Month: September 2010

Crested Butte, Colorado, 2.26 pm

Greg Pollowitz plucks a clip from the CSPAN archives:

Christine O’Donnell, communications director at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute, led a discussion on the depiction of women in J.R.R. Tolkien’s “Lord of the Rings” trilogy. The discussion focused on Bradley Birzer’s book, J.R.R. Tolkien’s Sanctifying Myth, published by ISI Books. According to Birzer’s analysis, the religious spirituality informing Tolkien’s books was specifically Roman Catholic. In addition, he suggests that the female characters Galadriel and Elbereth were designed to exemplify traits of the Virgin Mary.

The "Galileo Was Wrong" conference is no hoax. A reader writes:

I called the Hilton Garden Inn in South Bend. It's real. There are a number of posts on geocentricity on Mark Wyatt's blog. Volumes I and II of "Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right", by Dr. Sungenis and Dr. Robert Bennett, another speaker at the conference, are sold on Amazon. You can also go to Geocentrism.com and see a link for the conference.

From a Delaware blog on last night's Delaware forum:

Christine O’Donnell’s spokesman Evan Quietsch went on the Rick Jensen Show yesterday afternoon on WDEL, and said that O’Donnell will not show up unless she was provided all the questions to be asked of the candidates before hand.

Was she?

(Hat tip: Jesse Griffin)

Judge Judy is the new queen of daytime.

Concluding a profile of Saul Alinsky, Jesse Walker gives the Tea Party movement some advice:

If they’re serious about building a real alternative to the Bush/Obama megastate, as opposed to merely being used by the Republicans and discarded as soon as the GOP is in a position to relaunch the K Street Project, the activists need to build countervailing power of their own, rooted not merely in talk radio and the Internet but in the indigenous institutions that shape people’s everyday lives. In some areas — bank bailouts, eminent domain, the crackdown on civil liberties, America’s imperial foreign policy — they might even reach across the invisible lines that separate their favorite segments of civil society from the churches and councils that mobilize people on the grassroots left, to work together on issues of shared concern even when they aren’t about to back the same candidates. Sometimes it’s worthwhile to cross a boundary, even if there’s a risk that a stranger might hit you in the head with a rock.

If only a left/right alliance would cooperate to end the drug war, get a grand compromise on the debt, and rein in defense spending and police state creep. But seriously, does Jesse really believe that the Tea Party would do any of these things?

Yes, they are, for the most part, emphasizing economic and fiscal issues, which is wonderful, even though they have no actual realistic plans to cut spending by the amount they would have to if taxes are not to rise. But that does not mean they have in any way forsaken the social issues substantively. Name a tea-party candidate who is pro-choice. Name one who backs marriage equality. Name one who wants to withdraw from Afghanistan beginning next year. Name one who has opposed torture. Name one who has the slightest qualms about police powers. Name one who would end the military ban on gays serving openly, and take even the slightest political risk on any of these subjects.

I welcome the belated right-wing opposition to out-of-control government spending. But the one thing you have to note about tea-party fervor is that none of it existed when they had real leverage over a Republican president, who spent us into bankruptcy. That tells you something. And if you think a party led by Palin will not embrace every neocon crusade or Christianist social policy, you're dreaming.

California's alcohol industry is opposing Prop 19. Here's Steve Fox's response:

Unless the beer distributors in California have suddenly developed a philosophical opposition to the use of intoxicating substances, the motivation behind this contribution is clear … Plain and simple, the alcohol industry is trying to kill the competition. They know that marijuana is less addictive, less toxic and less likely to be associated with violent behavior than alcohol. So they don’t want adults to have the option of using marijuana legally instead of alcohol. Their mission is to drive people to drink.

Pete Guither's two cents:

Rather than trying to get the alcohol industry to stop funding legalization opposition, we need to spread the word that alcohol funds legalization opposition.

Here’s why… When people see that alcohol is afraid of marijuana, they’ll make the connection that marijuana legalization will result in a reduction in alcohol use (and possibly in some of the problems associated with alcohol). This is a positive perception change for us.

Yes, she says condom distribution facilitates HIV-transmission.

Lieberman voices doubt over repeal. And McCain is against and would allow the military brass to scrap its own internal review and scuttle the entire process. Politico has more unsettling news of moderate Republicans jumping ship. If the GOP wins back the House this fall, as is very likely, I fear the ban will still be in place at the end of Obama's first term – which means the Democrats and the president could not deliver on an issue with 64 percent Republican popular support in two years.

That's how effective the gay lobby is. And that's how much concern the Democratic leadership has for gay servicemembers. The only weapon we now have is public pressure. Call your Senator – 202 224-3121 – before this critical opportunity slips away.