Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
American Digest: And I like this from "The Blog That Nobody Reads", because it is -- mostly -- about me. What can I say? I'm on an ego trip today. It won't last.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Dr. Melissa Clouthier: Morgan Freeberg at House of Eratosthenes (pftthats a mouthful) honors big boned women in skimpy clothing. The picture there is priceless--keep scrolling down.
Exile in Portales: Via Gerard: Morgan Freeberg, a guy with a lot to say. And he speaks The Truth...and it's fascinating stuff. Worth a read, or three. Or six.
Just Muttering: Two nice pieces at House of Eratosthenes, one about a perhaps unintended effect of the Enron mess, and one on the Gore-y environ-movie.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
The Virginian: I know this post will offend some people, but the author makes some good points.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
I would like to submit the following as exhibit “A” –
“The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can require voters to produce photo identification without violating their constitutional rights, validating Republican-inspired voter ID laws.”
Tell me again witness Morgan why you won’t be voting for McCain.
- tim | 04/30/2008 @ 10:27Lately, I see it with everything he does: He comes from a central-authority world, in which some singular kiosk determines for the benefit of all the lowly peasants what’s decent, what’s “beyond the pale,” what’s left, what’s right, what’s centrist.
I’m just not ready to live in that kind of a world. In my reality, it’s “left-wing” to say your execution, which comes within 168 hours of the murder you committed, might have a chance of being quicker and involving less pain. “Centrist” would mean if you beat the guy to death with a baseball bat, that’s exactly what happens to you. And I don’t call it “right-wing” until we’re executing you in such a manner when the possibility exists that when you killed the other guy, it was an accident.
Well, we have this prevailing notion that classifies “right” and “left” differently; to them, “right-wing” means we eventually ban the death penalty, but take a really long time to do it; “left” means, of course, we don’t even start. A lot of people would make a good argument that my notions of “right” and “left” are pretty cockeyed. But you know what? I’d say that about the prevailing notion. It stands, as it is, because some people do a lot of organizing and complaining and holding candlelight vigils, and other people do not. It’s all social thinking — no logical thinking. And no democracy either. So funny we talk a lot about having “dialogues” about things. We don’t have a dialogue about this. We don’t even vote on it. And so it’s presumed that a big chunk of our electorate wants to ban the death penalty just like “civilized” countries in Europe. Ban means…it never happens. Ever. It is the ultimate extremist position to take. We think of it as moderate. There’s no reason to think of it that way. None.
This is a bad example for the subject under discussion, because McCain’s stated position on the death penalty is that he agrees with me. The underlying issue is trust. McCain’s going through an extended season in which all eyes are on the democrats, who in turn are on the defensive. He doesn’t need to make any deals yet. But when it’s time to compromise, he’ll jump at the chance to do it. He has no conservative principles, to which I think he’d stick when push comes to shove. And from the death penalty to the war in Iraq to strict interpretation of the Constitution, I think he’ll fold on each and every single issue when the time comes to make a new buddy in the beltway, and We The People won’t have a single thing to say about any of it.
This is the world of McCain: The few dictate the tastes of the many. Voters don’t tell leaders what’s right and wrong — leaders tell voters. Like I said, I see it in everything he does. I saw it in the blow-up over that ad for the North Carolina Republican party. McCain, so far as I have been able to learn, has never articulated exactly what’s wrong with the ad. The opposition clearly feel that he works for THEM, not us, and I’m sure he agrees. He’s just in touch with the “right” people, he’s got the right names in his rolodex, he’s listened to the proper wisened counsel, and now he’s going to tell us lowly wage slaves what’s decent and what’s not.
I’m represented in the Senate by Dianne Feinstein, so I’ve had quite enough of that thankyewverymuch.
- mkfreeberg | 04/30/2008 @ 11:35OK, got it. You don’t like/trust McCain. Hey, I totally get that and agree with some of what you’re saying. He wasn’t my first choice either and I’ve got plenty of issues with him. But having Obama or Clinton making Supreme Court nominations scares me more.
Choice A, choice B, that’s all we got. Sometimes in life the choices aren’t to our liking. Not participating doesn’t solve anything. I’m not comfortable sitting on the sidelines and letting others decide who is going to be our President.
Leaving Saddam in power, going to war; both choices suck. Someone had to make the tough call though. (Unless your Bill Clinton).
- tim | 04/30/2008 @ 12:16