If not Bobby Jindal, then Colin Powell
For one thing, the Bradley Effect would be gone, and race would be completely taken off the table. For another, Powell kills McCain in a head-to-head match-up. Remember when 1992 was the Year of the Woman? In 2008, with Powell as running mate, it could be the Year of the Black Man (or African-American Man, etc.).
There is one problem with that choice for the GOP base. Powell is pro-choice, but I don't see that as a major sticking point because so was Giuliani, and he provided enough assurances to satisfactory many (if not most) Christian conservatives. Last week, it was revealed that the McCain campaign was trial-ballooning Powell. Anyhow, I'm expected to be disappointed on both counts. Go Romney. Woo hoo.
--
"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Bird Dog's blog
- Login or register to post comments
will be McCain's announced choice tomorrow.
--Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.
- Login or register to post comments
)Hope you're right.
--Me: We! -- Ali
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080827/NEWS0107/8...
and not Honest Joe or Crist.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )can counter with the race card, only gender. They know it, at least at the pundit level. And it's a measure of how desperate they are that Kay Bailey Hutchison is now suddenly being touted.
I still think Sarah Palin is leading in those sweepstakes. Regardless of her being dismissed by those on the left for an investigation into her firing of a cop (Bill Clinton certainly was elected despite his abuse of state troopers) and the right for being 'inexperienced'. And Rice is still second, IMHO.
As far as male candidates are concerned, with fatal flaws seemingly attached to every single choice (today featured a 'beyond the grave' plea from Robert Novak--envious perhaps of Ted Kennedy's moment in the limelight--not to nominate Joe Lieberman), VA Rep Eric Cantor is suddenly being promoted at a few sites. I guess in a way the 'too many houses' controversy erupted a bit early for the Dems; if they'd waited a few weeks they could have had a 'twofer', since Romney was clearly the leading candidate for VP at that point. But now he's out of it, seemingly, due to his owning as many houses as McCain. Which is too bad for them. Because there's still the faint danger that McCain might actually make a smart choice and go with a woman after all.
- Login or register to post comments
)will be seen for what it is as a naked attempt to secure the gender vote by employing a gimmick. None of the often discussed candidates is even remotely qualified to be 'one heartbeat away from the Presidency' and especially not the most undistinguished and ineffectual National Security Adviser ever to hold the post.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )on lies and the Iraq war. I like it!
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
)Joe
and
Biden.
Good luck!
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Than Bush/Cheney enablers offering pithy analysis about the potential impact of presidential or veep candidates.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I thought you guys had a good night tonight. I now wonder.
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'm reacting to your weird Biden fixation. You want to offer something other than vapid scorn? Please. I'm curious to know why you believe his selection is the disaster you so clearly hope it will be. But thus far, all you've offered is standup, and while I'm all for that, it's hard to take you seriously on the subject. I'll make you a deal. When McCain picks a veep, I'll make an attempt to tell you why I believe the choice is a bad one. I may be wrong. But I'll make the effort. So far? You seem to want us to believe Biden is a disaster because you say so. Which brings me back to your unflinching support of Bush/Cheney. Because you said so?
It's just not enuf.
As for the night, it was a very very good one. And in the end? All this Clinton drama has turned out to be a very big plus for the convention -- something I did not see coming. But due to all that drama, I'll bet you more people watched the two Clinton speeches than will watch any speech in the GOP convention, with the possible exception of Senator McCain. And of course Biden benefited from all those eyeballs as well.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )which I just watched, I'd give him a B on delivery and C, that is, just average, on substance. Maybe the point wasn't to have him say anything new or controversial to avoid upstaging Obama.
Biden's speech was marred by the angry finger-pointing that seems to be a standard rhetorical device with him. Many people don't like angry finger-pointers; some hooligans even call them "Daddy-O" and threaten to cut off their fingers. Also, the repetitive call-and-respond theme can sound pretty childish in a serious speech.
That totally spontaneous, unscripted, unplanned-for, surprising, even shocking surprise appearance of Obama onstage right after Biden finished was a real shock to me, I'll admit. I've never seen anything quite that dramatic, surprising and, well, spontaneous before.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Good times.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Well, duh.
Are you kidding me? The media eat that stuff up. It's practically their reason for existence in the campaign season. They'll have a field day showing clips of RNC speakers calling Obama everything from a Jew-hater to a Communist (all between the lines, of course, but obvious nonetheless; the Republicans are past masters at coded language).
