Oh, yes, she did. Michelle Malkin asks an inconvenient question about the Mount Vernon Statement, of which a primary backer is the inconvenient Grover Norquist. We will never all agree on everything, and the Mount Vernon Statement is a nice attempt to erect conservative tent large enough to win elections under. It’s not a bad start, and I really am in favor of it. But she was right to ask the question. He should be called out for his associations with unsavory Islamic activists and for his support of Shamnesty.
Laura Curtis
pursuing holiness, following politics
I realize it’s not Shatnerday, but…
an interesting read, nevertheless.
Q.E.D.
“If you have to be told that running electrical current through your nipples isn’t a good idea, the brain damage was probably a pre-existing condition.”
Eat, Pray, Be Intolerant
Interesting review of Eat, Pray, Love:
“But warning bells about her spiritual sincerity start to go off when she admits she is willing to look everywhere (apparently in the whole wide world) for God, except in anything resembling orthodox Christianity.”
That’s a feature, not a bug
From WSJ, a probe to see whether Congress is misusing travel stipends:
“Some lawmakers said it has been a longstanding custom of lawmakers in both parties to keep any extra money. If lawmakers weren’t allowed to keep leftover travel funds, “you could never get many members traveling,” said Mr. Ortiz, the Texas Democrat, in an interview earlier this year.”
And the problem with that would be… ?
Exactly
I had to laugh when I read Henry’s post, Five Sites I Read Because I Disagree. That’s the same reason I read Henry’s site – we’re generally on the same page, faith-wise, but Henry offers thoughtful, cogent defenses of politics a good deal more liberal than my own. (Though he’s much closer to the center than I am.) Mind you, I still disagree. But as iron sharpens iron, so an opposing blogger sharpens another. 
Recent Comments