…then Terri Schiavo has someone new and really interesting to compare notes with.
My condolences to the Catholic community on the loss of its leader, a good and decent man.
PAD
…then Terri Schiavo has someone new and really interesting to compare notes with.
My condolences to the Catholic community on the loss of its leader, a good and decent man.
PAD
• 
Have fun with it, go with Pope Judas Iscariot
Heck, why not Kaiser Soze (sp)?
As who will succeed as the next pope, the cardinals aren’t stupid. John Paul II is being acclaimed for his travel, openess, and intelligence. These qualities will certainly factor into the choice. But will they choose a more progressive cleric to retain and recruit Catholics?
Speking as a Canadian, the media may very well be the message.
Nitpicking my earlier post, I now understand that there are conflicting information about to whether or not this silver hammer on the forehead thing is still a current papal practice (and what its purpose and symbolism is anyway.) Still, there’s lots of ritual here that’s fascinating…
As for this:
Posted by David
As who will succeed as the next pope, the cardinals aren’t stupid. John Paul II is being acclaimed for his travel, openess, and intelligence. These qualities will certainly factor into the choice. But will they choose a more progressive cleric to retain and recruit Catholics?
It may be worth noting that John Paul II was an unsual selection for two reasons. One being that he was not Italian. The other being that he was comparatively young.
I suspect his sucessor might turn out to be neither of these things, or perhaps one of them, but not both.
Although I liked John Paul II, I think John XXIII was more important, theologically and historically. I only mention this because of all this talk of ‘John Paul the Great’ and making him a saint. Any Catholics out there care to comment?
I suspect his sucessor might turn out to be neither of these things, or perhaps one of them, but not both.
I may be cynical about the process, but I don’t see how the college can dismiss John Paul II’s tenure. Given how successful he was to laymen and non Catholics, do they risk taking a step back? Like they say, it’s about putting bums in seats, in this case, pews.
Posted by David:
I may be cynical about the process, but I don’t see how the college can dismiss John Paul II’s tenure. Given how successful he was to laymen and non Catholics, do they risk taking a step back?
The whole process is shrouded in so much mystery (perhaps that should have a capital “M”…) that it probably doesn’t make much sense to predict what’ll happen. But, to my guess that the next pope might be neither non-Italian nor young, or perhaps one of those things, but not both, I note that many of the non-Italian possible popes being mentioned are already in their late 60s/early 70s. I could see the conclave deciding on a non-Italian-but-somewhat-older pope as something of a transitional figure from John Paul II. But I don’t quite see them comfortable with breaking so much new ground as to have another non-Italian pope who’s young enough to have such a long reign as John Paul II.
Then again, what do I know? It is fascinating to speculate, but largely irrelevant, and we’ll know soon enough.
For those that lamented about that infamous memo going around, there’s an article on CNN.com about it.
Apparently it was real, and, according to Senator Mel Martinez (R-Florida), it originated with an aide in his office, who has since been canned.
Link to article
Now, we can debate how much Martinez *really* knows, but I thought we’d start with the facts first. 🙂
So while one may quibble with the wording of the original Wash Post story, which implied that this was a talking points memo made by the Party leaders and passed on to Republican senators, the fact that a staffer at Martinez’office wrote it should be a black eye for Republicans. I’m glad he got canned.
I’m sure that some die hard Republicans will complain that they are being held to a higher standard than Democrats–don’t recall anyone getting fired over the memo that said Democrats should oppose Bush’s minority judge nominations because it might cut into minority support for Democrats–but that’s not how they should think. Republicans SHOULD have a higher standard. And it’s not like that’s a very high bar to climb…
So, you would then agree that DeLay should resign?
Sure, as soon as he is convicted of a crime…the same standard I’d give any congress member. That’s fair, right?
Given his, to me, questionable practices, I’d rather see someone else in his position of power but until there is something concrete against him that mnight be difficult to pull off.
So… three rebukes by the House Ethics Committee, at which point, he basically retooled the committee’s members to those that side with him, tried changing other rules so he wouldn’t get his ášš burned again, he’s under investigation for multiple other things.
And let’s not forget the possibility of his being indicted in Texas for one of these investigations.
They had witch trials for Clinton.
DeLay deserves worse.
And, Craig, if it turns out that all or any of these investigations show that he committed a crime, I hope he goes to jail.
If you want me to support witch trials just because you think that’s what happened to Clinton, well, sorry. No can do.
