I guess I'm extrapolating from (what I see as) the Reverend's profound indignation at being challenged, and his decision to deal with it, not by understanding, but by doing whatever would most effectively make the dog deal with him on his terms (those, and I don't think this is an unfair description of what he himself describes) being an acceptance of the Reverend's rightful place as the purveyor of abuse.
He's less explicit in describing female and child subjugation, but his obvious self-righteousness in describing his right to expect subjugation from, well, anyone he has a right to expect subjugation from and his attempts to define female and child rights as equally subject to righteous subjugation give me the creeps.
I guess I see his willingness - although I think you could fairly call it avidity - to use physical force to exert his will leaves me a little queasy in someone who is actively campaigning for People Like Him to be in charge.
Dave? I realize every child is different, and I seem to have gotten a particularly easy one, but one of the results of my not lifting a hand to mine has been that when we do have cause to express disapproval of her behavior, it upsets her a great deal that she's done something that might make us think she's not a good person.
We've told her that we don't think doing something wrong makes you a bad person, just a person who's done something wrong, but children have a primitive sense of justice sometimes.
I'm not sure what putting myself in the wrong (I mean, we've told her there's no excuse for using violence to solve problems, unless in self-defense and when there's no alternative to self-defense) would do to clarify her view of morality and where she fits into it.
Rev. Dobson on submission: lesser beings should submit themselves to christian men. Christian men are not required to show charity, humility, self-discipline, humanity or compassion in return
St Paul (far from the most liberal source of the scriptures - the man who - er- adjusted Christ's teachings to make them more acceptable to Roman patriarchalists) on submission:
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.'
and then, of course, the forgotten passage: Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it ... that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself ... For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
Anyone who believes that Rev. Dobson thinks his own flesh should be beaten viciously with a belt by someone stronger than he until he does what that person believes to be the right thing signify by googling Rev. Dobson and finding any indication that this is true.
Good luck.
one of the things I value about dissent from the left is how (unlike dispassionate reason) it's been uncommonly effective at moving Mr. Drum to the left, to the point where (accommodationist "moderation" being seen as the shuck that it is, in the current environment) he's giving himself the label "liberal" - something he strenuously avoided when it was more popular to avoid it.
That the Political Animal readers are less-than-tolerant of opposing viewpoints is unfortunate, but just as you're unlikely to find vegetarians in McDonalds, you're likely to find A Certain Mode of Engagement from the community in a blog which raced to throw Markos over the side so it could get back to a nice cozy debate with Professor Reynolds.
karma, neh?
One of the things that bothers me about the soi-disant "moderate" position on social issues is that they've so far unerringly picked up on the issues where
a) the Republicans are on the wrong side of the polls,
b) their actions don't in the least match their rhetoric, and
c) the cognitive dissonance between what they're meant to stand for and what they actually support make an awful lot of people who nominally support them very nervous indeed
and announce that we, the Democrats, should take those issues on, hug them to our bosoms and make them our own.
Better yet, we should announce that we're taking these issues as our own for completely cynical reasons.
If there's some nugget of gold in the idea that we can regain the public imagination by showing voters that we have no respect for them, I'd be fascinated to hear what it is. Until then, I'm just going to have to assume that all this strategerizing on the essential stupidity and sheeplike nature of the american people is just a really strong projection of minds far too willing to accept what they're told is the conventional wisdom.
By me, that's a poisoned well for Democratic, liberal or american politics to be springing from.
oh, wait - in reformed terms, I'm Sister Shining Shotgun of Unassuming Wisdom
Oh, decisions, decisions...
Sister (holy, presumably) Hand Grenade of Forgiveness.
gloriosky.
Does she look like a heroin-crazed racoon if you see it from the street or is it just the picture?
Well, as long as we're shamelessly linking to our Popeblogging...
You know, the Pope was an intensely political man, as anyone who was a leader of a church under both nazism and communism was likely to be, and also quite a mystic, in his way.
It is our, and possibly his, misfortune that his reign came during such a politically symbolic and religiously literalist age.
That said, the raft of articles about Bush putting off his trip to South Carolina (all of them remembering fondly the fine work he did there during his first campaign in '00) and his lofty words about the importance of the Pope - no more trips to Bob Jones for our boy - coming from a man who takes such terrific delight in death and who idolizes the things of this world to such a distorting extent, makes me good and sick.
I'm just getting over a cold, so maybe I'm feeling less like playing whack-a-troll than usual, but once The Next Voice You Hear (unless of course it's the dog giving orders) pops out with And Mrs. Robinson is one homely woman judging by her picture on her web site in his first post, isn't it pretty clear what he's here for?
Also, dude, spellcheck, please.
I really don't buy it. The last thing the Republicans want to do is make advocacy into an in-kind contribution.
I think this is supposed to keep us busy being indignant while Rep. Jones pushes his bill to allow churches to keep their tax-free status while endorsing candidates.
Dispatching the husband. Wrap him up warm and send him home before dawn.
It's magical thinking, I think. It's become increasingly important these last years (decades) as people who have to know on some level that nothing they've contributed that actually justifies on merit their being the richest and most powerful people in the world try to convince themselves that there's something intrinsic about them, some shining virtue that was recognized by the meritocratic establishment who gave them the keys to the kingdom and if the poor and powerless were just as good as they are, they'd be every bit as successful.
Even the traders and the associates long since gave up on trying to pretend it was the hours they put in.
Gannon/Guckert was in the press room? He's one of them. Maybe not one of them they have any use for, but one of them. There are all sorts of stories now about reporters bracing him in private, but not word one from an entire room full of reporters who collectively have one of the biggest stages in the world.
If he didn't deserve to be there, he wouldn't have been there, right? Because you have to be the best and the brightest to be there.
I mean, just look around the room.
Poor (Sir) Paul. I think he's been rewarded for entirely the wrong things (I always had the impression ithat he did much better work when he was nudged away from facility) but he's the too-often-baked ruins of any amazing talent.
saving the address also doesn't work if you have javascript shut off (I sometimes do when I'm going to particularly script-happy sites (koffkoffSlatekoffkoff)
just that fraction of an inch shift, where people who are working three jobs to not quite take care of their families wake up one morning and get hit on the head by an apple and all of a sudden it occurs to them that hey - those guys +are+ the spoiled rich elite with expensive educations who have contempt for us - and all of this is going to rain down on them like a short sharp shower.
Thank god for hubris.
I'm more worried about the right er, "center" wing of the Democratic party right now than I am about the public. The last thing any movement in need of congressional support can afford right now is to be tagged Something We Have To Throw Over the Side as a Sop To The Red States.
I hope your return means you're feeling better.
A little island of casual elegance in the early eighties.
I cast my mind back and I see mantailored suits and floppy bows.
shudder.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2005 | 19 |
| 2004 | 83 |
| 2003 | 69 |
Total: 171 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Electrolite by julia:
Show all comments by julia.