A Little Straight Talk
by Burt PrelutskyThose on the Left who have trashed George Bush for this entire decade claim they weren’t being rude or unpatriotic, but were simply talking truth to power. That has a nice ring to it, so I think I’ll give it a shot.
Today, I’ll talk truth to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, potential justice of the Supreme Court Sonia Sotomayor, Pope Benedict XVI and President Barack Obama. That’s a more powerful lineup than the 1927 New York Yankees, if I do say so myself.
I have almost begun to feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi. After all, when you get past the facelifts and the Botox injections, the designer suits and the large private jet, you have an aging grandmother who, in a perfect world, would be home playing with the grandkids and letting the wrinkles show. Instead, she’s constantly on TV, telling lies and looking like a small animal staring at oncoming headlights. I think that instead of babbling about what she didn’t know and when she didn’t know it, she should claim the Twinkie defense just like that other two-bit San Francisco politician, Dan White. In case you don’t recall, when he went on trial for killing Harvey Milk and Mayor George Moscone, White’s lawyers, in making their case for diminished capacity, claimed he had been suffering from depression, and that his depression had been made more severe by a junk food diet that included a lot of Twinkies. I can see Rep. Pelosi taking that defense out of moth balls, dusting it off and blaming all of her recent insanity on cheap confections. Heck, forget the pastries; she’d only need to mention having to sit through meetings with the likes of Harry Reid, Rahm Emanuel or Arlen Specter, and even I would lessen her sentence.
Secretary Gates insists that Guantanamo has to be shut down because its very name is a source of embarrassment for America throughout the world. Well, I happen to think the world is an embarrassment and is therefore in no position to judge us. But the solution in any case is not to shut down Gitmo, especially when it will cost $80 million to do so and when nobody has the slightest idea where to move the terrorists, but to simply change the name of the facility. We could call it any number of things, ranging from Paradise to Fantasy Island. Or we could take our lead from the pop singer, Prince, and simply change it to the Prison Formerly Known as Guantanamo.
I don’t know Sonia Sotomayor personally and, so, I don’t dislike her any more than I do any of the other liberal judges on Barack Obama’s short list of Supreme Court nominees. The difference is that I saw a video of Judge Sotomayor addressing what I assume was a group of law students. After telling them that the courts are where policy is made, she gave a little laugh and acknowledged that she probably shouldn’t have said that when she knew she was being taped. But she did say it, and in doing so, she spoke for every left-wing judge in America. The fact that she also believes that her experience as a Latina will cause her to rule differently from other people isn’t a cause for celebration. It’s the Constitution that matters, not whether her parents were Puerto Rican, Chinese or Hungarian. Here in California, judges have over-ruled the vote of the people on capital punishment, illegal immigrants and, before this May 26th, same-sex marriage. In Washington, the Supremes expanded eminent domain in a way that would have impressed even the likes of Stalin, Hitler and Castro, and decided that when the Founding Fathers included “the pursuit of Happiness” in the Declaration of Independence, what they had in mind were millions and millions of abortions.
The bone I have to pick with the Pope involves his cockeyed sense of priorities. Recently, I read a gruesome account of Catholic schools in Ireland. Even Charles Dickens could not have dreamed up such a nightmare. Apparently, for decades, the priests and nuns running these schools based their teaching philosophy on the precepts laid down by the Nazis who ran the concentration camps. With disgusting regularity, they beat and sexually molested the children, and suffered no consequences. At least not here on earth.
Now, I have nothing against the Catholic Church and, unlike some Jews, I don’t condemn it for ancient sins. However, a while back, when Pope John II was visiting America, he decided to use his influence to save the life of a person who had killed three people and was about to be executed in Missouri. Being the Pope, he got Governor Carnahan to commute Darrell Mease’s sentence to life without parole. At the time, I found myself thinking that if the Pope was going to go to bat for a cold-blooded killer, the taxpayers in Missouri shouldn’t be left holding the bag; instead, Pope John should have taken him back to the Vatican and let the Church put him up for the next 40 or 50 years.
