:

    In regard to JR's of the 5th at 601PM, I'm simply going to recommend it to readers as 'classic JR' and leave it with them for their further enlightenment and amusement.

  45. Publion says:

    But also: it's hard to know if JR had read my comment of the 5th at 435PM before he put up his of the 5th at 601PM. When I put up my immediately prior comment here a few minutes ago, I had presumed he hadn't and I was simply going with the whackness of the material in the comment itself.

    But the alternative is that he had read mine of 435PM and then his of 601PM then assumes a rather more acute character: in light of all the substantial points raised, flowing from his own claims and assertions, his only comeback is to whine about wondering how he ahs suddenly "become the subject here" …

    Then he tries to distract further from the vital conceptual issues and questions by snark about whether I am "a shrink" (his answer: he "didn't think so" – but what, really, does he know? he no more knows whether I am or am not a shrink than he knows that the other Abuseniks who post here are or are not genuine victims).

    And lastly he then tries to distract from the major questions flowing from his recent spate of comments (the 500-Plainitff AOLA case is not under any secrecy stipulations being the most significant) by yet again plop-tossing a JR-created misquote of my material and then trying to make a red-herring out of that.

    So: No, we're not making much "headway" with the content of JR's material. But I think the answer to the question of his credibility becomes clearer every time he hits the keyboard.


  46. Jim Robertson says:

    I was an A student. I did receive a full scholarship to the high school where I was raped. and i spell for shitski. And…..? So what?

  47. Jim Robertson says:

    Only you can get your church off the hook; and that's by doing right by your victims. You've killed people with your neglect. You've killed innocent children who trusted you and the system you support. When do you intend to compensate your victims?

  48. Publion says:

    On the 6th at 1141AM, we get nothing but more distraction.


    If JR was an A student and on scholarship (though not doing well in math and science, as the material from his own case's document cache indicated last summer) then he would have had to know how to spell (one doesn't do really well in English or Lit or Comp without that ability). So how is it that after being an A-student and a rapidly-promoted military passport clerk he now apparently cannot spell? This was the problem I had noted in prior comments.

    As for the red herring about why or how he has suddenly become the focus at this point: he makes comments chock full of assertions and claims and stories and those assertions and claims and stories raise questions and that's how his material becomes the focus of some attention.

    And since his credibility (or lack of it) has a great deal to do with how readers assess his assertions and claims and stories, then it's a relevant matter.

    And what's today's story about yesterday's claim about the restrictions or non-restrictions on the 500 Plaintiff case material? Has JR made any headway on how he's going to handle that one?


    • Jim Robertson says:

      Really? Really? Spelling makes literature? tell that to Chaucer; Shakespeare and Joyce.

      That's all you've got?


  49. Jim Robertson says:

    pope Fantastic Frank takes your line about falsely accused priests. They are so much more important than raped catholic children aren't they?. And there are so many of them according to you. Make a list for me will you?

  50. Publion says:

    If this exchange is getting rather repetitive for readers, it is for me too. But we are dealing with the deployment of the Playbook gambits, and they can tend to the repetitive – especially when it’s either the Playbook or face-up-to the issues and questions.


    Thus at 534PM on the 6th JR will latch onto the (very relevant) spelling issue, but only to discuss literature (as in Chaucer and Shakespeare and Joyce). But not – of course – to discuss the rather gaping discrepancy in the various bits of his story.  I wasn’t discussing JR’s eligibility for possible inclusion in the canon of English literature; I was discussing the rather substantive issue of whether one can ‘forget’ how to spell well (because of the traumatic effect of the ‘abuse’, of course), or whether one could be an “A-student” and a rapidly-promoted military passport official without being able to spell well.


    But we notice that there’s nothing at all aboard the 524PM from JR to address that, and also nothing about the pretty huge question as to whether – as he asserted – the 500-Plaintiff settlement documents are in any way restricted or not.


    But – in best Playbook style – in order to go out on a strong note (exaggerated formatting and all) JR will repeat a question that has been demonstrated to be legally nonsensical several times on this thread alone: the burden of proof is on the accuser (or allegant or story-teller) to demonstrate proof. And in just about all of the abuse settlements, that’s a) precisely what we have not gotten and b) may very well not ever get since the documents were so often restricted at the behest of the torties on behalf of the Plaintiffs (who, it would seem, clearly do not want their stories told – and examined).


    I doubt we’ll see much more progress on any of these points and questions. And I also think we are getting to the bottom of the Playbook barrel when it comes to distractions, evasions, and diversions.


  1. [...] Kyle Smith Why Can’t Christians Make Better Films Than This? – David Ives, Aleteia NYTimes Laurie Goodstein Slams Bishop Finn – David F. Pierre Jr., TMR The Stakes at Synod? Communion for Divorced & Remarried [...]