The thing that struck me about the Democrats' speeches was how all of them went out of their way to call McCain their close personal friend and laud his patriotism. They still haven't learned how to play this game. "He's a great guy, but don't vote for him" just doesn't have the visceral appeal of "If my opponent is elected, the terrorists will be dancing in the streets".
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I thought you said you wanted reactions to Biden's speech. I give you mine, and you give me in response a completely unrelated, orphanly road-kill of a post that's apparently been dejectedly looking for a home somewhere for some time. Down, boy - bad dog!
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )... Ron Paul is going to outdraw the RNC."
huh?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )in GOP land than amongst Democrats.
I don't expect Ron Paul will literally draw a bigger crowd than the RNC, but he does represent far more fundamental and significant disquiet within GOP ranks than do the PUMA's within Democratic circles.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I'm not sure anyone but the true believers would see it that way. In many ways it came across the exact opposite – it goes without saying I'm not a true believe so of course I'd see it differently – but I wouldn't bet that the mushy middle will see it as all positive and hopeful.
That evil Jay Nordlinger made two interesting observations:
Unintended consequences:
IOW, your unidentified author who thinks it was all upbeat and "constructive" might be as suprised as the Soviets by what people other than the true believers took away from it.
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I earnestly pray that the McCain campaign and the GOP both, take up your suggestion and return to the theme originally floated by McCain's now retired chief economic adviser. That the broad sweep of folks enduring difficulties under the Bush economic miracle are just imagining any harmful effects they may think they are experiencing. As always, "it's the economy stupid" and your insight properly exploited by the McCain campaign, perhaps with an upbeat 'you never had it so good' - "Morning in America" like theme, will be a sure winner for the Dems.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )There isn't a single suggestion in that comment.
Is your point so weak that you have to make up a strawman?
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )If you're gonna make the Nation of Whiners point, don't turn tail and run from it when someone points it out. You might also want to check out the Right Track/Wrong Track numbers.
But hey. I look forward to the GOP convention and a chesty celebration of just how great things are. I assume you'll be singing along.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )just as I detailed, that the Democrats shouldn't overindulge in bad mouthing economic achievements under Bush or overstate their case for change, lest the voters perceive a different reality that matches Phil Gramm's insight. I say go for it, who knows? maybe Gramm's right, certainly worth the gamble no?
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )No, there wasn't.
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )but campaign speeches aren't his forte. He's more of an attack dog that can be deployed in debates and interviews to confront weaker opposition (and they are all weaker) employing his depth of experience and knowledge to win the argument on the merits.
Kerry did exceptionally well too, where was this guy in 2004? But the Big Dog stole the show, hitting it out of the park and nicely setting the stage for Obama's acceptance speech tonight.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Biden's lunch bucket affect tends to help him thru the finger pointing, he is, like him or not, likable. That comes across in both his delivery and his biography -- and the latter was very effective last night.
The call and response thing rarely works, and it didn't work all that well last night. If only becuz they could never the the rhythm of it quite right.
Obama's appearance was hardly a surprise. But it was a nice touch.
And I'll say it again. All that Clinton drama added something to the convention that you usually don't get. A little narrative and suspense. That it all worked out in the end is of course an added plus, and ramps up nicely to Obama's speech tonight.
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The atmospherics were great last night. Whether it exists or not, there seems to be genuine affection between Obama and Biden. They're coming at this election as a team.
Can you imagine McCain and Romney similarly? (McCain and Leiberman is another story, and no one is hoping for Grumpy Old Men III more than I am).
Also?
McCain is currently polling at about 89 percent with his own party. Obama is not (high 70s to low 80s). Given the structural advantages the Dems enjoy this election, all Obama has to do is match McCain when it comes to those party numbers. That alone will put him in the White House.
That's why those Clinton speeches were so important. That's why more time was spent promoting Obama and party unity that 'ripping McCain's face off' -- a lovely term of art Mike Murphy introduced earlier.
That's why, if we're grading, I'd give the thing a strong B thus far. I'm guessing I'll have cause to raise the grade after tonight. (Hey, if nothing else, The Boss is in the house.)
--To think is not enough; you must think of something -- Jules Renard
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )we wouldn't have Dick Cheney.
--Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes. -JH
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )according to the last Gallup poll I saw on the subject, neither veep pick gave the respective candidates any significant poll bump.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But I don't think picking Cheney completely undermined Bush in any way like Biden does Obama.
Do you think Obama would have had a prayer of winning the nomination if he'd told all his early supporters that he was certain to pick an Iraq War supporter as his running mate?
Hey, that's a nice bridge there... is it for sale?
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )with a very different agenda from the one we all thought we were getting.
Dumb question from which any conclusion drawn would be even dumber. What Presidential candidate ever committed themselves in such a manner?
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Nobody shows the shiv before the thrust. That would be silly.
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )deceit the Republicans won't be able to repeat again any time soon.
I don't see McCain nominating a DC player skilled in the dark arts of government bureaucracy this time around either. More likely it will be someone with proven executive experience and broad acceptability within the GOP, able to make up for some quality or expertise McCain lacks such as on matters economic. Multiple Mitt it is then.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )if God gave us a finite capacity to hate, how do you ration that between Bush and Cheney and still have enough left for Karl Rove? A tough one, I admit.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I wasn't talking about Cheney, I was answering the question you ended with in your comment.
[bzzzt]
Try again.
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )explain.
Happy you got a laugh out of it though, sorry if that's what now passes as conservative humor.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Obama's supporters should have made him pledge to not accept any war supporters in his administration (except for people like John Kerry who learned their lesson).
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Biden has atoned. McCain and his coterie of neocon foreign policy advisers, not so much.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )to pump some gasoline:
Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.
- Login or register to post comments
)They just like the sound of the beat and hum along.
--~At times like these I am reminded of the immortal words of Socrates when he said...."I drank what?"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Zumbale mambo pa' que mi gata prenda los motores,
Que se preparen que lo que viene es pa que le den - Duro!
Mamita yo se que tu no me va quitar - duro!
Lo que me gusta es que te dejas llevar - duro!
todo los weekenes ella sale a vacilar - duro!
mi gata no para de janguiar porque
A ella le gusta la gasolina
Dame mas gasolina.
Shake it mambo so my (female)cat can fire up the engines.
Get ready, because what's coming is gonna give it to her, hard!
Little mama, I know you aren't going to drop me - hard!
I like it when you let yourself get picked up - hard!
Every weekend she goes out to sway back and forth - hard!
My cat doesn't stop hanging out because
She loves that gasoline
Give me more gasoline.
The next few verses don't pass our Wunnerful Posting Rules, including some amazingly profane and sexist vocabulary.
Poor old McCain. There's nothing more ridiculous than a Republican of a Certain Age trying to look musically relevant.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Yeah, that's it.
And at a middle school, yet.
[edit] strike that...it was a high school. Which means of course, that the students, at least, knew exactly what the song is about.
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Ella prende las turbinas,
No discrimina,
No se pierde ni un party de marquesina,
Se acicala hasta pa' la esquina,
Luce tan bien que hasta la sombra le combina,
asecina, me domina
janguea en carros, motoras y limosina,
Llena su tanque de adrenalina,
Cuando escucha el reggaeton en la bocina.
A ella le gusta la gasolina
dame mas gasolina!
(yo!)Aqui yo soy de los mejores
No te me ajores
En la pista nos llaman "Los Matadores"
Tu haces que cualquiera se enamore
Cuando bailas al ritmo de los tambores
esto va pa'las gatas de to'colores
Pa' la mayores, pa' la menores
Pa' las que son mas zorras que los cazadores
Pa' la mujeres que no apagan su motores
She hits the turbines [1]
She doesn't discriminate
She never misses a party[2]
She gets dressed up even to go around the street corner
She wears things so well even her shadow matches/
Assassin, she dominates me
She hangs out in cars, motorcycles, and limousines,
She fills her tank with adrenaline,
When she listen to reggaeton in the speakers
She likes gasoline
give me more gasoline!
(me!) Here I'm one of the best
Don't diss me
On the track they call us "The Killers"
You make anyone love you
When you dance to the rhythm of the drums
A shout out to the (female)cats of every color
For the older, for the younger,
for the girls who are more foxy[3] than the hunters
for the women who never shut down their engines
[1] Blower motor, say on a dragster
[2] Marquesina is a canopy tent, a fixture of a Spanish party.
[3] Zorra is Rican for a, um... sexually adventurous woman.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )if they'll play this at the RNC?
A little somethin' to keep folks tapping their feet between speeches. Maybe right after "Raising McCain".
--Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )said he liked the Macarena.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )is far likelier. Jindal has already rejected it, and Powell has been flirting with the Dems. Rice, on the other hand, is a woman, plus she's a far more competent manager than Powell. Plus, she's used to sparring regularly with Biden in front of cameras. Plus she actually has been lobbying for the job.
Did I mention she was a woman? ;)
- Login or register to post comments
)I left her off my list of prospective VP hopefuls because I didn't think even the GOP could be that stupid. I'd put her in the same category as a third term for Cheney or the conversion and beatification of Lieberman (I-Lieberman).
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )not to anticipate things someone with her job description should anticipate.
--Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I don't see the Republicans nominating anything other than a white guy for President and VP more or less indefinitely. It's weird to me to speculate on the possibility of a person of color receiving the nod.
--It's impossible to debate if people simply hold beliefs that have no grounding in reality.
- Login or register to post comments
)another chance to post Jindal's account of exorcising a demon. This really never gets old.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
)Again, Jindal was there and witnessed what took place, involving a troubled friend. He didn't participate except to pray. Jindal himself is a Catholic conservative, not a charismatic. Your opinion that Jindal is a "lunatic" is yours, but it's also a smear.
--"I want America to know that I'm, like, totally ready to lead." -- Paris Hilton
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Attending and praying at an exorcism is participating.
I'm Catholic and I have never been to an exorcism nor do I know anyone who has. Jindal's experience is very very very weird.
--But she's a queen, and such are queens
that your laughter is sucked in their brains. -D. Bowie
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )But I don't suppose you'll let that stop you. To each his own hobby horse, I suppose.
--"In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad."~Nietzsche
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"That Sam-I-am! That Sam-I-am! I do not like that Sam-I-am!"- Dr. Seuss
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I would be uncomfortable if an "up and coming star" in the Democratic party was such a lunatic. Better to just ignore it and hope it goes away.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )... this was truly a battle of wills between two strong and independent individuals
I'm not sure I've read a story of such powerful co-dependence get so totally out of control. At least when I've had psycho relationship moments they haven't dragged in an entire church community.
To your point re: lunacy, my family believes stuff like this happens all the time + they seem to fit in to society reasonably well.
We had a faith healer in the house regularly who once performed an exorcism (it was exciting!) and my brother faith-heals his wife every now and then. I think the last thing he did was cure her swelling ankles or something. He's an assistant US attorney.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I had a housemate once who thought there were evil spirits in the walls and that spreading sea salt on the floor of her room would protect her. She had a job and functioned fairly well in society, she was also a lunatic.
Just so religious people don't think I'm picking on them, I had another housemate (different house) who had a degree in EE. He disassembled his car and several defibrillators and was planning to build an energy generating device that would be powered by lightning. I moved out before he actually started testing it (I heard that the other roommates stopped him when he started putting up a lightning rod). He had a good job and appeared normal, had no religious beliefs that he ever shared with anyone, but he was also a lunatic.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )but noticed that 3/4ths of the US public believes in angels.
I bet it's at least 2/3rds who believe in demonic possession.
Meaning this may not be a campaign winner.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You mean a quarter of the US public thinks Anaheim can't make the playoffs? Or do you mean they don't think they exist? I mean I don't like the DH, but...
--“I serve as a blank screen on which people of vastly different political stripes project their own views.”
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )You mean you have a guy on the team who does nothing but go up and take an AB four or five times a game? What the hell is that all about?
As a NL fan, every time I watch an AL game it seems all weird to me.
--Guard, protect and cherish your land, for there is no afterlife for a place that started out as Heaven.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )there are plenty of things that I believe in that are not "campaign winners". That doesn't mean I'll stop believing them or speaking out on it.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's definitely an issue, no doubt about that.
I just think that bringing it up at any mention of Jindal's name, even in passing, would get old rather quickly. YMMV.
--"In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad."~Nietzsche
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )if he actually does get the VP nod, I'm sure there will be lots more to make fun of.
If you want, I'll alternate the exorcism story with his support for "intelligent design".
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Sounds good to me. Just promise me you won't do a multi-part series where each successive post contributes little more than new snark to the discussion, or one-line wonders, and I'll be happy.
--"In large states public education will always be mediocre, for the same reason that in large kitchens the cooking is usually bad."~Nietzsche
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )goes mainstream - that he's a lunatic? If so, good luck, man, but stay to the side of that par4ade so you don't get run over.