Now we have Pope Benedict XVI traveling to the Middle East, spewing out his predictable platitudes, while managing to suggest a moral equivalency between Israel and those dedicated to Israel’s destruction. As usual, his words fell on deaf ears. But, then, why should Jews or Muslims really care what he has to say, especially when he refuses to speak out in the one area where his authority is unquestioned? After all, a couple of thousand years ago, Jesus said, “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.” Jesus used “suffer” in the sense of “permit” or “allow,” but in modern times, far too many priests have perverted it to mean actual suffering. It shouldn’t be asking too much of the Pope that he excoriate and ex-communicate those priests here in America and in Ireland who have brutalized countless Catholic children for their own base pleasure and amusement.
As for President Obama, I would like to see him quit chastising George Bush while at the same time carrying forth his policies. Understand, I approve of those policies, which have helped safeguard America for nearly eight years. But, saying one thing while doing another may fool some of the people some of the time, and fool Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann all of the time, but it doesn’t make Obama look superior to the ex-president; it merely makes him look petty and deceitful.
Furthermore, I would suggest that Barack Obama quit telling us that everything he says and does garners us great respect in the world community. The majority of that community is made up of lunatics and gangsters, and most Americans don’t want to gain the love and admiration of North Korea, Russia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Venezuela, Syria, Iran, China, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Turkey, Yemen or Indonesia. It would be nice, though, if they were at least a little bit afraid of us.
If I had the president’s ear, I would beg him not to be a sucker, and not to think for a second that international villains will succumb to his much-publicized charm. They will applaud his speeches and return his smiles, and they’ll happily stab him in the back. I would try to make him realize that the world’s political leaders are just like Chicago’s, except that some of them have nuclear bombs at their disposal.
It’s easy, I would tell the president, to mouth all the usual cliches and be lauded by the various hand puppets and hand maidens at MSNBC and the New York Times, but being politically correct is, unfortunately, not the same thing as being correct politically.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
99 Comments
"but being politically correct is, unfortunately, not the same thing as being correct politically."
Classic!
Sonia Sotomayer and other liberal judges have used a different definition of "ruling" from the bench that was intended.
Oops. Typo. Should be "than" instead of "that". In too big a hurry to spell check….
"Well, I happen to think the world is an embarrassment and is therefore in no position to judge us."
Yeah! Who needs peers when you can rant carefree like a homeless man? Take that embarrassing world!
My favorite whipping boy is Press Secretary Gibbs. Could Obama have picked a dumber, more immature, and more incompetent boob for that position?
I'm a Roman Catholic and have felt nothing but anger and disgust at the way the Vatican has handled the child abuse revelations. Your other points are equally on the mark Burt.
http://shermansmarch.blogspot.com
Don't be so timid next time Burt
Press Secretary Gibbs also starred in "Mrs. Doubtfire."
This deal about no prisoners ever escaping from a maximum security prison here in the States, no one has ever escaped from Gitmo either.
Burt Prelutsky wrote:
"Instead, she’s constantly on TV, telling lies…"
But Prelutsky himself lied the other day on this very site:
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/bprelutsky/2009...
Bert Prelutsky wrote:
"It is virtually impossible to get a liberal to debate a conservative."
Prelutsky was lying when he said that.
Garafalo has been on 'The O'Reilly Factor' more than once, Tony Snow's show, Hannity's show, I've seen her on CSPAN panels with Joe Scarborough and Laura Ingraham.
Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz have conservatives and republicans on her shows all the time.
Moore challenged Fred Thompson to a debate, Thompson chickened out. Moore debated Jonah Goldberg on Hannity & Colmes, he debated O'Reilly on Fox during the '04 election, transcript here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,127236,00.htm...
Moore also appeared on 'Politically Incorrect' multiple times with a conservative on the panel.
Pot meet Kettle.
Prelutsky's just another breitbot hypocrite.
Great article. I wish it were mandatory reading for all libs, incl. our not-at-all-fearless or even fearsome leader, Barry.
Different? Or Better?
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but people are paraphrasing Sotomayor as saying "different" to water down her racist comments. I believe the exact word she used was "better." She believes that a Latina could make a BETTER decision than a white male. One might say this is a subtle difference as it is only one word, but I think it says a little something about her skewed sense of justice.
"I would try to make him realize that the world’s political leaders are just like Chicago’s, except that some of them have nuclear bombs at their disposal."
This piece is certainly laden with quotable material!
A far cry from the always professional and admirable Tony Snow!….may he rest in peace.
