Over the years, Nancy Pelosi has been a staunch supporter of abortion rights, gay marriage, and assisted suicide. I tend to disagree with her, but I do agree with her stances on those issues. With that said, I find it hard to believe that someone with these views could present themselves as a devout Catholic. The last time I checked, the Catholic Church was strongly opposed to abortion, assisted suicide, and gay marriage.

I’m trying to figure out if Nancy Pelosi’s inconsistency is due to her ignoring the differences between church doctrine and her voting record in an attempt to be everything to everyone, or is due to a lack of intellect. With Madame Speaker, either one is possible.

Let’s get this straight: Patrick Kennedy thinks the United States should leave Afghanistan and allow it to sink into even greater chaos? Sharp guy.

There are certainly more competent candidates to challenge Scott Brown, but if Kennedy does challenge Brown, it would automatically become one of the most competitive races in the country. The question isn’t if Kennedy will pursue the seat, but when.

“If you think there’s magic out there and things can be turned around overnight, then you would vote for someone who could promise you that, like Scott Brown,” Kennedy said. “If you don’t, if you know that it takes eight years for George Bush and his cronies to put our country into this hole … then you know we have a lot of digging to do, but some work needs to be done and this president’s in the process of doing it and we need to get Marcia Coakley to help him to do that.”

(Curiously, Kennedy mentioned Coakley repeatedly during his remarks to reporters, each time referring to her as “Marcia,” not “Martha.”)

Could someone tell him that her name is Martha? Maybe no one did, since they figured he would know her name, considering that she is Massachusetts’ Attorney General, and according to Kennedy, a great candidate who will do a great job. Doesn’t it make you wonder how he doesn’t even know her name, yet he knows she could do a great job?

Patrick Kennedy is the perfect example of someone who gets by solely on his family name. With an anti-incumbent sentiment spreading across the nation, disgust with the Democrat’s thirst for bigger government, and a strong Republican candidate, Patrick Kennedy might be looking at his last term in Congress

If you would like to help rid Congress of Patrick Kennedy, please visit the website of his opponent, John Loughlin. He’s an exceptionally strong candidate, and worthy of your help.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Bishop Thomas Tobin appeared on “Hardball” to discuss his decision to ask Rhode Island Congressman Patrick Kennedy to refrain from receiving Holy Communion. The funny thing is that Thomas Tobin is criticized in this clip, even though Patrick Kennedy began this nonsense by criticizing the Catholic Church’s stance on abortion, then brought up a conversation he had with the Bishop 2 years ago, when he was asked not to receive Communion.

In the interview, Chris Matthews seems thoroughly confused. Part of it may be due to him attempting to reconcile his prochoice stance with his life as a Catholic. He continually criticizes the Bishop and essentially demeans him by asking how he would write particular laws, and attempts to make him look incompetent.

Unfortunately, Chris Matthews misses the big picture. He is right in saying that Patrick Kennedy’s voting record is none of the Church’s business. His error is in not realizing that his life as a Catholic certainly is fair game. Besides being prochoice, Kennedy supports legislation that would increase the availability of abortion. These actions run counter to Catholic teachings and the Church has every right to call someone out for not following their faith. When you present yourself as a member of a particular faith, you’re essentially voicing acceptance of their beliefs.

This topic is actually quite interesting to me. I was raised as a Catholic, but I am staunchly prochoice, I support gay marriage, and I’m against open borders. All three of those views are at odds with the Catholic Church. These positions, along with theological reasons, have led me away from the Catholic Church. I don’t present myself as a Catholic, and I don’t expect the Catholic Church to conform to my world view, or to accept my views. If you don’t believe what you are supposed to believe, then how can you be a believer? This seems obvious to the Bishop and I. It’s unfortunate that Patrick Kennedy and his conflicted friends aren’t able to understand.

I’m amused by how many people present themselves as Catholics, then live their lives counter to the church’s teachings. You shouldn’t be able to pick and choose which aspects of a religion you like, and which aspects you don’t. If a particular religion doesn’t suit your particular view of the world, then find another one. For too many, their religion is nothing but a habit. If that’s the case, isn’t it better to just stop attending mass and stop living a lie?

I was raised Catholic, but I have serious disagreements with many of the church’s teachings. Unfortunately, you can often find parishioners who don’t make any attempt to be a good Catholic, they just go through the motions. Patrick Kennedy is a good example. Here’s an elected official who supports abortion rights and fights to make abortions more acessible. My problem isn’t with his views on abortion (I’m pro-choicee), it’s with people who strive to make those views consistent with their Catholic religion. Sorry, it can’t be done.

Ideally, we would see Bishop Tobin’s actions duplicated with other pblic officials. Too many politicians try to be everything to everyone. They present themselves as a religious individual, then support ideas that are in opposition to what they profess to believe. Hopefully, Bishop Tobin’s actions will be a first step in calling out the hypocrites and bringing some thought into the public sphere.

Here’s a clip of Rhode Island Congressman Patrick Kennedy, who makes me think of the following line: “It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.” Kennedy seems to feel that any opposition to illegal immigration makes an individual a racist, then takes issue with the word “alien.” Just in case there are any pro-illegal immigration advocates reading this, here is the formal definition of “alien”:

1. a resident born in or belonging to another country who has not acquired citizenship by naturalization (distinguished from citizen ).
2. a foreigner.
3. a person who has been estranged or excluded.
4. a creature from outer space; extraterrestrial.

Since Patrick likes to quote movies during House committee meetings, perhaps he only knew about the fourth definition and thought you had to be a little green person from a far away galaxy. Although, he would probably also oppose unfairly labeling little green people.

Those who support illegal aliens and open borders bring up bigotry and skin color to scare people into silence. They try to frighten people into silence by labeling them a racist if they oppose illegal immigration. Sure, you can support legal immigration and oppose illegal immigration, but to liberals like Patrick Kennedy, it doesn’t matter. They conveniently drop the word “illegal” and paint the views of their opponents with a broad, untrue brush. It’s intellectually dishonest, but then again, Patrick Kennedy is no intellectual, and I don’t find him to be a particularly straight-forward person.