Sports Break - Good for Brian Kelly, and Wow, what happened to the Steelers?

I've enjoyed watching the before unheard of Cincinnati Bearcats go full throttle in college football these last couple of years and am glad Brian Kelly was able to leaverage that resurrection performance into the Notre Dame head coaching job. His players at Cincy seemed upset, for now, but I hope they'll eventually be happy for him.

I watched the entire Steelers-Browns game on the NFL Network last night. I usually check out of these Sunday night, Monday night games because they end too late, but stuck around for this one. Partly because I couldn't believe what I was watching. The Browns actually looked like a real football team. Have been hearing about how good this Josh Cribbs is returning kicks. And the Browns, recognizing what a weapon he is, have put him in the offense running the Wild Cat, mostly successfully. Not sure what has happened to the Steelers. The Browns D got to Rothlisberger for 8 sacks. Incredible. But for the Steelers to only put up 6 points on a 1-11 team, particularly a division rival they had beat 12 straight times, is pretty remarkable. Can't be a good day in Steelers country.

Deal or No Deal

Forgive me for not getting all into the latest "deal" being talked about in the Senate regarding health care reform and the public option, Medicare, etc. Seems like we've had a number of deals over the past several months--it reminds me of the multiple number of occasions in which it was announced that we had killed the #2 leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq a few years ago. Just get the thing done and voted on, please. Thank you.

Christianist Double Speak

Andrew Sullivan flags this interesting post from a graduate of the Christianist Patrick Henry College, but I most appreciated this particular quote from it:

The first argument the letter-writers are likely to hurl back at me will insist that this is about America, about its future as a moral nation. This is politics, not our personal lives. Yes it is, and that’s the problem. It is why, on my darker days, I hardly want anything to do with the American church: as a national political force, it is about a highly politicized view of the United States, and not about God, people, or love. It assumes that the church can be a political force apart from the very principles it supposedly exists to defend—that it can preach institutional hate in the political arena and expect individuals to believe it really wants to love them. (This double-mindedness is apparent throughout the PHC letter, which one moment assures that Christians just want to be left alone to “remain faithful,” then pooh-poohs “small, behind-the-scenes actions” in favor of combative politics the next.)

I'm glad someone else is picking up on this Christianist dishonest gobbledygook. That it comes from a graduate of one of Christianism's "warrior" training bastions is especially reassuring.

Somebody needs to get to know the American Constitution

Particularly, Article VI, Paragraph 3:

"...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Afghanistan

I didn't watch the speech and haven't as of yet read the transcript, but I've read a bit about what other people have said of the speech so I guess that's the same thing.

I don't think the deadline is serious. I don't think Afghanistan can be fixed. I'm not even so sure any more that the original 2001 invasion was worthwhile.

Among the things I've read on this subject in the last two days, one of the more interesting was a column by David Brooks, of all people. Pakistan is, and probably has been for some time, as much if not more of a problem than Afghanistan. There are also some interesting thoughts at Sullivan's blog as usual, particularly from his readers, pertaining to the utility of deadlines.

Once I come upon the transcript of the speech I'll try to give this subject more serious attention.

Wars are free, etc

Greenwald on Senator Bayh:

It's impossible to find a more perfectly representative face for the rotted Washington establishment than Evan Bayh. He is the pure expression of virtually every attribute that makes the Beltway so dysfunctional, deceitful and corrupt...

When the sad and destructive history of the U.S. over the last decade is written, the coddled, nepotistic, self-serving face of Evan Bayh should be prominently included. It embodies virtually every cause.

Here's how this fierce deficit-hawk responds to Chris Wallace's question on financing our wars:

WALLACE: Senator Bayh, you brought up the question of cost, and the administration has put the cost -- and this is kind of astonishing to, I think, a lot of people -- $1 million per soldier per year, so if you sent 30,000 soldiers, that would be a $30 billion price tag.

Now, some top Democrats are talking about the idea -- the new idea of a war tax to pay for the escalation in Afghanistan. Good idea?

BAYH: No, I don't think it's a good idea, not at this point, Chris. First of all, you need to provide for the nation's security regardless of your financial situation, and there's no bigger deficit hawk in Congress than I am.

I think we need to start coming to grips with this. We're going to have a big vote coming up on the debt ceiling. I don't think we should vote to raise the debt ceiling until we have a strategy in place to get our deficits down.

So we've got to take the fiscal situation seriously, but, number one, national security comes first.
Number two, we've got to look at cutting spending in other parts of the budget before we even talk about raising taxes.

I don't know how serious Wallace's question was in tone but at least one of the Villagers put the question our there. Even to accept the argument that "national security" spending takes priority over "lowly" domestic spending, shouldn't one ought to propose some means of financing our military necessities? And to want to finance them if absolutely needed from those who can most afford to pay for them? Say hello to our Democratic Party "majority".

The (Evangelical) Kids Aren't Alright

In case you might have missed it, the usual gang of misanthrops, malcontents, and professional panty-sniffing scolds got together to try to intimidate the Democratic Majority and the rest of us:

Citing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s call to civil disobedience, 145 evangelical, Roman Catholic and Orthodox Christian leaders have signed a declaration saying they will not cooperate with laws that they say could be used to compel their institutions to participate in abortions, or to bless or in any way recognize same-sex couples.

“We pledge to each other, and to our fellow believers, that no power on earth, be it cultural or political, will intimidate us into silence or acquiescence,” it says.

The manifesto, to be released on Friday at the National Press Club in Washington, is an effort to rejuvenate the political alliance of conservative Catholics and evangelicals that dominated the religious debate during the administration of President George W. Bush. The signers include nine Roman Catholic archbishops and the primate of the Orthodox Church in America.

They want to signal to the Obama administration and to Congress that they are still a formidable force that will not compromise on abortion, stem-cell research or gay marriage. They hope to influence current debates over health care reform, the same-sex marriage bill in Washington, D.C., and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Yes, the Civil Rights movement's opposition to the South's racial segregation, legal and extra-legal denial of African-American voting rights, and KKK lynching is just like the conservative religious establishment's opposition to teh gay.

But this next statement from Watergate criminal Charles "Chuck" Colson is really pretty choice:

They say they also want to speak to younger Christians who have become engaged in issues like climate change and global poverty, and who are more accepting of homosexuality than their elders. They say they want to remind them that abortion, homosexuality and religious freedom are still paramount issues.

“We argue that there is a hierarchy of issues,” said Charles Colson, a prominent evangelical who founded Prison Fellowship after serving time in prison for his role in the Watergate scandal. “A lot of the younger evangelicals say they’re all alike. We’re hoping to educate them that these are the three most important issues.”

Well, poop. The old fundies have had such a good thing going, with the abortion wars, the war on Christmas, and how teh gay is going to ruin marriage. But the young Christians are ruining the mission. They must be educated. Maybe shipping these youngsters to some survival-ish camp like place or locking them in Daddy Dobson's Ministry of Truth for a while will wake them up and make them conform.