“E’ difficile sostenere che Bagnasco possa parlare a nome del’Italia, visto che lo stesso stato unitario è sorto contro il potere temporale della Chiesa. E non dimentichiamo che il consenso verso la Chiesa, persino nel nostro paese, è in picchiata. Il problema è che, anche se noi non ce lo dimentichiamo, la memoria degli uomini di potere è notoriamente corta.”—Il cardinale Bagnasco detta l’agenda anche al futuro governo (Uaar Ultimissime)
“Is it worse to imagine a world without pizza or one in which Obama gets a second term? It’s worse to imagine a world with Obama getting a second term than it is to imagine a world without pizza. Because with Obama in a second term, there will be no pizza. For anyone.”
Last week, Paul Ryan gave an interview in which, defending his position that there should be no excuses for abortion, he referred to rape as a “method of conception.”
Wow, right? Talk about a benign euphemism. Rape —RAPE! — is now a “method of conception.” You know, like love-making, just without the love.
There could be no greater testament to the utter abdication of responsibility by what passes for a “news” media in America in 2012 than that, despite the grotesquerie of this cavalierly callous comment, chances are better than good that this is the first you’re hearing of it.
Here, watch it — and try to figure out why this has gotten NO MAINSTREAM MEDIA play (not even here at the Huffington Post) despite it being, to my mind, a far more offensive remark than Todd Akin’s imbecilic blurt of last weekend. What, are we tired of stupid remarks about rape now, so Ryan gets a free pass?
Given the demands for Akin’s resignation from a mere Senate race when his musings on “legitimate rape” were publicized, what do you imagine the reaction would be if people were as familiar with VP wannabe Ryan’s stunning statement? Might there be a cacophony of outrage? Might there be calls for his resignation from the ticket? Might there be a focus on how fundamentally oblivious these people who would make our laws are to not just women’s but humans’ rights and dignity? Sure, there might, but then of course people would have to have heard about it.
According to the man who would be the proverbial heartbeat away from the White House, and who in any event would — given Romney’s utter hollowness — have an inordinate influence on the judicial appointments that will determine how much freedom our children get to live under, RAPE = “METHOD OF CONCEPTION.” And yet, unless you’re a frequenter of one of a dozen or so lefty blogs — or my friend on Facebook — you probably knew nothing about it.
I truly despair for the country my 14-year-old daughter is inheriting. That a remark this intensely revealing of the danger posed by this ticket can go basically unreported is as nauseating to me as the quote itself.
WHEN Mitt Romney was governor of liberal Massachusetts, he supported abortion, gun control, tackling climate change and a requirement that everyone should buy health insurance, backed up with generous subsidies for those who could not afford it. Now, as he prepares to fly to Tampa to accept the Republican Party’s nomination for president on August 30th, he opposes all those things. A year ago he favoured keeping income taxes at their current levels; now he wants to slash them for everybody, with the rate falling from 35% to 28% for the richest Americans.
All politicians flip-flop from time to time; but Mr Romney could win an Olympic medal in it (see article). And that is a pity, because this newspaper finds much to like in the history of this uncharismatic but dogged man, from his obvious business acumen to the way he worked across the political aisle as governor to get health reform passed and the state budget deficit down. We share many of his views about the excessive growth of regulation and of the state in general in America, and the effect that this has on investment, productivity and growth. After four years of soaring oratory and intermittent reforms, why not bring in a more businesslike figure who might start fixing the problems with America’s finances?
But competence is worthless without direction and, frankly, character. Would that Candidate Romney had indeed presented himself as a solid chief executive who got things done. Instead he has appeared as a fawning PR man, apparently willing to do or say just about anything to get elected. In some areas, notably social policy and foreign affairs, the result is that he is now committed to needlessly extreme or dangerous courses that he may not actually believe in but will find hard to drop; in others, especially to do with the economy, the lack of details means that some attractive-sounding headline policies prove meaningless (and possibly dangerous) on closer inspection. Behind all this sits the worrying idea of a man who does not really know his own mind. America won’t vote for that man; nor would this newspaper. The convention offers Mr Romney his best chance to say what he really believes.
Mitt Romney gets some major flack from The Economist, in the process of their announcing that he won’t receive their presidential endorsement. Despite being a publication that’s broadly championed free trade, free markets and globalization (much as has the modern Republican Party), their political views aren’t so heterogenous — borne out somewhat by their past endorsements of Barack Obama, John Kerry, and Bill Clinton, alongside George W. Bush, Bob Dole and Ronald Reagan.
Niall Ferguson: “Welcome to Obama’s America: nearly half the population is not represented on a taxable return—almost exactly the same proportion that lives in a household where at least one member receives some type of government benefit. We are becoming the 50-50 nation—half of us paying the taxes, the other half receiving the benefits.”
Journalist: It is true that 46 percent of households did not pay federal income tax in 2011. It is not true that they pay no taxes. Federal income taxes account barely account for half of federal taxes, and much less of total taxes, if you count the state and local level. Many of those other taxes can be regressive. If you take all taxes into account, our system is barely progressive at all.
But why do almost half of all households pay no federal income tax? Because they don’t have much money to tax. Here’s the breakdown from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Half of these households are simply too poor — they make under $20,000 — to have any liability. Another quarter are retirees on tax-exempt Social Security benefits. The remaining households have no liability because of tax expenditures like the earned-income tax credit or the child credit.
In other words, the poor, the old, and children. Not exactly the “50-50 nation” of makers and takers — or “lucky duckies” — that Ferguson imagines.
Guns are conscious and have feelings. They are angry and evil. Once a gun itself has decided to go on a murderous rampage — as they all inevitably do — it’s simply a matter of finding a human (any human is fine, even perfectly stable ones) to sink its…
America has a problem admitting it has a gun problem. America has a problem admitting it has any problems. Unless it’s the religious right pretending to have a problem, of course. Gay marriage, for example, is not a problem. They just don’t like it. Well, gee whiz. Go cry about it as you watch state after state make it legal. No problem there.
Guns, poverty, racial inequality: Those are problems.
“I emphatically denounce Paul Ryan’s use of my band Twisted Sister’s song, ‘We’re Not Gonna Take It,’ in any capacity. There is almost nothing he stands for that I agree with except the use of the P90X.”—‘Twisted Sister’ singer Dee Snider will not take Paul Ryan playing his songs. (via newsweek)
“King Candy,” captures the bizarre, overblown bass tones of Brian Gibson and the ear-piercing, machine-gun drumming of Brian Chippendale (who is seriously one of the most unique and intense players to ever pick up a pair of sticks); the song structure, on the other hand, is somewhat conventional, so that the result is weird, noisy, pulverizing, and catchy all at the same time.
L’io: Gadda lo chiamava, insieme agli altri pronomi, un “pidocchio del pensiero”, e invece i cattolici, anzi i ciellini di Rimini, con l’aiuto di un po’ di professori universitari si preoccupano che non esista. Dice L’Avvenire: “Michele Di Francesco, filosofo del Vita-Salute San Raffaele: “La…
In Missouri, Republican candidate Todd Akin is offering voters a chance to widen the range of pseudoscience represented in the Senate, opining that it is “really rare” for a rape to lead to pregnancy. In a “legitimate rape,” he explained, “the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”
Sadly, the interviewer failed to ask any follow-up questions about what those ways might be. Retractable uterus? Vagina dentata? Just how does Todd Akin think the female body works? I’m not the best interviewer in the world, but I know that when someone says something like that, you work to nail down the crazy right away. Good luck getting him to discuss it now.