Home > Uncategorized > Good things come in threes. So do morons Republican politicians with surprisingly archaic, factually unsupportable opinions of women’s sexual health.

Good things come in threes. So do morons Republican politicians with surprisingly archaic, factually unsupportable opinions of women’s sexual health.

#3

It’s a trifecta!  If you haven’t been paying attention, women don’t get pregnant when raped, because they secrete their God-given special sauce.  And women don’t ever need abortions to save their health.  And besides, God intended them to carry their rapist’s fetus to term.

Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said Tuesday when a woman becomes pregnant during a rape, “that’s something God intended.”

http://www.sfgate.com/news/politics/article/Mourdock-God-at-work-when-rape-leads-to-pregnancy-3975678.php

  1. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 8:28 am
  2. Anonymous
    October 24, 2012 at 8:32 am

    Mitch, I agree with your position on choice and get that Mourdock is a tad blind or perhaps simple. But your way of pointing this out is simply mean spirited and nasty. I thought Josh and Conrad moved away and we were entering a new era around here where there could be honest, even heated, but civil conversation. It looks like all thats happened is that you’re channeling Josh. Too bad, I doubt you’ll change anyones mind by calling them morons even if they are wrong.

  3. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 8:36 am

    You’re absolutely right, Anonymous. “Cretins” would have been more appropriate.

    I can understand people with “pro-life” positions. Last night I heard a nice radio show with pro-choice and pro-life representatives pointing out the need to seek common ground. I agree with that.

    But the latest crop of GOP weasels do not deserve civility or a shred of respect. They are misogynistic idiots who have been allowed into places of power that should horrify anyone.

    If you want to pretend to know “God’s” thoughts, then why is it that a rapist is apparently helping God, but a woman who aborts a pregnancy that results from rape is not helping God? Isn’t it all part of God’s mysterious ways? At least try to put on a fig-leaf of decency when you pretend to speak for God.

  4. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 8:53 am

    Awww, we need more civility for people like Todd Akin and ol’ Dipshit Mourdock here because they … they … wait, why? Fuck your civility, we’re not talking about being nice here we’re talking about men, willfully ignorant men demanding that women adhere to their particular brand of theological bullshit and then going public with those absurd positions. This is not about being polite, it’s about recognizing the sovereignty of a woman’s very existence, recognizing and respecting that she is capable and entitled to make decisions about her well-being. It’s not about you, it never was and it never will be.

    I don’t give a flying fuck what your positions on birth control, abortion or any other women’s health issue are, it doesn;t fucking matter, it’s not your life and it’s not your body so mind your fucking business before we come snooping around your personal life to investigate how and who you have sex with, when and where and if it meets our particular standards. Wrapping yourself in your personal beliefs is no defense, they apply to you and no one else, you don’t get to rule someone else’s body because you believe some shit a preacher told you while you wasted two hours of a beautiful Sunday morning.

    It’s really fucking simple, you want civil debate, mind your own fucking business. Is that polite enough for you? Condescending fuckwit.

  5. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 8:56 am

    Thank you #4. My #3 missed by a lot, but I think you more or less summed things up.

  6. anonymous
    October 24, 2012 at 8:57 am

    mean spirited and nasty is mitch’s middle name

  7. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 8:59 am

    Nah. It’s Jay.

  8. October 24, 2012 at 8:59 am

    In the case of the Christian right, “cretin” is a better choice, since it derives from the French crétin, ‘Christian,’ but I agree with the larger point Anonymous is making. These threads are often heated and contentious, so one need not apply heat in the original post to get a fire started in the comments. I would add that telling us that Mourdock, et al are morons, is not giving much credit to the intelligence of Herald readers.

  9. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 9:07 am

    Sorry, Joel, we disagree on this one. In fact, I think comment #4 is about the right level of description for the Mourdocks and Akins.

    My personal opinion is that there are religious pro-life arguments that could reasonably be used in an attempt to convince a woman not to have an abortion. But that’s separate from the civil issue of whether each woman has the right to control her body.

    There are simply limits to civility, and when men make comments that not only imply they have the right to control someone else’s body (because they know God’s will better than the person God gave the body to), but also PROVABLY demonstrate their almost inconceivable level of ignorance, they’ve forfeited any right to a civil discussion of their attitude.