If you want me to support witch trials just because you think that’s what happened to Clinton, well, sorry. No can do.
Maybe not, but it shows the wonderful hypocracy of the Republicans, and the utter disregard they have for the American people.
“Maybe not, but it shows the wonderful hypocracy of the Republicans, and the utter disregard they have for the American people.”
Well, for that to be true you’d have to first prove that Clinton was the victim of a witch hunt, which might be difficult since he pretty much brought his troubles down on his own head.(and of course “Witch Hunt” is in the mind of the beholder–it used to mean people who were innocent being railroaded but now people just use it to describe when someone they like gets caught). You’d also have to prove that Delay is guilty of everything you think he is. Time may take care of that for you. Then you’d have to show that the Republicans, despite his guilt, continue to support him. I suspectthey will drop him like a hot stone (witness what happened to Trent Lott) but Time Will Tell.
Well, for that to be true you’d have to first prove that Clinton was the victim of a witch hunt
You honestly believe what you just said? The Republicans did everything they could to try and get Clinton removed from power.
You’d also have to prove that Delay is guilty of everything you think he is.
This guy has more skeletons than some graveyards.
Here’s DeLay’s latest batch of utter bs:
“The judiciary branch of our government has overstepped its authority on countless occasions, overturning and in some cases just ignoring the legitimate will of the people,” DeLay said. “But I also believe the executive and legislative branches have neglected the proper checks and balances on this behavior … Our next step, whatever it is, must be more than rhetoric.”
Last I checked, polls says the “will of the people” was for the government to butt the hëll out of the Schiavo case.
I guess the “will” only counts for those that agree with DeLay.
Craig,
I know you believe what you write…but look at the above and tell me there is an argument there.
Saying that “The Republicans did everything they could to try and get Clinton removed from power” dosn’t make it so. Believing that Clinton didn’t bring on the majority of his problems won’t change the facts.
And your example of Delay’s guilt is just a stupid statement…which is not illegal.
And your counter argument isn’t very good. If the Zogby polls are correct and most people are actually AGAINST what was done with Schiavo would that make Dely’s statement any less foolish?
Right and wrong are not subject to the whims of polls, though popular opinion does hold weight in how best to implement policies.
Believing that Clinton didn’t bring on the majority of his problems won’t change the facts.
And what were the majority of his problems? A Congress full of power-tripping Republicans, the same lot that are still in power now and still causing havoc?
I don’t recall the Republicans trying to string Gingrich up by his balls since Newt couldn’t keep it in his pants either.
And your example of Delay’s guilt is just a stupid statement…which is not illegal.
No, it’s not stupid, it’s entirely on the mark. This guy is a danger to our society and our government.
It’s people like Bush & DeLay that are trying to seize control of this country, hoping that people are too dámņ ignorant to notice.
And, sadly, their hope is not misplaced.
Right and wrong are not subject to the whims of polls
Appparently they’re not subject to the whims of politicians, either.
“And your example of Delay’s guilt is just a stupid statement…which is not illegal.”
“No, it’s not stupid, it’s entirely on the mark. This guy is a danger to our society and our government.”
Just to clarify–I was saying that it was a stupid statement on the part of Delay, NOT that you were making a stupid statement.
And I’ll say it again; Delay said something stupid. Which is not grounds for impeachment.
“I don’t recall the Republicans trying to string Gingrich up by his balls since Newt couldn’t keep it in his pants either.”
Had he lied under oath about it maybe they would have had their chance–seriously, you think that the Democrats wouldn’t have done the same thing if Newtie had given them the grounds? As it was he lost his power and influence among the party faithful and decided not to run again. As I recall, nobody tried to talk him out of it.
In contrast, Bill Clinton is still protected and defended by his fans, allowing him to continue to suck the air out of the room every time some other Democrat has a chance to take over. For which Republicans the world over thank you all.
“It’s people like Bush & DeLay that are trying to seize control of this country, hoping that people are too dámņ ignorant to notice.”
Something to look forward too–when Bush nears the end of his second term and the far left moonbats start to talk about his secret plan to suspend the constitution and stay in power–basically the exact same thing the far right wingnuts said at the end of Clinton’s term.
And lest anyone think I’m coming to the defense of Mr Delay–I really hope he gets the boot. It would be good for the party. Much of what he did was technically legal but wrong–like Bill Clinton, he seems to think that he can do stuff just because he can.
