After a very tough day on Monday, I feel better these last few days than I have in over a month. I have been putting ice on the back routinely, and think that is accomplishing what taking some NSAIDs would do, without the additional stomach problems. Still a ways to go, as my right leg is not working as it should, but the pain is much less. Last two mornings I have been able to sleep later instead of waking around 5 in pain.
And I don't have a lot of time this morning, as I have to get going on some work. But saw a few things during the coffee/reading that might interest some.
Tomasky suggests that McCain and Palin have learned the lessons of the Bush administration and decided to "take them up a notch." Bush learned that the press didn't fact check, but merely passed on lies in a dutiful fashion. McCain has learned that lesson and he and his Alaska counterpart are lying on a daily basis. The Bridge to Nowhere nonsense continues, even though it has been refuted. Lately, the McCain camp is saying that Obama wanted to teach kindergartners explicit sex techniques. Nope. But until the press actually factchecks, we only have McCain and Palin's own internal morality to count on. I know she is a Bible believing Christian, but so far, that only means that the religious right loves her, no matter how badly she lies, or how juvenile and mean-spirited she is. WWJD? Lie his ass off, evidently.
Tony takes on the contradictions between the right's theology and their political stances.
And finally, this from a, er, Pennsylvania friend about the politics of racial resentment. I think he has a lot of good points--especially that the Republicans are playing to working class white resentments about "elites." We have discussed that here at the blog many times, but it is worth reminding how utterly ridiculous it is to suggest that voting for someone "like us" is a good idea. This "dumbing down" of the Presidency is ridiculous, and of course, we are living with the results after the last 8 years. That people want to spin the dial for 4 more with this same approach just makes no sense.
4 comments:
I know she is a Bible believing Christian, but so far, that only means that the religious right loves her, no matter how badly she lies, or how juvenile and mean-spirited she is.
In my book, a politician's claim to be a Bible-believing Christian creates a rebuttable presumption of fraud and incompetence. There just isn't any other reason than slimy votemongering to make a big deal of your religious beliefs on the campaign trail.
There just isn't any other reason than slimy votemongering to make a big deal of your religious beliefs on the campaign trail. Daggone. That is a sweet line. I like it.
Streak, we have GOT to do a "Leighton Top Ten" or something.
Well, if I had it to write again, I would have said "sectarian" instead of "religious." "Take care of the poor" and "Oh, hey, let's not torture" are, for many people, religious beliefs, which also happen to be supported by secular reason and ideas of justice. It's more precise to say that my complaint is with people who (as you mentioned on a thread on your blog) can't affirm anything without simultaneously giving or implying a laundry list of things they're against.
And by "things they're against" I (and they) really mean "people they're against."
Yay language!
Post a Comment