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )since I'm not "the Dems'". I think he's a lunatic, and I'll keep repeating it.
Did you read the link? Would you be comfortable with a person like that in a position of power? What if he suddenly senses the presence of a demon at a summit meeting?
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )when someone (you, maybe?) linked to it here. My response than and now was pretty much "and then?" This didn't seem to bother the folks in Louisiana, and I won't lose any sleep over it until he becomes a player on the national stage. If then.
(I initially misread your post: I thought you said "what if he suddenly senses the presence of a mormon at a summit meeting?")
--In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Just curious, Hank: Do you think that ANY religious faith or belief is any more rational (and less insane) than any other?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )that exorcism and belief in demonic possession is rather extreme, yes.
It's not the particular faith one belongs to, it's whether one is willing to pick intentional ignorance over reason and keeping an open mind.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I didn't ask you if you thought one religious faith or belief was more "extreme" than another. I asked you if you thought any religious faith or belief was any more RATIONAL (or less INSANE) than any other. So I'm trying a second time. What's your answer (without saying "yes" while essentially rephrasing the question in a way that could be altering its meaning)?
[edit below]
Do you think someone praying to some imaginary dude in the sky (who he thinks created the universe and has told us all what we should and shouldn't do and will punish us or reward us accordingly) and feeling like he's communicating with that imaginary dude and thinking his prayer might affect the outcome of something is more rational and less insane than someone believing in demonic possession? If so, on what basis?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Yes. Prayer, to the believers, is merely a way to seek favors from the imaginary dude in the sky. However, they (the believers)believe that they are still ultimately responsible for their actions and interactions with the world around them.* Demonic possession requires one to believe that a person is not only acting irrationally and is mentally unstable but also to believe that the cause of instability is not within the individual but rather an outside malevolent force or spirit who has "taken over" and then compels the person to act according to the whims and wishes of the "demon".
*Timothy would totally disagree.
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )That's an interesting distinction. I'd still have to say, though, that if one believes in an omnipotent deity, there's no reason to think it couldn't "take over" a person, and that there is no reason apparent to me to think that believing one can communicate with that imaginary dude in the sky and that he may dispense favors upon request is any less insane than believing that a deity has possessed a person. Same goes for believing in some defined deity -- what it is, what it's done, what it wants us to do and not do, what it's rewards and punishments are, etc.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )didn't ask that! :) You only asked if a person who believes in demonic possession could be considered LESS sane than a person who asks the imaginary dude for a seat on the bus. Now we're getting into deciding differing degrees of sane. Another way would be to compare each religious world views to an ideal completely rational world view. HankP lives in a completely rational and ungodly universe (Well except for his taste in shirts although they could be considered "ungodly"-I kid, I kid). He and the girl take the bus. She gets a seat he does not. After they get off she tells him that she prayed to God for the empty seat and God provided. HankP says its just a coinkydink. However, to both observers God was unseen. To HankP he doesn't exist and therefore was not there. To the girl he exists but acts in "invisible ways" and so she did not perceive God's interaction directly.
After an afternoon together at a hotel they both decide to go to an exorcism that evening. When they arrive, there is a woman writhing on the sanctified kitchen table. To hankP she looks like a whacked out schizophrenic nutjob in need of some serious meds. But to his (now) date, she can actually see (see I tells ya') the presence of the devil, the actual intervention of the malevolent spirit if you will, within the person writhing on the table. See the difference?
And, oh yeah, she ends up slapping HankP's face because he doesn't believe her, runs out and never speaks to him again.
--I had discovered a great secret. That everyone loves themselves more than they love anybody else. And if I wanted them to love me, I better be like THEM!... Ken Nordine
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Ah, but you didn't ask that!
What are you saying I didn't ask? Have you checked the whole thread?
As for your (enjoyably-written) story, I'm afraid I don't see what your point is, other than that some people believe in supernatural stuff and some don't. Please spell out for me what your point is.
By the way, re:
to his (now) date
I know I've posted this clip before, but what the heck. Your comment reminded me of it:
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )all are irrational at heart, but I'd say that with the exception of the belief in reincarnation Buddhism probably comes the closest to being rational. Deism and Unitarianism come in a close second.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Is demonic possession. And exorcism rituals are a huge percentage of Tibetan Buddhism's rites. Westerners are a little over-indoctrinated on the model of possession hyped in 'The Exorcist' and other head-rotating, slime-spewing flicks; most of the world's peoples (including most Muslims) believe that less elaborate spirits are responsible for most of their bad luck, including possession of their cars, for instance.
