7 Rules to Know Before Going on US TV News Programs.

During the crisis of the Church I appeared on MSNBC several times, including Hardball up against Mike Barnicle, CNN with Aaron Brown up against Margery Eagan and on MSNBC again up against local politician Warren Tolman. I have also been on several local venues. Uniquely, the program from which I got the most reaction was the Late David Brudnoy’s radio program on WBZ-AM 1030 even more than CNN or MSNBC.

What are the rules for appearing on these programs:

I will use Providence, RI Bishop Tobin's appearance on Hardball in 2009 as a model.

1. Understand the Venue

You are sitting somewhere in a studio and all your communication is through the earpiece. You are not having a face to face conversation as it appears. You are looking directly into a faceless camera and often alone in a dark, sound proof booth. The image behind you is added electronically, so it really is not there.

Any video feed available for you to watch yourself is delayed several seconds, making watching it while talking confusing and best done only by the most skilled of professionals. Besides, if you really want to focus on the conversation you need to ignore the video altogether and focus on what is coming out of the earpiece. There is no visual human interaction and in that light you are really not aware of what you look like on TV. The proverbial comedy sketch where people can paint electronic mustaches on your image or make stupid comments without you know it is very possible, but professionally forbidden.

Part of that venue is that you are auditioned by the producer before you go on the air. They want to know what your position is and will ask you several questions, don't think that is casual, you are being audition to see if you fit. Notice, these programs are designed to go a certain way and not your way.

2. The Host Holds All the Cards:
If you look at the Hardball interview, notice that Matthews clearly has the strategic advantage. He knows what he will ask, what direction he will go, what directions he can change and you have no idea of these plans. You also don’t know what the producer may be saying to him in his ear. If you are not prepared you can become a sitting duck.

If you look at the Hardball interview, you can see that Chris Matthews does ask some hard but apropos questions, but then falls into lecturing Bishop Tobin. Usually, there are two guests with opposing views, but in this case, this is just Matthews and the Bishop of Rhode Island. Matthew does a common trick on these programs, by speaking over the Bishop and by filibustering his ability to respond. Matthews completely controls the conversation. At one point Matthews and Tobin begin speaking simultaneously on three false starts, Matthews stops and tells the Bishop to speak and then goes and filibusters him anyway. That is the way Matthews works.

3. Never Talk Directly to the Host:
Bishop Tobin makes this mistake. He tries to answer Matthews' questions directly. Never, never, never do that on these programs. The reason why this is a major faux pas is simple. Matthews represents the audience and when he speaks and asks questions he does so as their representative. Since the focus of the whole encounter is really the audience, not the host; the guest on the program should answer them not the host. Matthews asks about what laws the Bishop would pass if he was in Kennedy’s shoes, he then puts the Bishop in one those "Do you still beat your wife?" positions. He asks if Bishop Tobin would put a woman in jail for procuring an abortion. Matthews later admits that this was a trap, by telling the bishop that if he said yes to his question, people would laugh at him. The Bishop needed to answer Matthews' question, by saying what he was trying to get across to his audience, not by addressing Matthews directly.

i.e. "The question Chris is not whether or not a woman should be a jail, it is what rights are upheld in this country and aren’t we actually talking about here not a woman's right to choose but the government's right to decide who can and cannot be born? When did we give this government that right? That is what they do in China!" Of course, Matthews would have filibustered the answer but it takes the question which Matthews is lobbing into a Church frame so he can tell the Bishop to stay in church and fires it back reframing it in a secular manner.

4. A Good Offense is a Good Defense:
Never walk into these studios to defend your position, but to proclaim it. If the host leads you back and says words to the effect of that is not my question or that is not what I am saying, you respond with "that is the question, that is what I am saying." The point is to reverse the pressure and again proclaim your position. You can never be in a defensive position, you always have to be on the offense, because the minute you go into the defensive position you are dead. Notice, Matthews' position is all offense. He is not defending Rep. Kennedy he is attacking the Bishop.

What is the name of this program? Isn’t it Hardball? If you are going to be on Hardball, play Hardball. Matthews used a statement that I use occasionally and people know that when I use it they are in trouble. “I have asked that question three times and you still have not answered it . . .” He was playing Hardball. For the Bishop to play Hardball he could have said "Either you are going to let me answer the question you asked me or you aren’t, if not then we are wasting each others’ time." But remember I am Monday Morning quarterbacking.