We would not have to worry about Islamofascists trying to escape from our prisons; they would be in their glory converting as many other criminals as possible to their madness.
"If I had the president’s ear, I would beg him not to be a sucker". I think we should hire those Irish Nuns to Pull the Bumbler's ear every time he starts his shtick. Juvenile Obama needs to be reminded to just behave using the preferred Catholic grade school methods. I attended Catholic grade school in CA run by Irish Priests and Nuns. They were the masters of disipline. Pull his ear when he says bad words that hurt America and rap his knuckles with the metal ruler when is does something that hurts America. Obviously Obama needs the corporal punishment correction desperately.
"Debate" key word, not SHOUT!
1. I do not understand why we should subject ourselves to the judgement of other societies and cultures when we are told that we musn't judge their societies or cultures.
2. Obama (all hail) seems very quick to blame Bush for many issues. It may or not be accurate that he caused all the problems. But I would really like to see him talk about the future or the present rather than defaulting to the blame Bush stance. He looks whiney when he does it. You can't change the past. Tell me what you are going to do and stop blaming everything on some one else. Wasn't it Truman who had the "Buck stops here" on his desk?
Good going Burt – another well written and lucid thread that is sure to provoke the trolls into a snappy, snarly snit. Nobody stokes the trolls like Mr. Burt.
nice slur… on the vast majority of talk shows- let's just take Bill Maher, for instance- they have a 2 or 3 to 1 ratio of liberals vs conservatives. Very rarely are there one on one. When they do appear the shout talking points, as in the case of Garofalo or Moore. That's not debate. Your post is poorly reasoned and explained.
Mr Prelutsky is saying that an honest debate is not possible. Your extremely selective recitation of facts are disingenuous at best…
Also, the 8th grade boys found out about a priest in our parrish that liked little boys way too much. We developed a way of handling abuse. We just cornered the dude in the dark and beat the crap out of 'Father Fondler'. That sota sent the message that children were not going to be abused without consequences. He was such a coward he didn't say a thing and didn't even stay one more week in our parrish. Ireland is not the only place Catholic kids get abused. But in America, kids react differently due to our freedoms. I am not a practicing Catholic but I believe in God and retribution, both earthly and divine.
I love how every Big Failywood post contains, somewhere along the way, a disclaimer to the effect that the author doesn't know what he's talking about.
Keep it up, guys! Gold!
Welcome to Thugworld, Burt. And a good dissertation on it, too.
Your conception of the Twinkie Defense is an urban legend.
http://www.snopes.com/legal/twinkie.asp
Thanks for taking my order! I'll have some arrogance with a side of ultra-left dogma, please. No sneering condescention with that arrogance, please.
It seems that in an attempt to save face (with regards to the abuse scandal), the Catholic church has turned its back on its own principals and wound up looking much worse than if they would have just dealt with the problem. They should have defrocked (no pun intended) the abusive priests out in the open and explained that this was not acceptable behavior for Catholics (and especially priests), as well as persued legal charges. I would argue that the church needs to spend less time trying to appeal to everyone and spend more time trying to appeal to Christians and Catholics.
Political math 97 (not even a 101 course)
Arrogance + Ignorance= liberalism… and this crowd demonstrates it in spades.
And yet you keep coming here. What does that say about you?
Anything that happens that seems bad, well Bush did it. Anything (if it ever does) good that will happen the Moca will claim.
Any questions?
Pelosi? We can pray for an early retirement from public life.
"…we musn't judge their societies or cultures. "
I guess its considered racisim, but if you think that a culture that celebrates freedom of speech and religion and freedom from persecution is better than a culture that celebrates throwing battery acid in the face of someone who just wants to go to school, you get shouted down as "ethnocentrist" by the lefties. All people of all races are equal, but all cultures are not.
It needs to become less of a political party and return to its roots as a spiritual guidance. I went to Catholic school for 12 years and actually never had a problem with any member of the clergy (because Jesuits are too busy being intelligent). However, you cannot excuse anyone from this behavior. Yes, priests have a profound gift for theology and the spiritual, yet they still must adhere to the same morals as laypeople otherwise anything they say is hypocritical positing.
[...] Do We REALLY Need Identity Politics To Extend To SCOTUS? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) First Things – The [...]