  10. HUUFC
    October 24, 2012 at 9:10 am

    Mitch, what an obsession you have, I’ll just let the voters in Indiana handle it. In a country of almost 310 million people you just need to accept some diversity of thought.
    BTW, are you following the reports of when the White House was informed of the Benghazi attack, in real time. Let’s go to Las Vegas!

  11. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 9:15 am

    HUUFC,

    A mean spirited and rude person might point out that accepting diversity of thought could be interpreted as letting each person decide what they will do with their own body. But that might be mean spirited and rude, so I won’t say that. I’ll just wait for FUUHC to chime in.

  12. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 9:22 am

    Joel, you’re trying to play this like it’s a spirited college debate. It’s not. Have you noticed that men like Akin and Ryan and King and thousands of other white men make the fucking laws that govern us, and in this case literally govern the body of a fellow citizen.

    This isn’t about civility, it’s about power and control and I’ll be damned if a pig-ignorant fuck-stick like Akin or Mourdock is going to do it without some fucking heat coming back on them. You’re in no fucking position to ever have to worry about carrying a rapist’s baby, Joel, so you can be as level-headed and civil as you wish, the heat will never fucking touch you personally. If you can’t recognize the supreme dickishness of a cabal of men claiming they know what’s best for you because you possess ovaries then you’re part of the fucking problem and not part of the solution.

    You want fewer abortions? Allow the affordable access to contraceptives instead of dressing up in a purple robe and spouting off in a pulpit while your fellow clergyman is raping a child and telling us you know better. You want fewer abortions? Educate your BOYS and YOUNG MEN about sexuality and how to protect themselves and their partners so that it will never be necessary. You want fewer abortions, I want fewer abortions, claiming that we must be civil to those who allow no moderation, no compromise and no disobedience to their particular beliefs is only going to lead to friction and friction causes heat and then you’re gonna complain you got burned and disrespected. And that’s as it should be.

    And one other thing — you get the respect of being able to believe and follow the tenets of any particular brand of theology or spirituality you wish, that is not the point, the point is your beliefs deserve no particular respect at all, that must be earned.

  13. Clockmaker
    October 24, 2012 at 9:27 am

    No! N0! No! HUUFC! You just don’t understand! We are all allowed freedom of thought and belief as long as we agree with Mitch!, Right Mitch?

  14. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 9:31 am

    Um, clockmaker, you get freedom of thought and belief and even the ability to comment here. Have you noticed?

    What you don’t get when I don’t agree with you is my agreement.

  15. A pesky fact
    October 24, 2012 at 9:35 am

    I find it baffling that the same crowd that chants “get your laws off my body” advocates for Obamacare.

  16. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 9:37 am

    I find it baffling that the same people who are outraged at the imposition of a tax or a speed limit find it reasonable to order someone else to carry a fetus in their body for nine months, especially when it is the outcome of a rape.

    Life is baffling sometimes, pesky.

  17. Carla Baku
    October 24, 2012 at 9:38 am

    HUUFC–diversity of thought? Really? Let’s see: “Black citizens = 2/3 of a person.” “Jews are subhuman.” “Men should be limited to using a rod the approximate diameter of their thumbs when beating their wives.” “The New World is a howling wilderness, populated only by wild animals and savages.” “Fourteen-year-old-girls who want to go to school are dangerous.” “When you’ve seen one redwood, you’ve seen them all.” “Separate but equal.” “DDT is perfectly safe.” “Japanese internment: just in case.” “Eugenics is a boon–we’ll just breed our problems away.” Maybe some thoughts diverge so much they ought to be rounded up and made to account for themselves.

  18. Anonymous
    October 24, 2012 at 9:38 am

    And what does conservative repub Joe Bonino think?

  19. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 9:38 am

    You find it baffling because you’re a fucking dumbass. The Affordable Care Act is just that, the ability to afford basic health care without having to pay a fucking middle man like an insurance company. But you stick with those strawmen, at least they won’t burn down because of all the rain we’re getting.

  20. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 9:44 am

    The headline scanned better when it was just “morons.” Oh well.

  21. A pesky fact
    October 24, 2012 at 9:58 am

    Mitch,

    Do you support sexual-orientation-selective abortions?

