September 9, 2008
-
Common Ground Between Competing Fundamentalists
This is an excerpt from an article that provides an interesting point of view that hadn't occured to me by highlighting the parallels between Christian and Muslim fanatics. Although, it's not as though I needed more reasons not to vote McCain/Palin.
"Palin has a right to her religious beliefs, as do fundamentalist Muslims who agree with her on so many issues of social policy. None of them has a right, however, to impose their beliefs on others by capturing and deploying the executive power of the state. The most noxious belief that Palin shares with Muslim fundamentalists is her conviction that faith is not a private affair of individuals but rather a moral imperative that believers should import into statecraft wherever they have the opportunity to do so. That is the point of her pledge to shape the judiciary. Such a theocratic impulse is incompatible with the Founding Fathers' commitment to tolerance and democracy, which is why they forbade the government to "establish" or officially support any particular religion or denomination.
McCain once excoriated the Rev. Jerry Falwell and his ilk as "agents of intolerance." That he took such a position gave his opposition to similar intolerance in Islam credibility. In light of his more recent disgraceful kowtowing to the Christian right, McCain's animus against fundamentalist Muslims no longer looks consistent. It looks bigoted and invidious. You can't say you are waging a war on religious extremism if you are trying to put a religious extremist a heartbeat away from the presidency."
Read the whole thing here. Also, Effect Measure has been all over Palin's policies on community organizers, religion guiding public policy, banning books, troopergate, sexual orientation, teen pregnancy/sex education, and reproductive rights.
On a lighter note - posthumous new comedy album from Mitch Hedberg! He is missed.
Comments (5)
Effective measures: "a Forum for progressive public health discussion..."
- is there anything you read (or watch, or listen to) that DOESN'T have a left-leaning bias, ever? Anything?
Selling the ex-governor's plane on E-bay: OMG, that's a great stump speech line that ppl on the left have twisted to claim it's a "lie". Ohh the humanity!!! The truth is that the plane was put on e-bay (as was claimed), and was actually sold later (not on e-bay)--> NOT "Sold on e-bay" as is claimed by the article. But because it's a great stump speech line about the reality of Palin's taking on corruption. The reality is that she DID indeed get rid of the plane because it was wasteful and she fought the corruption. Heaven forbid she put in a one-liner about putting it on e-bay. Oh the LIES LIES LIES!!!! - Talk about purposely missing the point. (and grasping at straws to attack something not worth attacking).
moving on:
THis is arguably the largest laugh of all of the left leaning tripe you've linked to:
"This is another in our Daily Dose of Sarah Palin, because even if John McCain didn't think it was that important to learn a lot about the person who might be the next President should some medical event befall the 72 year old cancer survivor should he be elected, most people want more information."
- let me get this straight. People are interested in knowing all the seedy details about Palin? This would be all of the people who for the last 2 years have ignored any details about Obama and his family and his decisions and his associations and his theology and his philosophy?
Within 1 week of the announcement, I've read, heard, seen, and smelt more slime (insert "lear a lot") from the media and bloggers like you progressive "Effect Measure" than I have over the last TWO YEARS about the big "O"bama.
It boggles my mind how it's so important to find out about the person who would step in the shoes of the president - should the president fall, and not concern themselves about the person who would be president from the get go.
As if I needed more reason NOT to vote for OBAMA.
Thanks for all of these links, I can use them to share with folks how biased and ignorant the left (or progressives or liberals)really are and how irrelevant the truth is to them. (And how ironic it is that sights loaded with lies about Palin and McCain - and even Bush, profess they are against the lies of McCain, Palin and Bush).
I'd take my time and debunk for you all of the biased slime posted on these links (Such as the lack of relevant facts present in the overly biased presentation on "troopergate", or the devoid of actual substance "mixing religion and politics" story), but I'd rather watch paint dry.
BTW. this line is just pure stupidity and should be a red flag to anyone who thinks independently: "Neither Sarah Palin nor John McCain, both of whom are politicians, care if politicians get a bad name."
-- but I'm sure you don't see any bias in this unsubstantiated - emotionally based - hollow OPINION that is professed as fact.
thanks for the laughs.
@sends -
"Effect measure: 'a Forum for progressive public health discussion...'
- is there anything you read (or watch, or listen to) that DOESN'T have a left-leaning bias, ever? Anything?"
