For the fourth time in recent months, I will post an update on the Democratic Presidential field which has expanded as well as contracted since the last update of this nature. As of this writing, it is at 13 candidates.{1} Here is a brief list of those who have dropped in and dropped out so far:


In the Race -Listed By Declaration Date:

John Delaney (July 28, 2017)
Andrew Yang (November 6, 2017)
Tulsi Gabbard (January 11, 2019)
Corey Booker (February 1, 2019)
Elizabeth Warren (February 9, 2019)
Amy Klobuchar (February 10, 2019)
Bernie Sanders (February 19, 2019)
Pete Buttigieg (April 14, 2019)
Joe Biden (April 25, 2019)
Michael Bennett (May 2, 2019)

Tom Steyer (July 19, 2019)

Deval Patrick (November 14, 2019)
Michael Bloomberg (November 24, 2019)


Out of the Race -Listed By Suspension Date:

Richard Ojeda (January 25, 2019)
Eric Swalwell (July 8, 2019)
Mike Gravel (August 6, 2019)
John Hinckenlooper (August 15, 2019)
Jay Inslee (August 21, 2019)
Seth Moulton (August 23, 2019)
Kirsten Gillibrand (August 28, 2019)
Bill de Blasio (September 20, 2019)
Tim Ryan (October 24, 2019)

Beto O'Rourke (November 1, 2019)

Wayne Messam (November 19, 2019)

Joe Sestak (December 1, 2019)

Steve Bullock (December 2, 2019)

Kamala Harris (December 3, 2019)

Julian Castro (January 2, 2020)
Marianne Williamson (January 9, 2020)

Note:

{1} Well technically there are others but the above listed ones are the only ones with a snowballs chance in hell of being nominated.

Points to Ponder:

[T]hose who have comments boxes are capable of manipulating the content there to suit their own agenda including banning people who raise strong enough arguments against the "prevailing orthodoxy" at a given weblog. You would be surprised at how often those who laud their "willingness to interact with others" will put censors on their comments boxes that would make the monitors at Pravda in the days of the old Soviet Union blush and as we do not believe in unnecessary censorship, that means we would inexorably leave out there potentially a variety of assertions that our lack of time to respond to would give the unintended perception of being "unanswerable" by us. Those are the main reasons for our refusal to use comments boxes in a nutshell. [Excerpt from Rerum Novarum (circa December 1, 2008)]

There's a place in the world for the angry young man
With his working class ties and his radical plans
He refuses to bend, he refuses to crawl
He's always at home with his back to the wall
And he's proud of his scars and the battles he's lost
And he struggles and bleeds as he hangs on the cross
And he likes to be known as the angry young man

Give a moment or two to the angry young man
With his foot in his mouth and his heart in his hand
He's been stabbed in the back, he's been misunderstood
It's a comfort to know his intentions are good
And he sits in a room with a lock on the door
With his maps and his medals laid out on the floor
And he likes to be known as the angry young man

I believe I've passed the age of consciousness and righteous rage
I found that just surviving was a noble fight
I once believed in causes too
I had my pointless point of view
And life went on no matter who was wrong or right

And there's always a place for the angry young man
With his fist in the air and his head in the sand
And he's never been able to learn from mistakes
So he can't understand why his heart always breaks
But his honor is pure and his courage as well
And he's fair and he's true and he's boring as hell
And he'll go to the grave as an angry old man
[Billy Joel]

Points to Ponder:

It is probably not possible to filter out all elements of gonzoism from one's work but the idea of falsifying facts and events is not ethical as far as I am concerned. Unfortunately, such things are common among journalists these days. Another annoyance is the common approach these days of before asking a question prefacing it with a mini-editorial of sorts which is presented as if it is the truth when in reality it is often just a showcase of the journalist's own biases. [Circa October 17, 2008]

The following is a posting to Pete Vere's Patheos website Orthodoxy In Communion With Rome and my response to it circa April of 2018. Some material that was in the process of either pre-publication revision at the time,{1} projects in composition at the time{2}, or was an idea only for a future project at most are in retrospect inferred in my words below.{3} Nonetheless...