    If a gene is identified that indicates a child will be gay, should it be legal to kill that child pre-birth on those grounds?

  22. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 10:01 am

    In the first trimester, no question, there is no obligation on a woman to carry a fetus to term. Once it can live outside of someone else’s body, no.

  23. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 10:04 am

    I’m assuming that when you talk about “killing that child prebirth” you’re referring to a woman aborting her pregnancy, and not to the Church dictating that no sexual sinners be born. But then, since God’s omnipotent, I guess he could take care of that on his own if he wished.

    And good lord, pesky, would you really want to put a woman through the trauma of bringing into the world someone she was convinced was damned for all eternity? That doesn’t seem very nice.

  24. October 24, 2012 at 10:07 am

    Republicans are the American Taliban.

    Nuff’ said.

  25. HUUFC
    October 24, 2012 at 10:20 am

    “Republicans are the American Taliban.” Mark that’s an outrageous dishonest statement. You can do better.

  26. A pesky fact
    October 24, 2012 at 10:22 am

    Mitch,

    When does life begin?

  27. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 10:31 am

    Several billion years ago at least, pesky.

    But you probably mean when does a fetus become entitled to the protection society normally provides to all persons simply by virtue of their humanity. That’s varied from society to society, and within societies.

    I don’t know why you’d care about my opinion on the matter, but I’d say it’s probably around the time the fetus can live outside of the mother, and that’s obviously a moving target. If I believed the dogma of one particular religion at one particular time, I’d feel differently, but I don’t see why that would privilege my opinion over that of other citizens of a democratic society with separation of church and state.

    You’ve probably heard the dark humor that Republicans believe protection of human life begins at conception and ends at birth. It sometimes sounds all too true to me.

  28. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 10:42 am

    You know, I’d probably be content to put the entire issue to a vote of all those persons capable of becoming pregnant.

  29. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 10:43 am

    HUUFC :
    “Republicans are the American Taliban.” Mark that’s an outrageous dishonest statement. You can do better.

    Yeah, how dare you compare the modern GOP — a white male dominated, Christo-fascist-dominionist-fundamentalist-driven group of god-bothering cretins to the Taliban, a darker-skinned, Mhuammed-fascist-dominionist-fundamentalist-driven group of god-bothering cretins.

    It’s totally unfair. White male Republicans KNOW what’s best for you because … god. The Taliban KNOW what’s best for you because … Allah. No fucking difference between them at all. I mean they don’t repress women, believers of other religions, homosexuals and apostates, nope, not an inkling of similarity.

  30. FUUHC
    October 24, 2012 at 11:02 am

    Deuteronomy 21:10-14 ESV

    “When you go out to war against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your hand and you take them captive, and you see among the captives a beautiful woman, and you desire to take her to be your wife, and you bring her home to your house, she shall shave her head and pare her nails. And she shall take off the clothes in which she was captured and shall remain in your house and lament her father and her mother a full month. After that you may go in to her and be her husband, and she shall be your wife. But if you no longer delight in her, you shall let her go where she wants. But you shall not sell her for money, nor shall you treat her as a slave, since you have humiliated her.”

  31. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:05 am

    pesky,

    Is this the guy who doesn’t want women terminating their pregnancies?

    Check out line 16, it’s a humdinger.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+13&version=NIV

    9 See, the day of the Lord is coming
    —a cruel day, with wrath and fierce anger—
    to make the land desolate
    and destroy the sinners within it.
    10 The stars of heaven and their constellations
    will not show their light.
    The rising sun will be darkened
    and the moon will not give its light.
    11 I will punish the world for its evil,
    the wicked for their sins.
    I will put an end to the arrogance of the haughty
    and will humble the pride of the ruthless.
    12 I will make people scarcer than pure gold,
    more rare than the gold of Ophir.
    13 Therefore I will make the heavens tremble;
    and the earth will shake from its place
    at the wrath of the Lord Almighty,
    in the day of his burning anger.
    14 Like a hunted gazelle,
    like sheep without a shepherd,
    they will all return to their own people,
    they will flee to their native land.
    15 Whoever is captured will be thrust through;
    all who are caught will fall by the sword.
    16 Their infants will be dashed to pieces before their eyes;
    their houses will be looted and their wives violated.