Fox news is my cable channel of choice when I just want something on in the background - I've never watched more than 15 consecutive minutes of CNN. I've seen every episode of the O'Reilly Factor for the last six years. I watch him more as a case study in techniques, tendencies, styles, and methods of a very successful broadcast journalist and what his success says about the media and the American people. I also subscribe to Dennis Miller's radio show - though I frequently disagree with him, I find him much more palatable than 99% of the dreck that talk radio has to offer. In short, I think I at make a decent attempt at hearing various sides of an argument, much more so than the handful of conservatives I know personally (excluding you) who insulate themselves in talk radio, fox news, townhall, NRO, etc. and wouldn't be caught dead watching Countdown, reading The Nation, or listening to Air America. What about you? Any left-leaning sources on your list?
"People are interested in knowing all the seedy details about Palin? This would be all of the people who for the last 2 years have ignored any details about Obama and his family and his decisions and his associations and his theology and his philosophy?"
To whom are you refering? Me? The writer(s) at Effect Measure? Obama supporters in general? How do you know what any of those people have ignored for the last two years? I have no doubt that certain Obama voters were drawn based on superficial criteria like his youth, his charisma, and/or the notion of change while ignorant of his decisions, philosophy, etc. but they are in the minority. Most supporters are well aware of any negative details of his political and personal life and see them as insignificant or have simply accepted them on account of his positions that are similar to their own. The topics addressed at Effect Measure are hardly "seedy details". We're talking dishonesty, hypocricy, and in the case of book-banning, lunacy as they pertain to policy decisions within her professional, political career.
"Within 1 week of the announcement, I've read, heard, seen, and smelt more slime (insert "lear a lot") from the media and bloggers like you progressive "Effect Measure" than I have over the last TWO YEARS about the big "O"bama. "
Really? Never been here, huh?
"I'd take my time and debunk for you all of the biased slime posted on these links (Such as the lack of relevant facts present in the overly biased presentation on "troopergate", or the devoid of actual substance "mixing religion and politics" story), but I'd rather watch paint dry."
Effect measure provided what seems to be a thorogh account of troopergate from beginning to present - What relevant facts were missed? The "mixing religion and politics" commentary simply cited previous examples of such by Gov. Palin and stated why that is dangerous - What substance were you hoping for?
A good rule of thumb when commenting on Xanga: don't make an unsubstantiated claim followed by your unwillingness to defend it. The claim is instantly rendered meaningless and it gives the impression you have nothing real to contribute.
"BTW. this line is just pure stupidity and should be a red flag to anyone who thinks independently: 'Neither Sarah Palin nor John McCain, both of whom are politicians, care if politicians get a bad name.'"
A little context is in order:
Effect measure - "Neither Sarah Palin nor John McCain, both of whom are politicians, care if politicians get a bad name. That's part of the game they are playing. To purposely denigrate public service (their own public service is fine, of course, and a reason to elect them). They don't want anybody to trust government. Cynicism is one of their most effective weapons and one of the reasons they find Obama's message of hope so threatening. It strikes at cynicism about government. If people think smearing of an opponent is just part of the political game and all politicians do it, including them, that's fine. They get a twofer. They hurt their opponent and they hurt the ideal of service to our fellow citizens."
"all of the left leaning tripe you've linked to"... "how biased and ignorant the left (or progressives or liberals)really are"... "all of the biased slime posted on these links"..."but I'm sure you don't see any bias in this unsubstantiated - emotionally based - hollow OPINION that is professed as fact."
Effect measure is a progressive blog written by a progressive author(s). It puts forth commentary on current event from a progressive perspective. Get over it.
@ filow
"I think I at make a decent attempt at hearing various sides of an argument"
- welp, I will have to take your word for that, because in all the time I've known you. I've never once heard you espouse anything (or read any source you've posted) that wasn't from a left leaning source - or rather your favorite left leaning comedy sources for hard news (Letterman and Daily Show).
- Granted you've never heard me quote any source (although when I source stuff in posts, I never pointed to a blog as a fact source, like ever)
- Why you watch FoxNews all of the time is beyond me however....
"In short, I think I at make a decent attempt at hearing various sides of an argument, much more so than the handful of conservatives I know personally"
2 things on that.
- 1st, I've always known you to be an intelligent person who does his homework on a lot of things (science and religion for example)and that is why it has always bugged me that it appears you only look at the left side of things - I've never not respected you for your opinions, I've just never seen any evidence that you looked much at the other side.