[...] Biden speaks at Wake Forest – does not disclose nuclear launch codes Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Scared Monkeys: Fox News Chris Wallace To Kathleen Sebelius & Janet Napolitano : Is Biden A [...]
[...] to the Truth! Blatherings Blog: Nancy Pelosi’s pants on fire Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Jim Blazsik: Actually, Mancow proves that waterboarding ISN’T torture The Great Illuminator: More [...]
Not likely. With any luck, he'll write a book in 4 years, telling us all about how the Obama administration misled him.
Feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi? No way. If President Obama was so concerned about world opinion, he wouldn't be sending out Pelosi and Biden on foreign junkets. Their recent comments have set back world opinion by about 20 years.
[...] Pundit: Der Spiegel: Obama Is Discrediting Himself & the US Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Macsmind: Obama wants to “Protect” America Crush Liberalism: LAT columnist: OK, you’re [...]
Here's the full quote of the lie:
"Bogus Baby–It is virtually impossible to get a liberal to debate a conservative. Have you ever seen Michael Moore, Al Gore, John Kerry, Janeane Garofalo, Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann, debate anyone? No, neither have I. However, I still recall when Charlton Heston challenged Barbra Streisand to debate the Second Amendment. He said they could sell tickets and the money could go to the charity of her choice. Naturally, the debate never took place. High-profile liberals only speak to the choir. Bill Maher will occasionally invite conservatives on his show, but he fills his audience with bratty left-wingers who can be counted upon to hoot and holler on cue, ensuring that nothing like an honest debate takes place."
Now, lets look at the first part here:
"Bogus Baby–It is virtually impossible to get a liberal to debate a conservative. Have you ever seen Michael Moore, Al Gore, John Kerry, Janeane Garofalo, Chris Matthews or Keith Olbermann, debate anyone? No, neither have I."
Prelutsky is lying. He's a liar. He said liberals never debate conservatives, that is not true. The part about honest debate doesn' t come up until later:
"Bill Maher will occasionally invite conservatives on his show, but he fills his audience with bratty left-wingers who can be counted upon to hoot and holler on cue, ensuring that nothing like an honest debate takes place."
That has nothing to do with Prelutsky's statement about liberals fearing a debate with conservatives. He knows he's been caught in a lie here.
[...] Do We REALLY Need Identity Politics To Extend To SCOTUS? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Ed Whelan, The Bench, National Review Online: White House’s Misleading Spin on New Haven [...]
Liberalism – logic's retarded cousin.
sorry pal- this is more a 'gotcha' moment than a salient point. The aforementioned lefties NEVER debate. They pick moments to 'speechify' hurl insults and non-sequiturs, and never address a question with anything other than another question or ad hominem attacks. So, 'lie'? no, perhaps a poor use of words but not a lie, oily one…
ethnocentrist is one of those terms that is meant to cause us to cower in the corner. Apparently they would work on those who use them, but on me not so much.
others include:
Neocon
Insensitive
Homophobe
Racist
Teabagger
Sexist
Christian
Halliburton
Gitmo
Carbon footprint
feel free to add to the list.
Yet another sad little troll who has no purpose in life since the election. Oh, and minus points for the lame Hitchhiker's Guide name ripoff.
not even related, Sir… we say 'Sir' because 04 still outranks 03. Ten Hut!
"Moore also appeared on 'Politically Incorrect' multiple times with a conservative on the panel"
You consider that debate? Are you serious? It was usually Moore and two other liberals, too.
"Rachel Maddow and Ed Schultz have conservatives and republicans on her shows all the time."
Ha, Maddow has conservatives on her show? Thanks for giving me a chuckle.
None of those examples are pure debates, because no one can make cogent points with all the shouting. Bill Maher and Ann Coulter debated back in March and Ann handed him his ass.
[...] A Little Straight Talk by Burt Prelutsky [...]
I would suggest that Barack Obama quit telling us that everything he says and does garners us great respect in the world community.
To quote Mr. Obama, 'You ain't seen nothing yet'
My mom lied to me about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny too. Lies, all lies I tell you! Under the bus, drum him out of the corps, that no good rotten stinkin liar… lol
Sending Biden out sure has it's rewards. Did you see him at the AF Academy, when a teleprompter blew away. I'm sure Barry continues to have warm feelings for his vice-dunce. Ha ha!