  32. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 11:08 am

    If “god” wants women to give birth to rapists’ babies, he certainly wouldn’t want the rapists punished for carrying out his will. In fact, let’s be consistent and stop punishing all crimes because they must be “god’s will” if he allows them to occur.

  33. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:10 am

    Get thee behind me, Satan!!!

  34. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:16 am

    Here’s the thing. No matter how much I try to be polite to those who use their religious beliefs as justification for their right-wing political opinions, I always end up failing.

    It’s just too transparently obvious that the god of the bible reflects the barbarism of the men who wrote it, and that reminds me that those who seek out particularly sick parts of 6,000 year old writings in order to justify their political beliefs are abusing the idea of God.

    It’s an outrage, and I don’t think it helps to pretend that I respect such people. I don’t. I think they’re mean, stupid, and dangerous.

  35. Legitimate Rape
    October 24, 2012 at 11:27 am

    This pharmaceutical ad brought to you by conservative Christians everywhere.

    httpx://www.youtube.com/watch?&v=KtzqvqzBdUQ&hd=1

    [I’m sorry, it was too much for me, despite my love of dark humor. If you really want to watch it, just remove the x from httpx. –Mitch]

  36. not a fan
    October 24, 2012 at 11:38 am

    So do you think # 18 is Salzman or Linda Atkins or perhaps her wife. An mind you own is off the clock, perfect for this blog.

  37. anonymous
    October 24, 2012 at 11:44 am

    Murdoch is some unknown politician a couple thousand miles away from us. He is irrelevant except to give the left wing here another excuse to launch more bile against all Republicans.

    As bad as Heraldo was (and he could be disgusting) the quality of this blog has been going downhill fast lately.

  38. A pesky fact
    October 24, 2012 at 11:44 am

    Mitch,

    I’d be glad to have a religious/theological discussion with you, but it is worth noting that you are the one bringing the matter up.

    I’ve merely offered an observation, then ask 2 questions.

    Let me return to one. When does life begin?

    Science is very clear on this. At conception. The one invoking faith-based positions is you.

    (My first question was a legal one, regarding forms of selective abortion. I’m not asking “When, for legal purposes should a particular line be drawn”, because there is always a gap between legal/moral and legal/scientific, it is the nature of the law that it can never be perfect. I’m asking, pointedly, “When does life begin?”. There is a scientific consensus, you just seem to reject it.)

  39. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:47 am

    pesky,

    Scientists everywhere are nodding their heads in, well, in something. Since you know the answer to your questions, there’s little point in any further response from me.

  40. October 24, 2012 at 11:50 am

    just let the voters in Indiana handle it.

    Yeah, Mitch, why should anyone outside Indiana have an opinion on an elected asshole’s opinion that rape is the work of God?

    At least this douchbag put one of this country’s greatest ills on the table. You can’t fight rape culture when rapists are doing the lord’s work. Amen.

  41. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:51 am

    #37,

    Mourdock is the Republican candidate for a Senate seat, supposedly one of the most powerful positions in the entire world. There are one hundred Senators, and control of the Senate will affect many aspects of our lives. That the Republicans offer candidates like Mourdock tells us a good deal about that party.

  42. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 11:52 am

    Heraldo,

    Your blog sucks, and it’s getting worse by the day.

  43. October 24, 2012 at 12:08 pm

    Mitch,

    Please direct your bile and those who would stand in the way of The Lord.

  44. A pesky fact
    October 24, 2012 at 12:15 pm

    And yet, Mitch, the science remains clear that life begins at conception.

    I understand that there will always be a gap between legal/moral, and I am asking a moral question.

    Given the clear evidence that life begins at conception, isn’t the moral thing to stop denying the science and acknowledge that fact?

    I’m not asking you to change your position on what the law should be, I’m just trying to dialog.

  45. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 12:20 pm

    Life begins long before conception, the egg is life and the sperm is life, and yet you maintain you only want dialog, no you don’t, you want to push an absurd and extreme religious position that a fertilized egg is the equivalent of a human being. You know it’s bullshit but you’ll run with it anyway and then simper, “dialog.”

  46. Nagamura
    October 24, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    Life begins long before conception. In fact there is an unbroken strand of DNA linking all of “life” back to that first organism that figured out how to reprilcate itself and sperm and egg are living parts of that unbroken strand. A fetus is nothing more than a tumor with potential until it is born. That is science.