Unitarianism isn't a religion--it's an apology for a lack of religion ;)
Methinks thou doth protest too much. Grew up Catholic, by any chance? ;)
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's all in the eye of the beholder, but you don't find a belief in demonic possession a bit unusual? Really?
BTW, saying that everyone is superstitious is not much of an argument.
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Check out the canonical texts.
The Buddha specifically forbade belief in charms in the Digha Nikaya - the primary Buddhist text:
However, it is perfectly true that Tibetan Buddhism (a small offshoot of mainstream Buddhism) does have exorcism rituals. These are almost certainly accretions from the pre-Buddhist Tibetan religion now called "Bon"
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )And Islam is probably the most superstitious religion there is. I'm not talking about canon, I'm talking about fact--go into any temple in Thailand or Sri Lanka and you will find demons being exorcised. That's what incense is for! As it is in Catholic churches. That's also what temple carvings--like Western church gargoyles--are for: to chase away demons and attract the blessings of benevolent spirits.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )hence the Satanic Verses, as you well know.
Islam has Satan as pretty much of a central tenet to an almost Manichaean extent. Almost every Surah inveighs against Satan or Eblis. That Satan has legions of demons, formerly angels, who support his actions. So, therefore, its not too big a leap in faith to demonic possession.
The whole Quran fadoodle starts off with an angelic visitation.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )forbade divination, witch-craft, etc, just as all other religious leaders have. Rather like industry lobbyists in Washington banning all competition ;)
Muhammed's visitation, of course, was lifted straight from the Satanic temptation of Christ, which occurred many centuries earlier. And Christ's was stolen from that of Adam in the Apocrypha.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )It's not really a central tenet of Christianity, either, but there are numerous references to it in Christian scripture (e.g. the Gadarene swine). AFAIK there is not a single reference in any sutra to the Buddha exorcising a demon.
You appear to be arguing that some Buddhists, maybe even most Buddhists, believe in demonic possession. I have no idea whether that's true, but even if it is, it has nothing to do with the assertion you made.
--The other day I heard that ignorance and apathy are sweeping the country. I didn't know that, but I don't really care.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I misused the word 'tenet'. I should have said 'belief'. Yes, a vast majority of Buddhists do believe in demons. In fact, only a few hundred years ago, the overwhelming majority of people on the entire planet believed that ALL disease was caused by evil spirits; the majority of Africans still do.
So pervasive was this belief that when bacteria or 'germs' were first observed, they were called 'animalcules' and assigned varying shades of intelligent malevolence.
In any case, those familiar with MPD--or who has lived with someone who has it--may be open-minded on the subject of demonic possession. My point here is that this incident will do Jindal no political harm and maybe some good. It certainly has so far. Hank has seized on it because he believes that it makes Jindal 'untouchable' as a vice-presidential candidate or future president--he is incorrect, IMHO.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )"The central message of Buddhism is not 'Every man for himself.'"
--I blame it all on the Internet
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )I don't know if you replied before my edit (addition) or if you just chose to ignore my specific question, so I'll repeat it:
1) Do you think someone "praying" to some imaginary dude in the sky (who he thinks created the universe and has told us all what we should and shouldn't do and will punish us or reward us accordingly) and feeling like he's communicating with that imaginary dude and thinking his prayer might affect the outcome of something is MORE rational and LESS insane than someone believing in demonic possession? If so, on what basis?
And I'll add another two:
2) What about belief in a "heaven" and/or "hell", either in general or per some "scripture" or interpretation thereof? Is that MORE rational and LESS insane than belief in demonic possession? If so, on what basis?
3) What about belief in a particular "god", and its "commandments" for us, and its history of interaction with us, all per some "scripture" or interpretation thereof? Is that MORE rational and LESS insane than belief in demonic possession? If so, on what basis?
[edit below]
By the way, you can also tell me the relative ratings on your rationality/insanity meter of any of the above vs. someone believing that "there were evil spirits in the walls and that spreading sea salt on the floor of her room would protect her".
Oh and:
4) You described that housemate of yours as a "lunatic" for believing in those evil spirits in the walls. Is there any reason I shouldn't consider anyone a lunatic for believing ANY of the stuff I mentioned above?
