Let not this Sebelius appearance stand for university integrity, hearing all sides, etc.
There is no clash of ideas in the holding up of a commencement speaker for all to see, no intellectual honesty for which Jesuits et al. at Georgetown are to be praised. Nothing like any of that. Just politics.
They say, We’re with you, Sebelius, you can count on us.
Rep. Paul Ryan has original idea: Measure a program by how well it works, not how much it costs.
I vouch for the author completely . . .
Word to the wise . . .
“Not really” is the new “No.” Or so I thought before running across this encyclopedic account.
While you (we) are at it (I?), consider the New Yorker cartoon by Edward Koren cited in Times Literary Supplement, 9/23/11 (but earlier in a textbook, Philosophy: An Introduction to the Art of Wondering, by James L. Christian, originally published in 1973), in which the devil laments:
It’s getting much harder for me to distinguish good from evil. All I’m certain about is what’s appropriate and inappropriate.
Quoted by Rae Langton, reviewing Terry Eagleton’s On Evil (Yale).
Lady of house is not amused when I referred to our parish church as “that neighborhood emporium of grace and salvation.”
Another time, maybe, but I take her as Everywoman responding to my various bon mots and salvos in the cause of humor as antidote (temporary, yes, but what isn’t in our vale of tears?) to the slough of despond* that ever beckons, at least to THINKING PEOPLE.
* Not quite, if I go entirely with Bunyan. Despondency?
The case for not eating meat, by David Sirota, is also a case for mandatory scanning of fetus by abortion-seekers, but Sirota doesn’t make the fetus case.
One of his [11] commenters notes this: “Sirota echoes an argument from the anti-abortion folks.” He or she is answered with this: “Only if the mothers eat the fetuses.” Followed by: “first they come for the placenta…. ”
Heh-heh: having fun with the opposition, and this on the somewhat religion-oriented, firmly pacifist and other sort of leftist position-taking Truth Dig site.
The mistakes of feminism, at Catholic and Feminist: Can You Be Both? (Part 2) » Catholic Sistas.
The first:
Secular feminists wanted women to be able to do as they pleased, with no regard for others. Essentially, they wanted to live as they perceived men living: putting themselves first. If men can pursue professional fulfillment at the expense of family, then women should be able to, too. If men can “have it all”…the family, the career, the personal pursuits…women should be able to, too. If men can indulge their sexual appetites through promiscuity, women should be able to, too. If men can walk away from their reproductive responsibilities, women should be able to, too.
There’s more where that came from . . . here.
It’s at the heart of the authoritarianism bent by the Obamacrats. Holder has been the cutting edge. If not, I’m open to candidates.
From: Enough Already: Contempt Process Begins Against Holder on Fast and Furious.
Prayer and Scripture reading help guide the faithful through life, Pope tells audience
That’s the head on a good story. But “tells,” as if he announces something? No, reminds. It’s an oldie and goodie and something worth repeating a lot.
Blithe Spirit 