Another good read Burt! All great bullet points, all worthy of a, “huh, do what?” Burt, you seem to draw the ire of our local trolls as the keepers of veracity, that’s funny! This coming from the harbingers of horse $hit. Keep it up, this is proof positive what you write disturbs their skewed logic, and their inexperience in the real world is further exposed by what they write.
- This complete separation of the judiciary from the enterprise of "representative government" might have some truth in those countries where judges neither make law themselves nor set aside the laws enacted by the legislature. It is not a true picture of the American system. Not only do state-court judges possess the power to "make" common law, but they have the immense power to shape the States'
- In fact, however, the judges of inferior courts often "make law," since the precedent of the highest court does not cover every situation, and not every case is reviewed.
Who said this? Some crazy leftist judge?
No.
Antonin Scalia did.
Nice job Burt – you wrap a bunch of truths together nicely and I really can't say any one is more on point than the next. I must admit, though I have not really been aware of the situation in Ireland. Regarding Madame Speaker, I'm sorry though, it would take a lot more to make me personally feel sorry for Nancy Pelosi. Come to think of it, maybe if she was kicked out of power and loses her congressional seat, then I might be in a better position to explore feelings of compassion. As for Judge Sotomayor, there truly is no way to spin her as anything other than a racist and judicial activist.
spot on, pale one… Maher v Coulter was Custer v Crazy Horse except the good General lasted longer before annhiliation.
Lonewolf: Am I right that the author doesn't think much of my rep in Congress, Grandma Pelosi?
I'd like to see Al Gore debate about his passionate cause of Global Warming, instead of citing only scientists who live off the research grants.
I'd like to see Michael Moore debate about the Cuban and Canadian healthcare systems versus a privatize system.
I'd like to see john Kerry's service records about when he was in Cambodia.
I'd like to see Janeane Garofaro's medical degree when she diagnosed all comservatives with brain damanged.
I'd like to know which other politicians have Chris Matthew's leg tingled.
I'd like to know how a second rate sports anchor learned about his politics since most of his points contradict mine.
Can you please post some links? Thanks.
Burt, meant it in a loving way?
Don't tempt him. This guy will be under the bus the second Obama tires of him.
Some good points, Burt. I didn't relize that Pelosi's face was surgically enhanced. I just thought it was the polluted Bay Area water and air.
activism is in the eye of the beholder. All judges create law when necessary; the question is are they following the letter of the constitution and what the founders envisioned. It is a pact to which we all subscribe, and allowing people to freely interpret it based on 'empathy' is a terrible idea and must be resisted.
Make sense?
the one we enjoyed the most was 'babykiller'… considering the fact that as an Operator you have to engender yourself to indigineous peoples, which of course means delivering their babies…
I had no idea that "virtually impossible" = "never". Using your same twisted tactic with semantics, you are now the liar. Your logic reminds me of the way my teenager argues, with the same nutritional content.
Crony
Right winger
Nazi
Gun nut
Warmonger
Any title with the word leading or expert in it ie "Leading expert on climate change"
Greedy
Where may I find this quote?
Obama was in the Senate for a few years before being elected President. Doesn't he hold some responsibility also for problems that we are going through? Did he do or accomplish anything as a Senator to lessen our problems? Or was he just a warm body? Oh I remember, he voted "present." I think that speaks poorly on him as he now criticizes everything related to President Bush.
Vakaa Vanha Vainamoinen
Once again, a Liberal fails to understand what he's reading…. Or ignores the key words and phrases:
"virtually impossible" – as in NEARLY, but not totally impossible. and that depends on what you call a debate.
Garofolo tried to spout liberal talking points with Snow..and he called her on them, adn she couldn't respond , or avoided them.. basically every argument she claimed Snow RIPPED apart, and she had nothign to back her comments up with.
(any other show she's been on that I've seen, (I'll admit, II've never seen her on a cspan panel) has been her trying to "shout" people down… (she tried it on Hannity and O'Reilly and got embarassed for her effort – and I'm not a fan of either of the two – they like Schultz love to play the "I can shout louder than you game".).