5. Know When to Speak Spiritually:
When a Catholic talks spiritually, the news reporter has no clue what to do with that. Use that when you need to say something, but you do not want to give your host anything to work with. I used this tactic with many reporters. I also used the tactic on Bill O'Reilly's Radio Show. The producer begged me to go on the program. I warned her that I would only speak spiritually and that is all I did. O'Reilly did not know how to address it.

I should note something here. I have a respect for Bill O'Reilly but during the crisis I had some serious concerns. We learned of a movement to silence the voice of the Church by using the tactics of Saul Alinsky. Among those involved were people associated with the Harvard Kennedy School of Government and O'Reilly is an alumnus of that school. I learned this after I appeared on his radio show and before I was asked to be on his TV show. I refused to appear on the TV show for that reason. I was not sure he was not part of that movement. I have since learned that despite his alma mater, he did not participate in the action that others associated with the Kennedy School did in attempting to stage a coup of the Catholic Church. But, I was not going to support anyone who was part of that movement.

Finally, I believe that O'Reilly treated the Bishop fairly when he was on his program recently. He did not hand him softballs at all, but he was fair.

By the way, I was never again called by MSNBC after I told them I was going to focus on spiritual topics. "Oh," said the producer, "we will call you when we start doing that, whenever that will be." That should tell you something. Why would a producer call a cleric if he or she did not want a spiritual focus?

6. You Can Always Say No:
Why do you need to be on these programs? Do you have an important message, a book to sell, an event that could use some free advertising. If not, why are you allowing yourself to be used by these people? I appeared on the programs to put a positive spin on the Church when the media was trying to tear it up and when members of a movement were using the Alinsky tactics to silence it. Once I had accomplished that goal, there was no longer a need to return to the circuit, unless I want to sell a book.

I have other work to do and that is to spread the message of God among those open to it. Remember the warning of Jesus, "Do not throw pearls to swine." Be aware of doing just that by appearing on such programs if you are not prepared. If you want to appear on a talk show, focus on those in Catholic circles where people are more receptive to what you have to say. My most recent appearances discussing the issue of the persecution of Catholics was on Gus Lloyd's Seize the Day program on the Catholic Channel on SiriusXM. This Catholic audience was my focus and the Catholic Channel was the venue to use it. I am also very proud of appearing on Amanha Viva with Adriano Moraes on Canção Nova television in Brazil. I have since become part of the order that runs that television network.

7. Don't Believe Your Own Press:
I never watched myself on television after an appearance. I did not want to get into believing my press. I said what I said and I left it alone. I never critiqued it, I just moved on. Don't focus on a media appearance, treat as you would a real conversation. You can't go back and review your days conversations, don't do so with a media appearance. Just let it be and move on to your more important work, spreading the gospel.

I am not sure if Bishop Tobin will be on television in the near future, but for anyone else, may I encourage these rules and allow you to follow them if you end up on any media appearance, whether that be Hardball or the local cable access channel.

Does Jesus Accept You Just As You Are? Nope!

Many people will celebrate that Jesus accepts them just as they are; the problem is He doesn't. Indeed, He does not accept me just as I am. For many, this may shock them. "But I thought the all loving Jesus loves me as I am." He loves you, but does not accept you just as you are. That is the difference. This is what confuses people especially those who get their theology from the secular media. It is not what you find in the Bible, nor in the tradition of the Catholic Church.

How does this play itself in our own lives. Well, first you see the principle in your own lives everyday. Do you have a friend that is walking down a path to disaster or just a path that you find tenuous? You may love your friend, but you do not love the path he or she is walking down. You are worried for this person you care about. You love him or her, but you do not accept your friend unconditionally, because if you do then you would be enabling this person into what you perceive is disaster. This same principle plays itself also in our relationship with Jesus.

Jesus cannot accept you just as you are, because, I would assume that you have not reached the highest level of holiness in your life. He will always call you to a holier life to turn from sin and draw closer to his presence in our lives. He cannot do this if by chance He accepts you unconditionally the way you are.