5) Do you consider ALL such people lunatics?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )The Lady downstairs had her apartment exorcised, and yes, she is nuts.
An ex-girlfriend used to utter a prayer at the bus stop as the bus was pulling up. She was asking god for an empty seat. She too was nuts.
There are something like 300 million people in America. Why not try to find one who isn't nuts? It can't believe it's too much to ask.
--Nothing resembles virtue more than a great crime. Saint-Just
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )An ex-girlfriend used to utter a prayer at the bus stop as the bus was pulling up. She was asking god for an empty seat. She too was nuts.
And what sort of prayer is not nuts, and what makes one nuts and the other not?
Is what makes her prayer nuts that she was asking her imaginary guy in the sky for something trivial (a bus seat), or that anyone would asking an imaginary guy in the sky for anything?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A prayer that asks God's assistance so that one's own soul can better bear the realities that it confronts is not at all nuts and in fact is profoundly grounded and sane. IMHO.
Praying for the wisdom and strength to do what is right is altogether praiseworthy. IMHO.
On the other hand, asking God to change external objective reality is nuts (and blasphemous as well) and my earliest recollection of having this explicit thought was when I was watching on television Boston College play Notre Dame in basketball.
Very late in a tied game one team or the other was shooting free throws and the camera revealed chaplains on both sides fervently praying that God deflect the trajectory of an orange ball, one side hoping it would fall into the basket the other that the ball would miss.
Nuts! Absolutely nuts! As if there was some sort of metaphysical tug-of-war going on.
Abraham Lincoln also captured this same sense in his Second Inaugural Address:
Abraham Lincoln knew how to pray, sanely.
--Fence post turtles -- They don't get up there by themselves, some moron had to put 'em there.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )A prayer that asks God's assistance so that one's own soul can better bear the realities that it confronts is not at all nuts and in fact is profoundly grounded and sane. IMHO.
Praying for the wisdom and strength to do what is right is altogether praiseworthy. IMHO.
Nope. Meditating in some way as a means of building strength to confront difficult realities or to achieve wisdom is not nuts. But praying -- meaning requesting something from an imaginary guy in the sky, thinking one is communicating with that hallucinated entity, and thinking it might provide assistance -- is batsh*t insane, period. And if you caught me praying to a bottle of Pepsi, asking it to help me achieve strength and wisdom, I assume you'd say the same about me.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )you are happy enough to accept the votes of all those batsh*t insane people and all the pandering that involves, in order to help your guy get elected.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )My curiosity exceeds my will to enforce my "no reply" ban.
Tell me, please, on what basis you label me "a conservative". What positions/arguments of mine define me as such in your mind? You state it as a matter of fact, so you must have some positions/arguments of mine in mind. So...watcha got?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )that you intend to vote for McCain in the Presidential election.
After 8 years of Bush there really are no true 'independents' outside the ranks of the many low information voters, which I'm assuming you would not want to identify yourself with.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )First, you seem to confuse party identification or lack thereof ("independent") with place on the left-right ideological spectrum (conservative, center, liberal/left).
Aside from that, if you think that anyone (other than what you call a "low information voter") who votes for McCain in this election is, by definition, a conservative, I disagree. I think that's an exceedingly broad and overly simplistic sole criterion. Not that I'm surprised that such is your view. Black and white. Us vs. them. Good vs. bad. With us or against us (if you'll pardon the phrase). Makes thinking easy and feels good (to some).
You should get together with the guys at RedState who branded me a "lefty troll". You and they have more in common than you think (see mindset described above -- oh and a strong allergy to questions that could expose flaws in your arguments, and tendency to react to them, and to the questioner, with annoyance).
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )or reticent.
You have made repeated comments to the effect that you might be persuaded to stay home and not vote for McCain in the coming election because of various stupid things he or the campaign have said or some dumb position or other he has taken. But nowhere have I seen you comment on why you would vote for McCain in the 1st place.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )Well, either you somehow missed the relevant comments of mine or you need to pay attention and think things through a bit.
But what is your implication? If your premise were correct (that I had never commented on why I would vote for McCain), what would your point be? What's the implication?
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )maybe even that you aren't capable of defending your decision to vote for McCain.
--GW Bush, leading contender for worst President ever.
- Login or register to post comments
| parent )