Maddow is the only obvious-leftist host i've ever "seen" try to debate against a conservative viewpoint. (not counting the "good old days of Crossfire".).. and to be honest, I've seen her lose as many (if not more) debates than she's won. (I would put Cooper in here, but at times he shows signs of trying to be fair and discuss both sides of an issue).
as for more flaws in your argument: It was Thompson who challenged Moore, not vice-versa. (remember the YouTube "commercial" that got everyone talking about a Thompson run for the presidency?).. the only time I've ever seen Moore "debate" someone was when he went on with O'Reilly (and as usual, O'Reilly completely SOFTBALLED every question he threw at him.).
.
And using Politically Incorrect as a "debate" is laughable at best… M
Totally agree. I live in Louisville and a few years ago, we had the Archdiosies pay OVER 30 MILLION DOLLARS to victims. And thru it all, the Church never apologized. They are still unreprentant.
For the last 6 years I have refused to attend the Catholic community in my city. To fell betrayed by church's leaders, locally and in Rome, makes me ashamed to be a Catholic.
For years, I was conservative, but also a democrat. Hoping for my party to return to it's conservative roots.
Now, I'm holding on to my faith, so that Rome will come back to it's roots and admit what it did wrong.
Call me hopeless, but call me a dreamer.
He could've brought Scott McClellan back…
That's the problem. Priests think they don't have to fear God and retribution.
They think their vestiments protect them from scruitny, both earthly and devine.
THEY ARE WRONG!
TRUTH!
Silly, silly, silly. Only liberals can speak 'truth to power'. When we conservatives do it, the libs call it 'hate speech'.
The first part is in section C of this opinion.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-521.ZO.h...
The second part is in a footnote on the same case.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-521.ZO.h...
You really don't believe this canard about 'what the founders envisioned' do you?
First the founders could not agree most of the time. They all had various ideas and they basically compromised. Second the founders actually wanted the courts to have very little power but Marbury v Madison changed that. Third, there is no way the founders could have prededicted or even understood the 20th or 21st century and the way the law applies to specific situations we have today. Original iintent is just way too narrow to even discuss seriously.
True activism is in the eye of the beholder.
"You really don't believe this canard about 'what the founders envisioned' do you? "
Then why have a Constitution at all?
Obama wanted a dumber, more immature, more incompetant boob for the position of Press Secretary — that's why he selected Gibbs!
Prelutsky said, "But the solution in any case is not to shut down Gitmo, especially when it will cost $80 million to do so and when nobody has the slightest idea where to move the terrorists, but to simply change the name of the facility. "
Yeah — you gotta keep the POW's somewhere. Shut down Gitmo, and open a new facility exactly like it, called Shmitmo. Thus you placate the Democrats, and also show some recognition of REALITY.
It's kinda like the Steven Wright joke: "I woke up this morning, and during the night somebody had broken in and stolen everything I own, and replaced it with its exact duplicate."
That's what we need to do: close Gitmo, and replace it with its exact duplicate. That'll placate the LUNATICS on the left.
Interesting!
I noticed this and think how it does apply currently.
“In terms of propriety, rather than disqualification, I would distinguish quite sharply between a public statement made prior to nomination for the bench, on the one hand, and a public statement made by a nominee to the bench.”
What is your definition of a good debate?
Surely you can't mean Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity?
Seriously, what is a good debate to you? And who on the right apparenlty has done this. And note that in order for there to be a good debate you have to have both sides represented. Which means if there is a good debate is HAS to include someone from both sides.
Well there is a difference between a footnote or a public statement. But the difference as I see it is one of legal talk vs public talk. It's just Scalia would probably not say this in public. But you have to believe he thinks it to some degree. Lot's of public officials believe things they would never say publically because they would get in trouble. She didn't guard her remarks. But her opinion is sort of true.