- 2nd, it doesn't surprise me that the majority of conservatives you know (in Q town especially) that don't do their homework. I do my fair share of debunking them where I'm at as well. Although I must admit, the majority of ppl in my school lean left to far left, and they are woefully misinformed.
-- I think we can both agree that regardless the side of the isle one is one, the majority don't have a clue why they
"wouldn't be caught dead watching Countdown, reading The Nation, or listening to Air America. "
- Well I never suggested you didn't have standards.
"What about you? Any left-leaning sources on your list?"
- several, and from time to time, when I can stomach it, I do watch a 1/2hr of Oberman just to see how far MSNBC can fall.
But seriously, as you may remember my current profession as "student" I get little TV time and much get most of my sources on line, and I read many of left news sites (if they are backed by print media, they are almost always left leaning anyway. But I do check lib blogs like the daily Kos and others (again till I can't stomach it and move on) which is ironic that I can stomach the daily kos more than I can Michael Moore, but that's a whole other convo.
As for radio, I'm pretty selective I too can't stand most of the conservative talk radio pundits for the right (and I didn't know Air America was still around).
incidentally, I have also been receiving daily e-mails from the Obama Campaign for nearly 2 years now - something I can't say for McCain.
"Really? Never been here, huh?"
- I suppose this site somehow contains what you consider 'real information' about Obama's record, his true past, et. al.? I guess I need to spend more time there because all it reads like is an apologetic for those who would smear Obama, and doesn't give any salient detail about his past, his associations, his education, his family, his political career. All it appears to give is retorts to the one line smears.
As an example: In fact -The very first one about william aires doesn't even address the real relationship that Obama indeed does have with william aires. It simply argues that someone else launched his career and ergo if you say william aires (by hosting Obamas first fundraiser in Aire's home) launched Obamas career then it's a smear. But it does throw something in there about John McCain that has nothing to do with Bill Aires or Obama.
- Obviously this site DOES NOT DISCUSS anything about the relationship and life of Obama beyond that point and DOESN'T tell you or me anything about OBAMA. There may be sites dedicated to an open and honest look at Obama's career, you must be joking if you are arguing that one does - cause it doesn't.
I still stand by this: "Within 1 week of the announcement, I've read, heard, seen, and smelt more slime (insert "lear a lot") from the media and bloggers like you
progressive "Effect Measure" than I have over the last TWO YEARS about the big "O"bama. "
"Effect measure provided ... What relevant facts were missed?"
let me reiterate: "I'd rather watch paint dry."
Is it fair that I'm not taking the lengthy time to go through and bisect each and every point I disagree with and give links to other sources that show their biased writing (such as "the taser was on 'test' setting - as if that is somehow makes it acceptable to tase an 11 year old) - NOPE, not fair at all.
But I do have a lot more things to do in life nowadays (unlike the good old days -where, as you may recall, I would spend hours online getting all of the salient details just to prove my point and then dissect every tidbit from everyone else).
How's this? - Someday I can post a bunch of article you don't like and demand you dissect everyone of them when you point out their bias and slanted reporting of some of the facts. And you can give me the same response and we'll all be happy!
"Effect measure is a progressive blog written by a progressive author(s). It puts forth commentary on current event from a progressive perspective. Get over it."
to quote Marla Singer from Fight Club "candy Stripe or Cancer ward, not my problem"
- I was over it before I started posting on your page.
I would just like to see you source something neutral for once when it comes to making a political point (maybe you have, it's been a while since I've been back to xanga, but it appears to me to be the same old same old) as a source, or God forbid - right leaning - as a source for your leftist things - just once.
Of course those sites don't exist I guess, but far be it for me to expect you to source anything NOT LEFT LEANING in your blog.
P.S.
I had to get the previous post done, and go off to work, but I did want to include my apologies for presuming you don't seek other sources.
@sends -
Your presumption that I seek only left-leaning sources is definitely understandable given that your only point of reference is this site. Besides my wife, I don't know how anyone could know that I seek alternate sources. All of the links in my custom module are neutral or liberal, and this results in my citing of said sources for two reasons. 1) The material is original content that isn't available anywhere else. 2) When citing a news story with a mass release that is virtually word for word everywhere, I see my citation as an endorsement of that source. I would rather send traffic (ha! I know it's only like two or three people) to a site that I support or prefer. In the case of science posts, I cite the highest in the hierarchy that contains the info I'm looking for and work my way down and stop when I get to the mainstream sources.
Comments are closed.