Recently, I read on a blog of a person who attends a Catholic Church where she learned that Jesus accepts her just as she is. The person feels fully accepted by Jesus but also boasts living a lifestyle that is contrary to Catholic morality. The blogger is also a non-believer, a non-Catholic and even a non-
Christian. The obvious question is why is that person in a Catholic Church.

Jesus calls us to daily conversion and repentance and to grow daily in holiness. When we celebrate an attitude and a way of life that sees no call for repentance and no call to grow in holiness then we are ultimately not listening to Jesus. We become like people looking to buy hamburgers in an office supply store that sells "staples". Why are we there? If we find what we are looking for then we should be wary of it, just as I would be careful of eating a hamburger surrounded by boxes of staples.

There are other people whom Jesus outright rejected, even though He loved them. He called the pharisees children of the devil. His betrayer, He warned, would be better off never being born. He talked about people who would be better off with a millstone around their neck being cast into sea. He did not respond to two people who spoke to Him. He said He wants to vomit people who are lukewarm. In every case, He was dealing with people whom He did not accept just as they are, because they showed no inclination to allow him to enter their hearts nor to allow His love to change their hearts and to grow closer to Him. He loved each and in that love called each to repentance and holiness. When He was rebuffed he had no choice but to accept none. Those whom He did accept, He called to greater levels of holiness to the point of giving their lives for Jesus. Such people included Peter who betrayed Him and all the Apostles who abandoned Him in His hour of need.

Today's political movements are trying to create a Pollyanna Jesus who rubber stamps every human behavior in the world. This is not the Jesus who died on the cross for us. Such a Jesus would never have died on a cross because He would have been celebrated everyday for his approval of everything. Jesus is God and God leads His people to salvation but only if they choose to follow Him. Those who smile at Him and go their own way, do not find salvation. Indeed, if you look at Psalm 23 they end up alone in the Valley of Death by their own choice.

It is a misnomer to believe that we can do whatever we want and Jesus will just applaud everything we do. It is the Devil who applauds us at those times for when we walk into the Valley of Death, we have entered his reign and he congratulates himself for another soul conquered. It is Jesus who applauds you when you have done your best to daily draw closer to Him to follow Him. The applause you hear is from God and the Heavenly hosts who celebrate your heroic witness to His truth. It is then He who welcomes you into His kingdom.

Tracy Morgan Vs. Kathy Griffin

In what is being described as a rant, comedian Tracy Morgan has apologized for intense anti-gay comments that he made during a comedy routine. As the usual course of events happened, people were offended and he apologized. You can expect some sort of firing to happen, if the usual course of events continues. Already on Twitter people are making comments on how they will never watch 30 Rock or anything else with Tracy Morgan again.

However, when the rant is anti-Catholic the response is radically different, there is just silence or praise with an occasional protest from the faithful. An example of this is Kathy Griffin who labels priests a term that cannot be written in this blog.

There are those who will protest Griffin, others such as myself will leave her to her own devices. She is just one of many in Hollywood who hate Catholics priests.

Obviously, the outrage is the same in Catholic circles, but the response is not. The next question is should it be?

First, Tracy Morgan's rant may have not been "homophobia" which literally means fear of homosexuality; it can be best determined as completely out of line. There is nothing funny about stabbing your son because of any inclination. I am not sure that is homophobia; it is closer to genocide. No one should support that for any reason.

Yet, those who demand that he stop are demanding not to be insulted.

Catholics can demand not to be insulted, but first that won't happen, and second we need to ask, who are the insulters.

Jesus warned us that we would be hated, and you can rest assured that the anti-Catholic hatred which has always been prevalent in this country will greatly increase. No one will respond. As a "victim" of vicious anti-Catholic persecution in Massachusetts with the passive and in some cases active support of many of our elected officials from both parties, I see no end to the persecution because it has been institutionalized as well as personalized.

You have to remember that Catholics stand in the way of billions of dollars in industries that look on humanity in the most materialistic terms. There will always be an industry that supports anti-Catholicism because we cost people money in their quest for products that improve the lives of some people at the expense of others. For example, product using tissues from unborn children.