Although I am a lapsed Catholic, I find myself in a difficult position when I consider the level of evidence necessary to make an accusation actionable. The Catholic Church has many enemies, many who'd like to see it destroyed (Don't believe me? Take a trip to your local multiplex…), many to whom the 8th Commandment means nothing. This is not to say that I don't believe that these abuses take place: the priesthood has become too convenient a refuge for rogues, either predatory hunters utilizing a ready-made duck blind or earnest(?) men who seek to sublimate their perverse desires, then forget to try very hard. I can understand the hesitation of the church hierarchy to turn their own over to law-enforcement authorities, as there seems to be an immediate presumption of guilt in all cases, particularly here in the U.S. And it would not be philosophically out-of-line for the church to leave individuals under clouds of suspicion to God's judgment. But where they can ascertain that a problem exists, they *should* address it – rather than transferring predatory priests to other parishes… (a truly sickening practice…)
That said, I whole-heartedly agree that the church should – wherever possible – keep itself REMOVED from the political (and judicial) process – here in the U.S. and elsewhere. I remember, many years ago, when Archbishops of the Catholic Church involved themselves in the Robert Chambers ("Preppie Murder") case, submitting character references testifying to the fact that Chambers was a good boy, a former altar boy. I was ready to tear my freakin' hair out. And when Popes involve themselves in U.S./world politics, I want to scream. Shades of the Borgias…
I don't mean about the Constitution. I mean the conservative canard that the founding fathers set this thing in stone and no deviation should be allowed. There is no way that would even be possible.
The basic tenants of the Constitution remain strong and are a fondation for this country. But the various laws derived from the Constitution have different interpretations. That is why you have a judicial branch. If everything were set in stone then there would be no need for a judiciary. But 200 years have proved there are multiple interpretations some of which please Conservatives and some of which please Liberals. Although in time the Liberal policies please most everyone proving [to me] that Liberals are ahead of the curve and set the standards we all come to respect.
Ann Coulter will embarrass 99% of the liberals you bring to her. Love her or hate her, her books are meticulously cited and she makes good points.
A good debate is a liberal not pandering to a left-wing crowd and cracking Christianity jokes ad nauseam to cover of the fact that they have no cogent points. Bring a lefty who can be civil and then conservatives will consider debating you.
Obama hates America. Once you accept that fact, then all BO's policies to destroy American, make sense.
ModDEM.. go back and check the thread about Hitchens and… i can't remember the Christian that he debated. That's a debate that had respect and integrity on both sides.
Note I even wrote in my post, I can't stand Hannity… i used to, til I got tired of his cheerleading and shouting.
To me a good TV-debater (from the right-side) are people like Joe Scarborough, Neal Cavuto, Brit Hume, Chris Wallace, Rush, or when he was able to, Tony Snow.. Those guys give you the chance to get your points out, and then they'll debate you on the merits of your points, and if you can't argue your points, you're going to get run over and look like the imbecile. That's why I give Maddow (and to a lesser extent, AC.) credit on the left.
Ann is not a debater.. she is more of a point out the flaws of your logic with snarky comebacks (IMO).
Wrong again, Thompson criticized Moore, Moore challenged him to a debate, Thompson chickened out:
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.p...
While I will leave it up to the conservatives to debate your hypocrisy and the Treasury Department to determine whether the “box upon box of cigars” violates the trade embargo, I hereby challenge you to a health care debate.
Survey after survey has indicated that health care is one of the top issues to the American voters. Today, more than 46 million people lack health care coverage, including 9 million children. We pay significantly more than any other country in the world – and get less back. Americans life expectancy is lower than other developed countries and our infant mortality rates are higher. And our heroic Ground Zero 9/11 workers live in a society where the Bush Administration has shown more concern about their travel than about their health.
Our debate would provide you an opportunity to appeal to the right wing of the Republican Party by continuing to attack me; it would give me a chance to discuss health care and tell you exactly what happened in Cuba, given your apparent interest; and it would provide the American people an opportunity to see just how serious Hollywood can be, with a purported conservative and an avowed progressive Hollywood personality on stage. "
The breitbots can't get anything right.
And "virtually impossible" implies that something rarely happens. I cited many examples that show that Preliesky is lying about this.
bwahah… okay, now it is too laugh… you use a michael moore letter that he posted on his own site to claim that he sent this off… (somehow I have my doubts about this)..
Note that Thompson A) criticized moore and the B) offered to take him on in a debate.
So now Moore "responds' on his website (which there's no guarantee Mr. Thompson reads)… Note that none of this challenge ever (to my knowledge) made it out to the public, and then throws up a bunch of half-truths and lies, and yet claim it's 'all true' and calls Preiliesky a liar?