Time for a New Catholic Apologetics Movement? Four Ideas for Renewal

We discussed this very subject a while back ago if memory serves and much of what you write above looks familiar. Though dropping terms like "Protestant" and "Protestants" was not specifically discussed, I nonetheless agree with what you wrote on this. (Its also why I think as a rule all generalized terminology should be avoided.)

One important idea to add to your list of four is addressing a serious defect of no small magnitude in almost all apologetics circles I have observed over the years; namely, the actual study and conscious inculcation of the principles outlined in the Catholic spiritual tradition. I concluded a long time ago that if Catholic spirituality principles were studied prior to anything else, it would fix so much of what is wrong with not only the apologetics movement but with general online communication as well. (Not to mention the adversarial predisposition towards conflict so inherent in almost all who involve themselves to any degree in apologetics would be significantly reduced!)

Notes:

{1} I have in mind here the three threads pertaining to the so-called Correctio Filialis.

{2} I have in mind here among other things the thread on the infallibility of the canonization of saints.

{3} Around the time I penned those words, I had a project in mind that will be published in about eight weeks time. It was I believe around the time of June of 2018 when drafting my inaugural piece for the aborted WherePeterIs collaboration when I first mentioned privately intending to write on the subjects of dialogue and on the magisterium. The aforementioned inaugural piece was published to WPI on June 16, 2018 and can be read HERE.

Briefly on Vigano:

My words are in regular font.

nowhere does Fr. Angel point out what Vigano says is not true

That is a pretty loaded statement since Vigano has said a lot of things. The goal of Fr. Angel's posting would seem to be not to go through the scroll of various things that Vigano said but to instead point out a common theme to Vigano's entire approach that underscores its lack of authenticity. I can understand how those for whom Vigano seems to be the sun around which their world rotates would find that sort of stuff sticking in their craw but that is neither here nor there.

Fact of the matter is, whatever flaws Abp Vigano has, what he says about Pope Francis is true

This was dealt with back in 2018 when the grave defect of Vigano's original "testimony" was pointed out by yours truly. Also revealed not long thereafter were his true motivations.{1} Furthermore, they were revealed in his own words verbatim but conveniently ignored by the cultists circulating his manifestos.

But as we saw then and likely will continue to now, those engaging in #Viganolatry have shown themselves to be as impervious to reason and logic where he is concerned as any conspiracy theorist and for many of the same fundamental reasons. Also worth noting is the #Viganolators parallel to the dyspeptic AlSheadas of the world and revealing the same spiritual defects.

and that is what really grates on his defenders

Actually, the ones that really seem to have a burr in their saddle that really grates them are the #Viganolators who have sought to defend every utterance of Vigano as if it is inspired and have sought to move the goalposts regularly when certain statements of Vigano were shown to be either false or otherwise misleading. It is too bad because these antics sully any possible valid points he may have raised but I digress.

Note:

{1} For example, many of those pushing Vigano think he was speaking up courageously about the sexual abuse stuff and its coverup but Vigano himself admitted that his real motivations were anything but.

Why the Seahawks’ Jadeveon Clowney and Ezekiel Ansah duo could be a nightmare in the playoffs

Thanks For Asking I Appreciate It

Kenneth Arthur's tenure as lead writer for Field Gulls is coming to an end because of that stupid California law AB5 that takes effect this year.

Briefly...

For those discussing current national budgetary issues, there were trillion dollar deficits under the system pre-Trump. (How do you think the debt doubled under Obama much as it doubled under Bush?) Cutting taxes changes investment behavior in beneficial ways that raise more revenue over time. The real problem is we have no mechanism in place to kneecap government from just spending the excess and then some.

We need mandatory sequestration that cuts 5-10% from every budget item every year until there is balance to within the rate of inflation. Pick a percent and apply it to everything, no sacred cows spared. Until that happens, its all Kabuki theater and deficits and debt will continue to grow.