Links that caught my eye, but did not warrant full-blown blog entries …
- Jeffrey Feldman: Conspiracy Theory Conservatism – Excellent article, and the best analysis of what’s going horribly wrong with the GOP I’ve read of late. The main problem is that his conclusion comes at the very end — the only folks profiting from this are neither the populace nor the pols, but the pundits / media personalities that get high ratings. They don’t have to care whether their lunacy wins elections or helps the country — just whether they are getting big radio, TV, and book contracts from it.
- BBC NEWS | UK | Archbishop condemns pregnancy ads – Because Ignorance is Power!
- BBC NEWS | Europe | Vatican ‘vetoes’ US envoy names – I’m sure that it’s untoward to appoint an ambassador who is actively hostile toward the country in question, but it’s a bit polite of the country in question to demand some sort of ideological litmus test of potential ambassadors. Of course, I’m not quite sure why we have an ambassador to the Vatican, anyway.
- Simulated crime-scene bathroom accessories – Oh, my. These are great. Gruesome, but great.
- Kenneth Starr: Obama Legal Nominee Under Assault From Right Should Be Confirmed | The Plum Line – Well, we all know Kenneth Starr is a dupe for the socialist sharia Left. I mean, just look at how much time he spent with the Clintons a few years back …
- Photo Challenges Conservative Bloggers’ Claim Of “Staged” Obama Troop Visit | The Plum Line – But remember — it was an anonymous report that’s been repeated a lot of times, Operator-style, so it must be true!
- Iowa Same-Sex Marriage: Mike Peters
- Veterans Upset That Tea Baggers Plan To Hold Their Anti-Obama Protest At A Veterans Memorial In Kansas: Amanda Terkel
- CIA Black Sites No Longer Being Used, Panetta Says – Elections matter.
- Creepy Eyes Be Gone – The new one is pretty lame, but the old one was, yeah, quite creepy.
- Are Most of Us “Bad Parents?” « FreeRangeKids – Huzzah for Admitted Imperfect Parents!
- Justice Clarence Thomas: Too Much Focus On Rights – Right, Clarence. That is absolutely why the Founding Fathers (you ol’ Original Intentist, you) fought tooth and nail to avoid having a “Bill of Rights.” “Whining frippery,” John Adams called it. “Gimme some of ye olde tyme Tyanny,” suggested Jefferson. “Obligations for all,” maintained Madison, “Begone, ye rights-obsessed lunaticks!” Yeesh.
- Nat’l Park Designated As Wilderness Area – Yay! Love RMNP.
- Cure For Honey Bee Colony Collapse? – This is good news.
- The Obama Conspiracy – These peple are just nucking futs. I’d rather that the Obama’s, in general, rescued a dog from the shelter, but between the hypo-allergenic aspect and the fact that it’s a DOG IN THE WHITE HOUSE, I will let them make their decision and move onto, y’now, IMPORTANT things.
- Amazon explains cataloging error that banished queer books to “adult” purgatory: Cory Doctorow
- Some-Bunny Was Cranky Today…: admin
- The Fine Art Of Firing A Customer: admin
- Quit Smoking with the D&D Method: Z.
- David Sirota: Gay Marriage & the Right’s Selective Attacks on Democratic Institutions: David Sirota
94 view(s)
As a reminder:
Dave, just a few blocks from where you work will be some Epic Teabagging tomorrow, you should go get photos, since they will look nice next to your SUV’s of DOOM. 🙂
As to the Vatican…
The current and past poes had no issues accepting pro-death penalty Ambassadors, even though the Death-Penalty is the same as abortion to the Vatican. So, it is just a pissing contest to embarrass the Democratic President.
Personally I would nominate who I wanted, if rejected by the Vatican (especially if it were a Kennedy) it would be a win/win.
But then again I posted as much last weekend….you are falling way behind on your reading Dave. =P
I am. 🙁
Denver Tea Party — Noon onward on the West steps of the Capitol Building. I may wander over Or I may give it wide berth. Depends on my mood and how good my book is (right now, pretty good).
Re: Too much Rights. There is a certain point where there is too much concentration on ‘Rights’ and not enough on ‘Responsibilities’- The TEA partiers are all rights and no responsibility (see woman with T shirt). When smoking in indoor public spaces was banned we got a litany of \What about our riiiiiiights. If YOU don’t like smoke, go somewhere else.\
On a more global scale what about the USA- \Why should we stop polluting, what about our riiiiiights?\ (Because a-5% of the worlds population uses 20% of the worlds energy, and b- China and India are not going to control theirs while you tell everyone it is your ‘right’ to destroy the ecosystem)
Oh, I agree that Rights and Responsibilities go hand-in-hand. On the other hand, hearing a Supreme Court justice, a large part of whose job is determining whether laws are constitutional (which usually centers on issues of rights as ennumerated there) comment that we are too focused on rights is a bit … unnerving.