Frank at IMAO says:
I think Arnold should keep up the rhetoric. He should have a press conference to apologize saying, “I am so sorry I upset the Democrats by calling them ‘girlie men.’ To make up, I’ll give them all pretty flowers so they squeal with girlish glee.”
Larry Miller, contributing humorist to the Daily Standard, says no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Just look at the residents of the Twin Cities and you’ll see why. Read the whole thing – it’s a riot!
Since I live near Boston, I’m speaking, of course, of the impending Democratic party convention that is about to close highways and bridges, make our subway stations operate as smoothly as airport checkpoints, shut down business for a week, and – oh, yeah — cost the taxpayers over $20 million in direct subsidies.
Well, at least we get to crack jokes at the Dems.
Update: Coverage of highway and subway closures.
…who might consider himself a spiritual rationalist if had those words in his vocabulary, was explaining to me that reason trumps faith in all matters, faith is just a feeling, and by the way, you’re a fool to believe all the stuff those icky, old, and oppressive father-figures in the Catholic Church have been churning out all these centuries. What do I? Gave him the link to Fides et Ratio. “It’s long but it’s good for your soul,” I said.
The fundamentalists and evangelicals have turned faith into a feeling as though was some kind of drug or anti-drug that buys you eternal fire insurance – bliss in this life and assurance of bliss in the next. That’s not faith. Faith is an intellectual assent to the teachings of the Church. We believe these teachings because God has revealed them, so they are even more believable than something that can be empirically tested or observed. But are there degrees of truth? Is the Incarnation more true than one plus one is two? Do these truths have no degrees of veracity but rather different metaphysical import? Or do I sound like I’ve been educated beyond my intellect? I shall discuss all this with my pagan friend when he finishes reading Fides et Ratio.
One of our astute readers in the Diocese of Richmond sent me a very amusing, very telling email today:
…thought you might get a kick out of it since you seem to be following our travails in the Richmond Diocese. TQ’s comments, which you linked, reminded me of the funniest thing I’ve seen this year. Some brief background:
TQ mentioned “a manual” that was discussed in Bp. DiLorenzo’s homily. The “manual” was a document prepared a couple years ago by Bp. Sullivan and his cronies that deals with the goals, strengths, weaknesses, etc., of the diocese. (They mostly get the strengths and weaknesses backwards, as you might expect). Supposedly, they got input from the parishes in preparing it, but at the parish level very few people seem to have heard of it.
They seem to have presented it to Bp. DiLorenzo with great fanfare — “this is the course the diocese wants/needs to follow” — so Bp. DiLorenzo talked a lot about it in his homily.
Then he went on the road, meeting lay leaders, and discovered that very few had heard of the document. The diocesan newspaper, reporting on the meeting, quoted him as asking “Is this document relevant, or is it a house job?”
I figured that by “house job” he meant, like, an “in-house” thing by the diocesan staff that wasn’t really relevant to the situation “on the ground” in the parishes — which is true enough.
But Tuesday, the new edition of the diocesan paper arrived with this correction, which gave me one of those wonderful diet-Coke-through-the-nose moments:
“Corrections: The term used by Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo … was “hose job,” and not “house job” as was printed in the June 21 issue…”
Hose job, of course, means snow job. As though blowing sunshine in the direction of the Bishop will distract him from the real work of the Church.
I’m really starting to like Bp. DiLorenzo. A lot.
Thank you, anonymous reader, for your email and a Diet-Coke-through-the-nose moment.