  47. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 12:25 pm

    No, pesky, you might think you are trying to “dialog,” but you are not.

    The science is anything but clear about when human life begins. Please stop saying “life” — a bacterium is as alive as you or I. You don’t even mean human life, because an unfertilized egg is as much human life as a fertilized egg. For that matter, so is a blood cell. You mean “sacred human life,” which is a religious concept, or “worthy of society’s protection,” which is a legal and ethical one.

    If an egg turns into a fetus without being fertilized by sperm, is it housing a fake soul? Just a confused one? No, don’t answer that. I really have no interest in continuing your dialog.

  48. October 24, 2012 at 12:33 pm

    There are simply limits to civility…

    Okay. I’ll look elsewhere for blog posts that do something other than beat me over the head with the obvious.

  49. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 12:35 pm

    That’s your right, Joel. Feel free.

  50. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 12:47 pm

    Nagamura,

    How awesome is that! One gigantic thread of life, surviving over billions of years, poking itself into every niche imaginable and many unimaginable. Branching and branching and branching uncountable times, with branches evolving into kingdoms that capture a star’s energy and kingdoms that parasitize the earlier kingdoms. Branching into species that can ask where they came from.

    And we don’t yet have any proof that it’s happened anywhere but on this planet, and here we are… ready to deal it a potentially fatal blow. Mind-blowing, truly mind-blowing.

    I think it was Lewis Thomas of “Lives of a Cell” who suggested we shouldn’t be allowed to kill any person or any species until we understand everything about them (or it) that it’s possible to understand. (Meaning, of course, never.)

  51. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 1:14 pm

    I absolutely LOVED that book and recommend it to everyone, Mitch.

  52. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 1:24 pm

    I find that all much more awe inspiring than the idea that a god somewhere wished everything into being in 7 days.

  53. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 1:29 pm

    Compared with the “creation” as revealed by scientific investigation, the “creator” posited by various religions is just extremely boring and one dimensional. Excepting (of course) the FSM, blessed be he and the tortoises.

  54. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 1:37 pm
  55. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 1:40 pm

    If I had to pick one I guess it would be the enjoyable variety; but I haven’t heard of one of those since Barbara Cartland died.

  56. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    I guess the chart leaves it off because it’s a metaphor some don’t like, but there’s always NATIONAL RAPE.

  57. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 1:45 pm

    “Some girls, they rape so easy” has me confused. Is he speaking from experience?

  58. Just Watchin
    October 24, 2012 at 2:57 pm

    HUUFC :Mitch, what an obsession you have, I’ll just let the voters in Indiana handle it. In a country of almost 310 million people you just need to accept some diversity of thought.BTW, are you following the reports of when the White House was informed of the Benghazi attack, in real time. Let’s go to Las Vegas!

    It seems that Mitch didn’t respond to the fact that President Dickweed, after hearing of the Libya murders, got a good nights sleep and then headed off to a fundraiser in Vegas the next morning.

  59. October 24, 2012 at 3:01 pm

    That’s your right, Joel. Feel free.

    Again, tell us something we don’t already know. Goodbye.

  60. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 3:04 pm

    Just Watchin,

    Meet Joel. Consider his approach. It seeems very civilized to me.

  61. Anonymous
    October 24, 2012 at 3:10 pm

    anonymous :
    Murdoch is some unknown politician a couple thousand miles away from us. He is irrelevant except to give the left wing here another excuse to launch more bile against all Republicans.

    Good point.

    As bad as Heraldo was (and he could be disgusting) the quality of this blog has been going downhill fast lately.

    Lately? It has been sliding downhill ever since it existed.

  62. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 3:19 pm

    I’m constantly amazed at the number of masochists who force themselves to read the Herald and even post comments, all despite its evident disgustingness and its continuous slide downhill. All you have to do is stop reading it, and the Herald disappears completely from your existence. Give it a try. Really, give it a try. So you don’t forget, act before midnight tonight.

    When the readership disappears, all our advertisers will go elsewhere.

  63. Just Watchin
    October 24, 2012 at 3:23 pm

    Mitch :
    Just Watchin,
    Meet Joel. Consider his approach. It seeems very civilized to me.