I have to comment regarding the Catholic church. I'm a lapsed Catholic, haven't been inside a church since I was 17, and have my own gripes with the organized church, but I have to address the comments made about the abuse of children. Yes, there have been, unfortunately too many instances of this, one instance would be too many. However, the fact that pedophiles have been attracted to the church because it allowed them to be in a position to exploit trust, and the fact that there have been corrupt bishops and others who have covered for them doesn't taint the church as a whole, or the religion. The recent abuse of children in Ireland, I read the UK press regularly, and there is no doubt that some nuns and priests beat these children horribly, and the molestation has been found to have been by a few priests, and the majority at the hand of those who are called "Christian Brothers".
No church is free from being infiltrated by monsters like those who exploit and abuse children. I've read about pedophiles in the Hasidic community, in fact there was a recent scandal in NY where repeated child rapes were hushed up, and the perpetrator was allowed to flee to Israel before the most recent attack could be reported, and similar rapes of children at an orthodox school in Australia, within the past few months.
Such things should never be allowed to happen. To me however, I know the fact that the Catholic church has done more to aid poor children, here and around the world, than any other religion. Catholics have been at the forefront of all human and civil rights movements, from the very inception of those concepts. As a child, my parents struggled as factory workers. My mother became ill, with thyroid problems, and was hospitalized. My dad couldn't take time off work to care for us, so the nuns at our parish took turns taking care of us, doing housework and laundry, cooking our meals until he came home from work each day, and that continued until my mother had recuperated. I remember them doing this and many other things for others in our working poor factory town parish, and they did these things out of kindness and love.
http://www.thetablet.co.uk/article/13152
According to this report which is confirmed by many other liberal news organizations who are against the church. The scandals occured between the 1950's until the 1970's. The scandals became public a few days ago. Evidently many of the people involved in the scandal are no longer alive.
However the Arch Bishop of Ireland has denounced what has happened and is personally going to go to the Pope. So far there has not been a response as of yet.
So you agree then that we should start electing judiciary members as the full context fo this quote states………………….
"But in any case, Justice Ginsburg greatly exaggerates the difference between judicial and legislative elections. She asserts that “the rationale underlying unconstrained speech in elections for political office–that representative government depends on the public’s ability to choose agents who will act at its behest–does not carry over to campaigns for the bench.” Post, at 4. This complete separation of the judiciary from the enterprise of “representative government” might have some truth in those countries where judges neither make law themselves nor set aside the laws enacted by the legislature. It is not a true picture of the American system. Not only do state-court judges possess the power to “make” common law, but they have the immense power to shape the States’ constitutions as well. See, e.g., Baker v. State, 170 Vt. 194, 744 A. 2d 864 (1999). Which is precisely why the election of state judges became popular.12"
It seems to me that say what you want about Catholicism and the Pope, the last thing that is happening is that he is being ignored.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/The_Pop...
http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/...
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,367353...
http://atheism.about.com/od/benedictxvi/i/Ratzing...
"I'd like to see Al Gore debate about his passionate cause of Global Warming, instead of citing only scientists who live off the research grants. "
Al Gore at any debate…..
"Lockbox"
[...] Do We REALLY Need Identity Politics To Extend To SCOTUS? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) First Things – The [...]
Though I do think the Irish Bishops could be a bit stronger on the sex schandal, it's hardly something unique to the Catholic Church – though of course it get's less hyped & headlined. Eg the abuse in the Ultra-Orthodox Jewish community:
http://wcbstv.com/local/sex.abuse.jews.2.972934.h...
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/Story?id=7376057&...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1088346.html
Obama Bought The Presidency
[...] Do We REALLY Need Identity Politics To Extend To SCOTUS? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) First Things – The [...]
[...] Hudnall, Big Hollywood: What’s ‘Latina’ Got to do With It? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) First Things – The [...]
[...] Hudnall, Big Hollywood: What’s ‘Latina’ Got to do With It? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) Leigh Scott, Big Hollywood: [...]
[...] Hudnall, Big Hollywood: What’s ‘Latina’ Got to do With It? Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Grand Rants: Sotomayor on Video (Sotomayor’s Outrageous Comments) Leigh Scott, Big Hollywood: [...]
[...] opponents and others offering a politically incorrect point of view Burt Prelutsky, Big Hollywood: A Little Straight Talk Michelle Malkin: Why they hate us and Media Malpractice: The documentary Jonah Goldberg, National [...]
Awesome website…
[...]the time to read or visit the content or sites we have linked to below the[...]……
You must be logged in to post a comment.