The clash is because our anthropology is different from the world's. We not only believe in a higher being but we believe in a destiny that is the fullness of creation. The world believes that the future is determined solely in terms of one earthly lifetime and, therefore, it believes that humanity must live by each individual's standards to get the most out of life now. Anyone who stands in the way, in the thoughts of the world, must be annihilated. This is the reasoning behind holocausts. It is also the goal of the mentality of the world. When it is allowed unbridled development, it ends in the most evil of humanity showing itself.

One of the great parables of this reality is actually in the end of the sixth chapter (3rd movie) of Star Wars Return of the Jedi. Remember the Emperor knew how to destroy Luke, by allowing the Jedi's own anger and hate to consume him. So he told Luke that he wanted his hate. However, it was the son's love for his father that led Luke not to give in completely to the emperor's temptation. The emperor was destroyed by Luke.

Our response to the likes of Kathy Griffin must be different than those who protested Tracy Morgan's rants. Our goal does not involve being accepted fully in this world, God help us if we are. Our goal is to seek the reality of being fully human and fully alive that comes from our growth into the fullness of humanity led by Holy Spirit. Our hatred would consume us as the hatred that others have for us will consume them.

We listen to the words of St. Paul in Romans "Bless your persecutors" "Do not curse them." "Do not return evil for evil." St. Paul reminds us that vengeance is God's. We must respond to our persecutors in loving obedience to God not in hateful retribution for ourselves. St. Paul teaches that this is our weapon against our persecutors. We grow in holiness and they fall into destruction but not by our hand. The grace of God leads us to the fullness of humanity to which we are called. If we on the other hand allow ourselves to be driven by hatred as our persecutors are, that hatred will consume us, as it will consume them. We lose and end up not only like them, but with them.

Tracy Morgan's rants cannot be described ever in the terms of entertainment nor comedy; neither are Kathy Griffin's which likewise are hateful and genocidal. What I have read of Kathy Griffin's rants, I have found painful and slanderous. However, if we try to silence her, then we enter into her pool. If, however, we look to draw closer to God and seek to become holy, we can see just how destructive her pool is and we leave it and her alone.


Since we are Catholic we will always deal with the Kathy Griffins in the world, until Jesus returns. Let us, therefore, instead seek to be counted among the communion of the saints through prayer, perseverance and in the words of the corporal works of mercy: bearing wrongs patiently.

Should Representative Anthony Weiner Resign? Absolutely!

Should Representative Anthony Weiner resign? Absolutely. The reason has little to do with the scandal and more to do with what might have been.

Here is a man who commits a bizarre little act, that may or may not have been illegal. However, he blamed what turned out to be a phantom hacker. His strategy did not work, but what if it did? This man is a congressman and to hack into his Twitter account as he claimed happened would be a serious act. An innocent man would have had to defend himself against false charges with a federal prosecutor doing all he could to take down the man in order to defend the integrity of the US Congress.

Rep. Weiner at one point was willing to let that all happen. For that reason he needs to resign.

Have these people not heard of Charles Stuart? The famous story of the man who shot his wife and then blamed the incident on an innocent black man. The case ultimately fell apart when one of the accomplices came forward and Stuart committed suicide by jumping off the Tobin Bridge that connects Boston with the North Shore via US Route 1. However, until that moment the Boston Police combed the poor black neighborhoods in the area looking for the phantom black man. It was a low point in Boston history and the media drove the search for the black perpetrator acting as Stuart's ignorant accomplices as well. Later one alternative newspaper admitted that the reason why the Stuart case almost worked was because the "victim" was a middle class white couple and the accused perpetrator was a poor black man with a history of incarceration. In the words of the newspaper, the "victimized" couple was us. The media bought Stuart's lies hook, line and sinker.

Rep. Weiner's constituents need to ask themselves what would have happened if one of them was accused by their representative. Lives would have been turned upside down, careers lost and if the accused was a black man, a latino, a muslim, an undocumented person; a rich, white male attending Duke University or even a catholic, he or she would have been fodder for the media everyday. Just ask any of the above demographics who have been falsely accused, they know how much the media would have gone along with the gag and how easy it is for less than honest people to manipulate them.

Maybe we should all be thankful Michael Nifong was not on the case.