    Still no comment on Barry letting Americans be murdered??

  64. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    JW,

    What can you expect from a Kenyan antiChrist terrorist?

  65. October 24, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    When the readership disappears, all our advertisers will go elsewhere.

    Nooooooooo!

  66. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 3:25 pm

    Sorry, Heraldo. I got carried away.

  67. Just Watchin
    October 24, 2012 at 3:35 pm

    Mitch……glad to hear that you agree.

  68. suzy blah blah
    October 24, 2012 at 3:41 pm

    How awesome is that! One gigantic thread …

    -yes, but why did God create trolls on his own blog?

  69. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 3:48 pm

    You’re in luck, JW. You’ll like suzy.

  70. MindYourOwnBusiness
    October 24, 2012 at 3:51 pm

    So wait, President Obama “let Americans be murdered” … how? Was he supposed to parachute into the area all Rambo-like and go a-shootin’ the bad guys with his minigun? Maybe he could have borrowed Romney’s battle horse and bayonet and staged a frontal assault, Verdun-style.

    Or … or…. better yet, he could have gotten excellent intelligence nearly two years before a devastating terrorist attack, ignored that information and then stood atop the rubble with a lopsided grin on his face, invaded the wrong country to prove to his daddy he had big balls and then destroyed the financial accountability system … right?

  71. October 24, 2012 at 4:26 pm

    I just luv it when the censors go after the other guys and gals.

  72. Just Watchin
    October 24, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    It was 6 hours after the terrorists struck before the 4 Americans were murdered. Armed drone was in the air and troops were nearby. Barry took no action, other than go to bed and wait for his trip to Vegas the next morning. He`s a POS.

  73. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    Joe,

    How do you define “censor”?

  74. October 24, 2012 at 5:07 pm

    Mitch :
    Get thee behind me, Satan!!!

  75. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 5:09 pm

    OK, PJ, consider yourself censored.

  76. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 5:50 pm

    Check this out: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20008687

    In only one country (besides possibly us) do more people want Romney want Obama for president of the US. In Pakistan 15% of them want Romney and only about 12% want Obama.

  77. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 5:52 pm

    Sure Mitch, what for?

  78. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 5:57 pm

    PJ,

    I don’t understand Joe Blow, except that I’ve finally figured out that he or she is no fool. I *think* Joe is saying my use of “Get thee behind me, Satan” was censoring you, but I don’t know.

  79. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 6:03 pm

    That is one hell of a chart, PJ. It’s enough to make me sorry I censored you. But don’t let people see how much France prefers Obama; he’s in enough trouble already.

    Note to self re Pakistan: Drones bad politics.

  80. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    I wish they had polled Israel, but I couldn’t find anything about why they polled the countries they did. Romney is most popular, surprisingly :-D in Kenya! All our neighbors, major allies and trading partners prefer Obama.

  81. October 24, 2012 at 7:59 pm

    Here’s a (dastardly) thought…in tune with the conversation, which has me laughing.

    In the new globalized world, let other nations have a share of the vote for US pres.

    No, I don’t mean it, but it is something to think about. Given the influences…

  82. Mitch
    October 24, 2012 at 8:04 pm

    Narration,

    We’re willing to allow each of the top multinationals a Senator or two, so your proposal seems only fair.

  83. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 8:30 pm

    The multinationals have a senator or 2 from almost every state, Mitch.

  84. Plain Jane
    October 24, 2012 at 8:31 pm

    Hell, about half the country wants a multinational for president!

  85. October 25, 2012 at 2:12 am

    Actually, Jane, I think that’s a pretty fair perspective on what they do want. Like Romney himself, a world that would be simpler and more benign than it actually is, where you could just have studies and believe them, or believe that destroying a company’s pensions is a necessary and fair way to plan to conduct most business.

    Cf. history for what happens when someone’s elected to actualize this desire….

    Anyway, I was just looking at this again before going to sleep too late, turned away, and realized how close what I said probably is to my most personal worldview.

    Or, too much bluegrass – listening late again after preparing my sister’s birthday present.

    Or, some somewhat delayed reaction to suzy dropping in again. hi suzy….

  86. Turdblossom
    October 25, 2012 at 6:54 am

    We already HAD a multinational for (de-facto) President. . .remember Dick Cheney/Halliburton? I don’t seem to recall that experience being “simpler and more benign.”