Unfortunately, he raises a lot of money and probably has enough people in his pocket that they will fight for him. Too bad. If republicans have the same low standards as democrats they deserve the same electoral fate.
Just to clarify–I was saying that it was a stupid statement on the part of Delay, NOT that you were making a stupid statement.
Ahh.
For which Republicans the world over thank you all.
I don’t think the Republicans being where they’re at today is due to Clinton.
If Clinton could’ve ran a third term, Bush didn’t stand a chance.
Gore? Well, I don’t know what his problem was (beyond a really bad misquote), and last year it was gay marriage bans that carried the day.
Unfortunately, he raises a lot of money and probably has enough people in his pocket that they will fight for him.
Yet, there is some hope:
DeLay spent nearly $3 million in this last election campaign in Texas, and got 55% of the vote.
The guy who ran against DeLay only had like $500k and still got 41%.
DeLay can be beat. The Democrats realize that, and they’re starting to look at their options in that district already.
“I don’t think the Republicans being where they’re at today is due to Clinton.”
“If Clinton could’ve ran a third term, Bush didn’t stand a chance.”
I think that is probably true. Clinton was a much sharper debator than either Bush or Gore.
Then again, virtually everyone that Clinton actively campaigned for lately has lost. He was never good at transferring his charisma to other people–in fact, when people saw a politician with Bill they assumed he was as much of a sleeze (poor Erskine Bowles did everything he could to distance himself from BC but the Republicans just ran ad after ad showing the two together).
The facts speak for themselves–When Bill was elected the Democrats owned the House, ruled the senate, had most of the govornerships, controlled most of the state legislatures…they were unquestionably the dominant party, despite having difficulty winning the big enchilada.
After Clinton got elected the ONLY thing they could keep was the presidency–and even then, only with Clinton. The republicans have a good lock on the House, thanks to the fact that redistricting has protected all incumbants (the Democrats went along with much of this, looking out for numero uno). The senate and control of most states has fallen to the Republicans more often than not–even California and Massachusettes have Republican govorners. And the number of people who identify themselves as republicans has gone up while the number describing themselves as democrats went down.
maybe it’s all a coincidence but one can certainly argue that Bill Clinton was the best thing that ever happened to the Republicans.
“The facts speak for themselves–When Bill was elected the Democrats owned the House, ruled the senate, had most of the govornerships, controlled most of the state legislatures…they were unquestionably the dominant party, despite having difficulty winning the big enchilada.”
Which should make this next set of elections very interesting. If this indicates a pattern which we are about the repeat, we should see a dramatic shift from Red to Blue in the legislative houses, even if the White House stays Red for another term or two.
Then again, virtually everyone that Clinton actively campaigned for lately has lost
But Clinton didn’t campaign for Gore, which some people said at the time is what probably cost Gore the election.
“Which should make this next set of elections very interesting. If this indicates a pattern which we are about the repeat, we should see a dramatic shift from Red to Blue in the legislative houses, even if the White House stays Red for another term or two.”
Good point. So far Bush has defied predictions and managed to win midterm elections. If things like the Delay scandels gain traction there could well be a repeat of 1994. The Democrats will, of course, have to offer something as well–they keep thinking that they will be swept into office on a wave of voter anger. Apparently they aren’t as angry as they thought.
“But Clinton didn’t campaign for Gore, which some people said at the time is what probably cost Gore the election.”
Sure he did. He wasn’t as active as he could have been and that was a deliberate choice of Gore’s, for better or worse, but he certainly campaigned.
A few blasts from the past:
” Gore and Clinton campaigned together in Monroe, Mich. a blue-collar swing district where they had appeared in their successful 1992 campaign. Gore thanked Clinton for the endorsement he delivered from the convention podium on Monday night. He noted the prosperity of the past eight years, and said, “we’re just getting started. We’re not turning back.”
“President Clinton spent Sunday enthusiastically stumping for Al Gore in his home state of Arkansas, where the race between Gore and Texas Gov. George W. Bush is considered a valuable toss up.”
“Clinton campaign
President Bill Clinton campaigned for Gore in Arkansas, telling volunteers there, “We’ve got to get the troops out.”
“This state could literally determine the outcome of the election,” he told civic leaders in Little Rock. “There are about 15 to 20 states that are literally within three points … and no one knows what’s going to happen. But what will happen is the people who want it bad enough will win.”
