Things Heard: e83v4
Thursday, September 3rd, 2009 at
9:00 am
- While some on the American left thought speaking out against Bush, part of a “truth to power” legacy … this is what it really looks like.
- Your government at wurk.
- Some more climate conversation.
- Amazingly this isn’t a right wing parody.
- The WH middle east plan, err, muddled mess.
- Mr Sullivan and his remarks on Ms Palin put in context.
- No matter how nutty some, however, are still fans regardless.
- Ontology and 1+1=2.
- Two on the gospel message, here and here.
- Rationing, a term with common and technical uses.
- A heroic act.
- Looking at supplemental material suggested for Mr Obama’s kiddie address. One wonders how the left reconciles their anti-establishment roots with Questions emphasized the “importance” of the students listening and doing what the President “and other elected officials say” are “important”.
- Corruption in plain sight.
- When Scripture doesn’t match the message you’re peddling … change the Scripture … nobody will notice, but geesh pick a less well known story if you want that to work.
Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!
Speaking for myself, not necessarily The Left, I wonder just exactly what you’re asking for?
If Obama (et. al.) doesn’t affirm a set of priorities and values, he’ll be declared nihilistic — nay, possibly even dread ‘secularist.’
If instead he does say something affirmative and definite (however bland in fact) to whatever audience, he is — help me out here — flouting anti-establishment-ness? In a bad way? You’re for it or against it? You’re for or against the prospect of his disappointing the anti-establishment types?
I would think that the straight line is simply to state that you disagree with Obama’s values and priorities; that you think they’re the wrong ones, for reasons A, B, and C, and since they are the wrong ones, they shouldn’t be promoted.
Alas no. Instead you participate in this odd game where you say lots, imply lots more, but rarely quite get around to just acknowledging that you disagree with him/them, let alone giving reasons for that disagreement.
Plenty of us on The Left were for the rule of law, among other definite values, both before and after January 2009. I doubt you give a crap, but I will continue supporting the rule of law no matter who occupies the White House, and will notice and object to departures from it.