08 September 2009

Coffee Cup Browsing (Cranky Edition)

Definition of "ironic hypocrisy": Michael Moore, fat cat filmmaker, condemns capitalism as evil. Will he stop taking those royalty checks? Nawwwww. Will he invest those profits in his next socialist project? Of course!

I've come to believe that charging your political opponents with being racists and/or Nazis is meaningless. Being an accused "terrorist" is a close third. Rational political discourse in this country is dead.

Why did the NYT, CNN, LAT, etc. ignore the Van Jones scandal? They ignored him because they agree with him. . .that's why.

Archbishop does his job. Gets slammed. Predictable.

They didn't bother disciplining him while he was alive. . .can they slap him on the wrist now that he's dead? Hardly.

To the ELCA: it's 500 years too late to be crying "heresy!" now. . .you shoulda thought of this before leaving the Church.

They should be publicly whipped and pilloried. Seriously.

That NYT bubble must be gettin' low on air: B.O. is "explicitly non-ideological"! This reminds me of my poli sci prof freshman year who predicted with both confidence and glee that Reagan would lose big to the Democratic nominee in 1984. Lesson: experts are "former squirts."

Americans are making a crucial distinction between Labor and Labor Unions. 'Bout time.

The text of Obama's speech to schoolchildren. . .now, let us see the draft before parents starting screaming bloody murder about using their children to create a cult of personality.

OK. Enough. Back to some serious reading. . .


  1. I think it's careless to make claims that there was a completely different speech for schoolchildren in the works before parents found out about it. Maybe that was just the crankiness speaking.

    If there WAS a different speech prepared, and there was no outcry before, and he gave that different speech, and it turned out to be "cult of personality" or morally reprehensible or whatever else, there'd be hell to pay. There would have been a GREATER outcry than there was when the contents of the speech were unknown.

    Let's not make a caricature of Obama and fight against it. Deal with the actual man and his actual actions. For example, he said if you want to know his policy, look at the people he surrounds himself with. Case in point: Van Jones.

  2. Jeffrey,

    It's more than my a.m. crankiness...it's my general suspicion and cynicism about all politicians.

    I think the curriculum material sent out by the Dept of Ed gives us sufficient evidence that the speech was going to be political, if not indoctrinating. Nothing in the speech as it was given would lead to the assignment: "Write to letter to your future self describing how you will help the president."

    The Dept of Ed withdrew the material and changed the assignment...only after the outcry.

  3. Scott W.11:23 AM

    Archbishop does his job. Gets slammed. Predictable.

    At Ten Reasons blog, GailF noted that this "Bishop does job" story didn't rate page 6, let alone the front page. The only reason it made there is the typical wimper of, "Authority. We hates it! My Preciousss!"

  4. The Archbishop of Cincinnati got slammed (unfortunately), but Fr. Z's readers turned the ridiculous poll in that article around: