Cato Minor plus quam Catalinam ego.
Politically, Cicero was an opportunist who got what he had coming.
In this construction Catalina would not take the accusative.
It should be:
Cato Minor (presumably Uticensis) plus quam Catalina ego.
Politically, Cicero was an opportunist who got what he had coming.
So we have here a dichotomy: on the one hand Cato Uticensis, a self-righteous prig who chose to commit suicide rather than accept a political order that was not organized in precise accordance with his own idiosyncratic views and on the other hand, Cicero who was attempting to come to grips with new political realities without accomodating the extremism of either Antony or Cato - and who was murdered for his attempt to oppose the tyranny of Antony.
As a self-proclaimed reader of the Bible and a apparent despiser of the violence employed by the US in our current war I find it interesting that you come down on the side of a man who committed the damning sin of self-murder and against a man who was murdered by a tyrant for the crime of speaking out against that same tyrant's avarice and cruelty - so much so that you satisfiedly judge that his brutal murder and the subsequent mutilation of his corpse were deserved and just.
How you reconcile this attitude toward Cicero's fate with your self-proclaimed dedication to the Scriptures escapes me. Additionally, your implicit claim that the Bible teaches that America is bent on "World Dominion" cannot survive any serious scrutiny.
I also wonder, since Cicero was an "opportunist" who "had" his murder and mutilation "coming" to him on that account, what your opinion is of the American contractors who were murdered and mutilated in Fallujah?