The last week and a half or so has been amazing, in more than one respect. In the Washington, D.C., area, we had Popemageddon, followed by the shocking (shocking!) budget showdown over Planned Parenthood and near Government shutdown (again!).
The amazing thing, though, has been some of the quotes coming from the right wing. More than a little bit of delusion going on here. Complete detachment from reality. Real head-scratchers. (All of these have been pulled from actual newspapers–I’m not going to link to them, because I just scribbled them into a notebook as I came across them, and don’t have the links handy… If you want to find them, Google is your friend.)
How could it come to the point that people would turn their backs on Christians?
(This was in reference to the Kim Davis/Same-sex marriage debacle.) Okay. First, nobody has turned their backs on Christians. (Snark: I’d be afraid of getting a knife in the back…) On Christianity, perhaps–but primarily because we’ve taken a long, hard look at the supposed followers of Christianity. If that’s “goodness and morality,” I’ll look elsewhere. (Yes, I’m aware that some of them are truly good people; I’m related to some of them. I’m also aware that more Muslims are good people than otherwise. I’m waiting for the groups to start policing themselves, and ‘clean up’ some of the dreck.)
We will aggressively pursue a vote on the Responsible Spending and Accountability Act, our bold, long-term plan to fund the government within current budget caps, strengthen our national security and hold President Obama accountable. (Rep. Bill Flores, R-Tex., on a plan to de-fund Planned Parenthood)
Yep. “Fund,” if by “fund” you mean “de-fund.” Their plan has more cuts than a scissors factory. And, by the way, nothing to strengthen national security, as such. As to holding the President accountable–I’m confused. Accountable for what, exactly?
Republicans have rallied to [Fiorina’s] side, not just to defend one of their own against fact-checkers and attacks from Democrats for misrepresenting what was in the video, but also because she brings a fresh voice and perspective to what has long been a predictable debate over abortion.
A “fresh voice”? Seems to me that the voice and perspective have been sticking firmly to the party line–nothing fresh here. (Well, okay, you’ve actually got a Republican woman talking about abortion; that’s certainly outside the norm.) And here’s a hint: If you’re defending someone from those pesky fact-checkers, you might want to check your own facts. She’s claiming the video shows things which are demonstrably not in the video. Almost as if she hadn’t actually watched it. Hmmm….
There was a fourth one, about the Pope (how conservative Catholics shouldn’t rush to condemn him) (!); but I’m overall of very mixed feelings about the guy. He’s got lots of great things to say–particularly about looking out for the poor and disadvantaged. But he’s also got a bunch of not-so-cool things wrapped up in his Church, and shows few signs of dealing with them…
Actually, here’s a fourth one, for a touch of sanity:
[N]either do I look with favor upon those who would work to subvert Article VI of the Constitution by requiring a religious test, even by indirection. For if they disagree with that safeguard, they should be openly working to repeal it.
. . . [C]ontrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President.
I am the Democratic Party’s candidate for President who happens also to be a Catholic.
I do not speak for my church on public matters; and the church does not speak for me. Whatever issue may come before me as President, if I should be elected, on birth control, divorce, censorship, gambling or any other subject, I will make my decision in accordance with these views – in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be in the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressure or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to decide otherwise.
But if the time should ever come – and I do not concede any conflict to be remotely possible – when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office; and I hope any other conscientious public servant would do likewise.
That would be (candidate for President, at the time) John F. Kennedy, explaining why his being a Catholic shouldn’t disqualify him from the Presidency. Yes, there was such a time. Kim Davis could do with thinking about that last paragraph, too…
So, for next time, I’m looking at a number of other articles on BoBs, GHBs, and the like. As usual, if there’s any desire for me to look at a certain topic, let me know in the comments, and I’ll see what I can do.