Just politics

My tidbits for the day were getting too numerous, so I took political stuff over here. It was a very political day, it seems.

Gloves off!
Iron fist.
The Fleshpots of Reagan.
Paean to Palin
Ron Paul is winning.
Perry’s Crony Capitalism.

Whoa! Susan B. Anthony List takes the gloves off! It’s going to be a long 13-1/2 months.

This style ad is not my cup of tea, but although hyperbolic, it’s essentially true.

I commented yesterday on President Obama losing the Catholic vote and the Jewish vote (though he was working like crazy at the U.N. today to regain the latter).

Catholic Archbishop Dolan, speaking on behalf of the Bishops’ Conference, today asked the administration to “’push the reset button’ on their multipronged efforts to undermine marriage and treat Catholics who believe in marriage as bigots.”

“…it is particularly upsetting, Mr. President, when your Administration, through the various court documents, pronouncements and policies identified in the attached analysis, attributes to those who support DOMA a motivation rooted in prejudice and bias. It is especially wrong and unfair to equate opposition to redefining marriage with either intentional or willfully ignorant racial discrimination, as your Administration insists on doing.”

Just so. No hyperbole, but there’s an iron fist in that velvet glove. No wonder Obama’s in trouble with conservative religious folks. “They only call it culture wars when we fight back.”

The Archbishop’s full letter is here.

But opposition to the current administration’s positions on social issues does not mean I’m “Pining for the Fleshpots of Reagan,” as Jason Peters reminds us of a few derelictions of the Grand Old Partiers.

I should have commented on it at the time, but I didn’t quite believe my eyes: the New York Times publishing some friendly words toward Sarah Palin, because she (briefly? Time will tell) broke with GOP talking points and committed Truth. (HT Patrick Deneen)

Dana Milbank at the Washington Post explains how Ron Paul is winning exactly what he intended to win: control of the terms of debate. Disregard the snarky adjectives and it’s worth a read.

Mark Thiesen and Jennifer Rubin spar at the Washington Post about whether Texans for Public Justice cronyism charges against Rick Perry are meritorious. Thiesen says no, essentially because they’ve been making the same charge against every Texas Republican who rises to national prominence.

I’m with Rubin, who thinks Perry needs to address the issue. It seems to me that as widepread as crony capitalism is (even Sarah Palin has noticed), Texans for Public Justice might be repeating the charge because it’s repeatedly true.

I’m fond of Texas, having lived there on assignment many years ago, but it’s a whole ‘Nuther Country. Not “deep South” but barely (or is it “quintessentially”?) American.

* * * * *

Bon appetit!

Tasty Tidbits 9/15/11

Octomom Redux.
Sex is optional.
“Social issues” waning?
Provoking culture war.
Tom Howard anthology.
Aggressively inarticulate.
Time magazine, adult edition.
An original poem.

Continue reading “Tasty Tidbits 9/15/11” →

Pat Robertson Creeps Me Out – Again

Pat Robertson, who regularly gets mis-identified as a “Rev.” or “Evangelist” (it’s so hard to tell the difference between Evangelical “Rev. Celebrities,” “Evangelist Celebrities,” and “Batshit Crazy Celebrities”), gives a big ole Bronx Cheer to Christian tradition on marriage by saying that it’s okay to dump a spouse with Alzheimers. Continue reading “Pat Robertson Creeps Me Out – Again” →

Trouble in Democrat Paradise

Rep. Anthony Weiner, whose “Weiner shot” probably will not linger in the political lexicon as long as “The Lewinsky Maneuver,” has been replaced – in a seat held by Democrats for almost 100 years, in New York’s 75%-Democrat 9th Congressional District – not by the Democrat chosen to run after he resigned, but by a Republican.

A conservative Catholic Republican. By a full 8%.

The Wall Street Journal, somewhat predictably, plays up the “dissatisfaction with all things Obama” angle, which almost certainly is in the GOP talking points list now. But the New York Times concedes that SSM played a role, along with – surprisingly, since the Democrat was “an observant Jew and strong supporter of Israel” – Obama’s position toward Israel.

The Democrat voted for Same-Sex Marriage in New York, which did not play well with folks who were hard-working immigrant Democrats, including Orthodox Jews and Hispanics.

40 Orthodox Rabbis have signed a letter “blasting” Weprin’s gay marriage vote. The Jewish Journal and NY Assemblyman Dov Hikind (also an Orthodox Jew) have crossed over and endorsed Weprin’s Republican opponent, the Catholic Bob Turner. NY Senator Ruben Diaz, a Democrat and an ordained minister, well-respected by the Hispanic Community has taped a radio ad against Weprin — because Diaz puts faith and marriage in front of his political party.

(CatholicVote.org, cited and linked in item 1 of Saturday’s Tidbits)

Robert P. George reports at Mirror of Justice later today what I had not seen elsewhere:

In the run up to the election, a group of Orthodox rabbis, most from Brooklyn, but including others, notably Rabbi Shmuel Kamenetsky and Rabbi Simcha Bunim Cohen, two nationally prominent Orthodox Jewish authorities, published a letter stating that “it is forbidden to fund, support, or vote for David Weprin.” The reason? As a member of the New York state legislature, Weprin, despite his Orthodox Jewish beliefs, voted to redefine marriage to include same-sex partnerships. This, the rabbonim declared, was chillul Hashem—a desecration, or bringing of shame, on God’s name. The rabbis went on to say that “Weprin’s claim that he is Orthodox makes the chillul Hashem even greater.”
…
The letter from the rabbonim went farther than anything I recall Catholic bishops saying by asserting that under Jewish law “it is incumbent on every Jew” to support and vote for Weprin’s opponent, “if the opposing candidate is committed to safeguarding the moral values that made made this Republic great, including the educational, religious. and parental freedoms of Torah adherents, defending family values, opposing abortion on demand, protecting the moral environment, opposing the radical LGBT (To’aiva) agenda, including opposing legislation of civil unions, as well as defending the security of our brothers internationally, particularly in Eretz Yisroel.”

(Emphasis added. I guess that last clause lamely supports the New York Times’ “Israel” angle.)

My gut tells me that Weprin would have survived the Obama baggage had the extra SSM baggage not been there, and that Obama’s abandonment of even doing his duty to defend the Defense of Marriage Act may have played into the story. Who really believes that Obama’s formal opposition to SSM is anything more than tactical political timing?

But the Rabbis’ letter surely played a role, and the press silence on what would be trumpeted as a dangerously theocratic transgression of the Church/State boundary if uttered by a Conservative Catholic Bishop/Archbishop/Cardinal or Evangelical celebrity is … well, pick one:

Proof of anti-Christian bigotry
Proof that the press is in Jewish control even more than GLBTetcetera control.
Evidence that the liberal press doesn’t want to further divide two normally aligned Democrat constituencies by pointing out to one that the GOP is a marginally more accommodating home these days.
Something else.