Monthly Archives: March 2010

Republicans talking sense

A clip that includes Republican politicos that doesn’t include any tea-bagging pandering?!

Granted, I still don’t buy some of what they say, but it’s nice to see conversation without fear-mongering or deliberate misinformation. Let’s keep the talk on policy and not so much on riling (or fleecing) the base.

And don’t you just love King’s mispronouncing of the word, “heretic?” I suppose you get more slack when you’re 200+ years old.

a case of the Mondays

comic link, found via

What a difference a page makes

The webpages of the GOP vs. Democratic party:

Who’s up for a rhetorical analysis? Better yet, which “side” would you rather be associated with?

For the larger picture version of the two pages, go here.

What he said, part 2:

re: Catholic child-abuse sex scandal — PZ Myers, on why we should (always!) “tell on the church”:

So this is our sacrilege for the day: speak the truth, decry the crimes of those in authority, challenge the dogma that says we are sinful beings redeemed by the suffering of another.

Sunday Sacrilege: The greatest blasphemy of them all

What he said:

Richard Dawkins, on whether the Pope should resign:

No, Pope Ratzinger should not resign. He should remain in charge of the whole rotten edifice – the whole profiteering, woman-fearing, guilt-gorging, truth-hating, child-raping institution – while it tumbles, amid a stench of incense and a rain of tourist-kitsch sacred hearts and preposterously crowned virgins, about his ears.

from Ratzinger is the Perfect Pope

fluttering disgust


Gardenscape 2010, originally uploaded by becky b..

Check out the look on Emma’s face! Photographic moment achieved.

“It’s enough to make a good old boy go crazy.”

President Obama and what he represents has jolted extremists into the present and forced them to confront the future. And it scares them.

Even the optics must be irritating. A woman (Nancy Pelosi) pushed the health care bill through the House. The bill’s most visible and vocal proponents included a gay man (Barney Frank) and a Jew (Anthony Weiner). And the black man in the White House signed the bill into law. It’s enough to make a good old boy go crazy.

[...]Politically, this frustration is epitomized by the Tea Party movement. It may have some legitimate concerns (taxation, the role of government, etc.), but its message is lost in the madness. And now the anemic Republican establishment, covetous of the Tea Party’s passion, is moving to absorb it, not admonish it. Instead of jettisoning the radical language, rabid bigotry and rising violence, the Republicans justify it. (They don’t want to refute it as much as funnel it.)

There may be a short-term benefit in this strategy, but it’s a long-term loser.

A Quinnipiac University poll released on Wednesday took a look at the Tea Party members and found them to be just as anachronistic to the direction of the country’s demographics as the Republican Party. For instance, they were disproportionately white, evangelical Christian and “less educated … than the average Joe and Jane Six-Pack.” This at a time when the country is becoming more diverse (some demographers believe that 2010 could be the first year that most children born in the country will be nonwhite), less doctrinally dogmatic, and college enrollment is through the roof. The Tea Party, my friends, is not the future.

Whose Country Is It?
by Charles M. Blow

More scary GOP stats here – as in, “Two-thirds think he’s a socialist, 57 percent a Muslim—and 24 percent say “he may be the Antichrist.”