Archive for September, 2009

…and what fits your template, can be illustrated by a simple YouTube video:

Note: Stacy really deserves the hits on this has he has done the legwork while I’m sitting on a couch a thousand miles away, but I’m posting it here in case you are unwilling to go to his site because Charles says you can’t.

Now tell me, you might believe her you might not but which is more solid reporting? The AP story quoted in the post, or the actual film of what she claims to have said. Given the choice which report would you believe?

I’ll bet that if the AP guy knew this:

Miss Brown says she is not a Republican, but is a registered Democrat and, during her 2008 senior year at Corbin High School, was actually a leader of students supporting Barack Obama for the presidency.

And the reports themselves? Stacy links to this story that says in part:

Rudzinski did comment on some of the reports circulating about the death.

“Misinformation is one thing, but pure speculation is another,” She said. “What we’re seeing the bulk of is speculation by people who don’t have direct access to the investigation.”

I’ve objected to some of the speculation myself, the bottom line from the story:

“Misinformation is much more damaging to our investigation than the correct or no information,” he said.

But hey who cares about facts or actually catching a killer when there are points to be scored against the right?

Consider this: She will be leaving high school and either going to college or looking or work, what do you think will happen when her name is googled (and you know it will be) and that quote comes up? That is messing with a young woman’s future. That’s despicable and dishonorable.

If you want to know why this reporter is worth a ten spot, that is why.

… on his blog tonight lgf officially jumps the shark.

Just for fun lets take a look at how long it’s been since Charles hit Hugo Chavez. The last hit is April of this year. Ol’ Hugo hasn’t done one odd thing since then, no sir.

Now lets do the same search for Sarah Palin. Take a look at the hits (to be fair there are some defenses there too) but make the comparison.

Nope Charles hasn’t changed, not one bit and we on the right are just delusional to say so.

I predict that not only will Charles become a darling of the left, but he will at some time before or when her books comes out he will be invited on MSNBC to talk about the “White Supremacist” connection to the governor. I personally would be shocked if MSNBC doesn’t pick this up sometime before the week is out.

Take care Charles. Good luck convincing your new friends that Israel is worth defending, Afghanistan is a war worth fighting, the Mohammad Cartoons are worth printing and Iran shouldn’t have the bomb.

I would have thrown in the religion of peace stuff too but for some reason you haven’t used that term since April 6th. In fact you used the term only 3 times this year so far. In 2008 it was 36 times. In 2007 it was 165 times.

Has radical Islam become proportionately less violent, have they decided to treat women better or stop killing gays or are not preaching holy war or the death of people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Or is there another reason? Rather than speculate as others have, I’m asking directly.

WHY?

This telegram story says a lot deletion of the ick factor.

I reread an extraordinary interview Polanski gave to the novelist Martin Amis in 1979, the year after Polanski went on the run.

The interview originally appeared in Tatler and is collected in Amis’s excellent book Visiting Mrs Nabokov.

Here’s a section of the first quote it contains from Polanski.

“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”

I have always maintained that the war on Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular is all about justifying one’s own sins. Andrew Sullivan doesn’t leave the Church for one that accepts gay marriage because deep down as a Catholic he still has the grace to KNOW what sin is and needs to have it justified by the Church.

This is all about trying to normalize behavior by an elite group of people who do not want to be judged.

“But DaTechGuy how can you possibly suggest this could happen?” Let me remind you of a post back near the start of my blogging days here:

Personally on a religious level I can’t support gay marriage but this is not a valid argument for a non-religious person. On a non-religious level it seems to me you can not rationally say that gay marriage is ok and should be legal without also allowing either polygamy and incest between consenting adults. Both have a longer and more accepted cultural history worldwide.

And PLEASE don’t give me the “ick” factor argument about these other things being accepted. Ick is just an argument about culture. It is the same argument that one would have heard concerning gay marriage less that 20 years ago.

Anyone familiar with the vast cultural change promulgated over the last decade and a half can’t be surprised by the elites reaction to the Polanski stuff without considerable idiocy. After all:

The idea that when you can’t always live up to your values you drop the values is the path of the coward and the fool. As the saying goes:

“Christianity has not been tried and found wanting, it has been found difficult and left untried.”

I’m sure the author would like to leave it untried. A lot easier to do what you want when there are no rules, isn’t it?

It’s all about allowing the sin. And nobody described sin better than Warren in his interview with Curry last year:

Mark my words this case and the elites reaction to it and the media’s reaction to the elites will be either a turning point or a breaking point in the culture wars, and No I’m not surprised we have reached this point, I just didn’t think it would happen this fast.

Update: Mark Stein on the Polanski comment:

What’s that from? The Mullah Omar Guide To Healthy Relationships? Personally, I prefer ’em a little older than 13, but no doubt that explains why I’m not as “grown-up” (in Polanski’s word) about this as his pals.

More interestingly how many of the people on the list that signed are women under the age of 21? That would be an interesting stat.

Update 2 Michelle and Driscoll comment. This is going to explode in a lot of people’s faces.

…Even that darling of liberal Catholicism Father Thomas Reese gets it:

Imagine if the Knight of Columbus decided to give an award to a pedophile priest who had fled the country to avoid prison. The outcry would be universal. Victim groups would demand the award be withdrawn and that the organization apologize. Religion reporters would be on the case with the encouragement of their editors. Editorial writers and columnist would denounce the knights as another example of the insensitivity of the Catholic Church to sexual abuse.

And they would all be correct. And I would join them.

But why is there not similar outrage directed at the film industry for giving an award to Roman Polanski, who not only confessed to statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl but fled the country prior to sentencing? Why have film critics and the rest of the media ignored this case for 31 years? He even received an Academy award in 2003. Are the high priests of the entertainment industry immune to criticism?

Via ABC and hotair. If the case is so clear even Fr. Reese can’t justify it then the defenders of Roman Polanski have a problem on their hands. If James Carroll agrees then it’s all over.