Very disappointed in Eminem, from whom we have learned to expect so much.

How many more cultural icons can Trump afford to lose?

And well she might apologize, but it was funny.

Sorry.

Says NC Reporter blogger.

And makes a good case for getting along with opponents in a number of doctrinal battles. But his cases each call for broad-mindedness, not just loving the person right or wrong, which broad-m. can look a lot like giving away the store.

It’s one thing to recognize the opponent as a child of God, for instance, another to say he or she may be right. If it’s tension you are willing to undergo, this friendliness with your opponent right or wrong provides more than enough.

So what else is new?

Wants it to be the cornerstone of diplomatic activity.

If I had to choose a quote from our latest print issue that could serve as a motto for the whole edition, I think I’d have to go with Pope Francis’ words to the Vatican diplomatic corps advising them to “abandon the familiar rhetoric and start from the essential consideration that we are dealing, above all, with persons.”

As to what the heck that means, well gosh . . .

Not data, principles, logic, all that governs our dealing with persons?

Stonewall Barack and Stonewall Rahm went strollin’ down the avenue, two by two/ Oh my buddy-buddy, block that, block that, Oh my buddy-buddy block that, for sure!

(To the tune of the immortal doper’s song, “Cocaine Bill and Morphine Sue.”)

The two of them can’t break the habit.

God writes straight with crooked lines.

(No offense to Mr. Lavrov, but he does represent a country with a long history of malfunction.)

Good for Fr. Graf.

But small question: How is he on the rule of law?

Probable answer: He believes in it but considers this an unjust law.

Then: How is he on open-borders? Ancillary matters in his view? Important considerations nonetheless?

Just asking.

Not so sure about the headline, with memories evoked of Richard Nixon’s famous “I am not a crook.” But NC Reporter is not letting this story go, and that’s a good thing.

Besides the headline critique, I’d like to see someone who buys ink by the carload or its digital equivalent put this question: Presuming Francis has been convinced of offenders’ guilt in many other abuse cases, what does he see missing from this case of episcopal see-no-evil-ism?

Is there an analysis anywhere of what usually tips the scale, has done so in other cases, that — in Francis’ view — is not available in this one? What did he see in those other cases?

Or, to call up the big Nixon question of decades ago, what did Francis know (about Bishop Barros, enough to give him a pass) and when did he know it?

Wordsworth vs. Darwin. W. offered milquetoast alternative to Darwinism based on his vague pantheism, transforming the believer into a “daffodil enthusiast” valuing “a tour through Westmoreland” over “a pilgrimage to Jerusalem.”

From TLS review of R. Ryan’s Charles Darwin and the Church of Wordsworth (Oxford U Press)

EX-Dem Trump voters in CNN interview, Ohio woman: “He talks like we do . . . We are sick of the suave (a la Obama), sick of the teleprompter.”

“He talks like we do.” A man of the people even if a billionaire.

These former Dems who voted for Trump in 2016 “will vote” for him again in 2020, reports CNN man.