  87. Mitch
    October 25, 2012 at 7:19 am

    Nor is Narration suggesting it would be, Turdblossom. Narration’s full phrase was “a world that would be simpler and more benign than it actually is.” Our human desire for that — a desire that spans the political spectrum — is the Achilles’ heel of democracy, and the Romney/Reagan/Rove/Ryan campaign exploits it well.

  88. Mitch
    October 25, 2012 at 7:40 am

    Excellent: http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/25/when-gods-will-rape-and-pregnancy-collide/

    Paul Root Wolpe, the director for the Center of Ethics at Emory University, said Mourdock’s comments were the equivalent “of saying you shouldn’t pull people out of the rubble because God intended the earthquake to happen or we shouldn’t try to cure disease because it’s God who gave us the disease,” Wolpe said.

    “That perspective was theologically rejected by virtually every major religion a long, long time ago,” Wolpe added.

    Even excellenter, Monsieur Colbert:

    http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/colbert-mourdock-rape-god.php?ref=fpnewsfeed

    And most excellent of all, the Obama “Truth Team” finally finds an issue in which it can appropriately use music reminiscent of Tubular Bells, from The Exorcist:

  89. Plain Jane
    October 25, 2012 at 8:14 am

    Using Mourdock’s theology, we don’t need to protect our country or do much of anything because if god wills it, it will be done.

  90. Mitch
  91. October 25, 2012 at 12:46 pm

    Are you not forgetting about Satan the Devil, Mitch?

  92. October 26, 2012 at 8:53 am

    If your Pro-life and christian you should be adamantly opposed to war and a total supporter of universal health care. Thats what makes these GOP liars so obviously hypocritical. Over 100,000 deaths in Iraq alone since the invasion. And you claim to be concerned about the tragic loss of life… from abortion?

    Unless you follow the Old Testament of course, in which case you better be sacrificing your first born sons!!!

  93. Mitch
    October 26, 2012 at 9:03 am

    Um, you won’t usually find me defending the Old Testament, but it’s worth pointing out that the big news in the story of Isaac is not that a god demanded human sacrifice — that may have been a common practice of the time — but that God sent an angel to stop the sacrifice.

    The times were barbaric, so to make sense of even a literal reading of the bible requires, for starters, an understanding of the times.

    It’s the story of Abraham and Isaac that led to my sister’s rejecting Conservative Judaism. I feel there are far better reasons to reject it.

  94. Plain Jane
    October 26, 2012 at 9:34 am

    To be entirely accurate, according to the Old Testament, god demanded that Abraham sacrifice Isaac to prove his devotion and then sent an angel to stop it. Then there is the New Testament that claims god sacrificed his own son “so that whosoever believeth in him shall have ever lasting life.” Seems quite consistent, at least to me.

  95. October 26, 2012 at 9:52 am

    Actually, PJ it was to prove Abraham’s faith.

  96. October 26, 2012 at 10:40 am

    Faith, Devotion, Piety – either way there will be blood!

  97. Billy Batts
    October 26, 2012 at 10:43 am

    “devotion” “faith” Thanks for clarifying what God’s thought process was. Now go home and get your fuckin’ shinebox.

  98. Anonymous
    October 26, 2012 at 11:14 am

    Obama says “let the Bible burn” as the Muslem cleans his AK-47 for use on Romney’s future.

  99. Fact Checker
    October 26, 2012 at 11:31 am

    Can’t find that quote from the President anywhere.

  100. Plain Jane
    October 26, 2012 at 12:00 pm

    Joseph Stiglitz essay in the New York Times today:

    Some Are More Unequal Than Others
    http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/stiglitz-some-are-more-unequal-than-others/?nl=opinion&emc=edit_ty_20121026

    He’s brilliant. Now I’m going to check out The Economist’s series “arguing that the extremes of American inequality, its nature and origins, are adversely affecting our economy.” Is it possible conservatives are finally starting to get it?

  101. October 27, 2012 at 2:50 pm

    Jane, that was indeed a very clear statement, particularly in the closing paragraphs.

    Thanks for posting it.

  102. October 28, 2012 at 10:08 pm

    “Satan?” Hey! That guy owes me money!

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s