“No. No. No.” Ctd

by Dish Staff A reader writes: I felt a slow-creeping horror building in the pit of my stomach when I read your reader’s incredibly brave essay “No. No. No.” It wasn’t the same visceral horror the men who wrote to you felt, though I’m grateful the piece could shed some light for them. Instead, my horror came from the fact … Continue reading “No. No. No.” Ctd

“No. No. No.” Ctd

by Dish Staff A reader writes: Like many others, I was simply floored by the post in which a woman bravely details her experience of being raped and dealing with its aftereffects. (A college friend who was also raped forwarded me the story – it came with the subject line “oh my God.”) Never before has someone – even the … Continue reading “No. No. No.” Ctd

“No. No. No.” Ctd

by Dish Staff A reader writes: That email is such a compelling, extraordinarily well-written, and utterly heartbreaking account of a truly sadistic and unspeakably selfish rape. I find myself completely ashamed that I share similar chromosomal make-up with someone capable of such an act. This account should be required reading for all men, and not … Continue reading “No. No. No.” Ctd

Romney Agonistes

Et tu, NRO?

Romney may feel impatience with requirements that the political culture imposes on a presidential candidate that he feels are pointless (and inconvenient). But he’s a politician running for the highest office in the land, and his current posture is probably unsustainable. In all likelihood, he won’t be able to maintain a position that looks secretive and is a departure from campaign conventions. The only question is whether he releases more returns now, or later — after playing more defense on the issue and sustaining more hits. There will surely be a press feeding frenzy over new returns, but better to weather it in the middle of July.

This is such obvious advice that the real question becomes: what on earth could be so damaging that Romney would risk this agonizing twist in the wind? Did he pay no taxes at all in 2009? Or in some other year? Meanwhile, TP has listed 15 prominent Republicans calling for the release of the returns – including Ron Paul, George Will, Haley Barbour, Brit Hume and Michael Steele. This crack in the ranks means that some kind of release is all but inevitable – the Palin strategy is not going to work here. But I'd note some ferocious pushback in the comments at NRO. Money quotes:

Romney should release as many tax returns as the Secretary of the Treasury has – and only as soon as Obama releases all his college records and signs a waiver allowing Hawaii to release the original long form birth certificate.

NR Editors to Romney: Capitulate

If you are going to insist that Romney release more tax records, how come you are not all day, every day insisting that Obama release his college and health records?

No. No. No. He never should have released any tax returns. No politician ever should. What business is it of anyone's what his tax returns look like?

APPEASEMENT DOES NOT WORK.

There are some saner voices as well – but I wouldn't be surprised if Romney's refusal to release his returns becomes a cause celebre on the crazy right, an emblem of his hostility to the MSM. Malkin is quiet all of a sudden, but wingnut Dan Riehl is off to the races:

The Mutilation Of Infants

A reader writes:

My son, who was not circumcised at birth had to undergo the procedure as a medical necessity at the age of two. He was anaesthetized, etc, and we were sent home from hospital with painkillers, ointments and instructions. Nonetheless, I still get chills at the memory of him hysterically screaming out "No, Daddy. No. No. No. Don't. Don't. Don't!" while I had to physically pin him down to change the dressing in the days afterwards. Maybe it was my inexperience at parenting. Clearly the painkillers we were initially provided weren't doing the job (fortunately the doctor provided a better solution when we complained). All I know is it reduced me to tears.

I believe that to give religions a pass on this procedure because it's a "core conviction" is to duck the issue like the New York Times. Please call it what it is and be consistent. It's evidence that some religious beliefs are just not compatible with what we know about the world.

The logic of my readers is pretty overwhelming; and my position is obviously a defensive and largely pragmatic one.