Now granted, Clinton could have been used far more effectively. But the idea that he did not campaign and rasie money for Gore is a myth.
Odd. I seem to recall distinctly that Gore was intentionally distancing himself from Clinton, thinking that the impeachment would hurt him (Gore) in the long run.
But then, that was 4-5 years ago, and it’s harder and harder to see through the haze of red that has affected my vision since Bush’s 2002 State of the Union address. 🙂
Yeah, it does seem like 100 years ago, doesn’t it?
And you’re correct about Gore distancing himself, to a degree. And obviously, it was a bad idea. I mean, there’s no way a last day visit to Florida by Clinton couldn’t have netted more than 500 votes. meanwhile, he had BC campaign in California…like he was in any danger there…amazing…
Of course, we’re all strategic geniuses after the fact…:)
So, Bill, do you think we’re seeing a case of ‘political suicide’ unfolding with DeLay’s? 🙂
Depends. A lot of people in the republican party would like to see him fade away but it’s not likely. And if he goes nuclear…a lot of folks could go down with him.
Democrats have to be careful as well. The recent line of attacks over his using his family in paid positions within his campaigns is laughable–this is really a case of something EVERYBODY does and while it stinks to high heaven, if Harry Reid makes too big fuss over it someone might point out that his own family has profited tremendously from the Nevada gaming industry. Which is no shock–we’re talking Nevada here fer Christ sakes. at any rate, Delay has so many real skeletons its nuts to try to make up bogus ones.
I guess it depends on whether the Republicans see this as a media witch hunt or not. With Trent lott they wisely cut him off at the knees, which contrasted favorably with the treatment the Democrats give Robert “Grand Kleagle” Byrd. They’d be wise to do the same to Delay but I’m not hopeful.
I’m more or less a religious retard, and as such, cannot possibly understand the lament of some of these more devout catholics out there.
All I can say is; it’s a shame when ANY strong, moral leader dies, but in this case, I think the pope can be satisfied with a life lived to the fullest (he was the pope, come on!) and a clean, proud legacy left behind. (which, needless to say, hasn’t been the case with certain catholic priests of late.)
As for Mrs. Shiavo, I have no idea how this became the media and political circus that it is.
decisions like this are made every day by people from all walks of life.
This case wasnt about Terry Shiavo.
This case was about people’s OPINIONS, it failed to be about Shiavo long ago.
And, at the risk of sounding heartless, Im glad shiavo has moved on. She can have some peace in death, and we can have some fresh news stories that havent been harped on for three solid weeks.
(All respect to Mrs. Shiavo and her family.)
http://www.forbidden-planet.co.uk/acatalog/Battle_Pope__1.html
I know Todd would do alot for a buck, but this is just pathetic.
darrick, did you mean to leave a different link than you actually did? If not, I don’t get it.
Fred
I just find it sadning and offensive. Of course, he has the right to publish it, but I just think that the idea (and re-releasing the first issue around the Pope’s death) is very respectful.
Drudgereport today had a link to Cafepress advertising a t-shirt that said
Dear Tom Delay,
Please commit suicide.
Sincerely,
Everyone.
The link says it’s unavailable now but if you go to cafepress and search under Delay it pops up. It’s from the Goodwin art folks, who also sell a shirt that states simply “Bush is Vile”. You have to marvel at the chutzpah.
All in the name of tolerant, progressive politics no doubt.
Despite this grotesque behavior, I STILL he think he ought to be bounced. Just because you have a witch hunt doesn’t mean you have to sympathize with an actual witch. (apologies to any wiccans out there. It’s a metaphor)
Battle Pope was originally published years ago. I preordered the tpb, which was due out a few months back and has yet to see the shelves. This new #1 has nothing to do with John Paul II, his papalcy or his death. Completely unrelated and merely coincidence that it is due to hit stands 2 months after the real world pope’s death.
Fred
I ment “DISrespectful.” ARG! Stpid keybord
Just because you have a witch hunt doesn’t mean you have to sympathize with an actual witch.
To paraphrase Monty Python:
“HE’S A WITCH!”
🙂
“I just took it for granted that we wouldn’t be that dumb.”
–Mel Martinez, Florida Senator, revealing that one of his aides wrote an unsigned memo last month citing the Terri Schiavo case as a “great political issue” for Republicans. From the April 18, 2005 Time magazine.