Wednesday, April 25, 2007

News items that caught my eye while I websurfed during lunch today

Heroine attacks Pentagon over lies about her capture
Jessica Lynch, the US army private who became the heroic American face of the Iraq war when her convoy was ambushed soon after the invasion, lambasted the Bush Administration yesterday for lying about the incident.

Comment: Is there really anybody left out there who doesn't think this country is being run by people onotologically incapable of telling the truth about anything?

House Committee Authorizes Subpoena for Rice
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform today authorized subpoenas for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Republican Party documents as part of probes into a key assertion in the run-up to the Iraq war and alleged violations of presidential records rules.

Comment: About time!

Rosie O'Donnell Leaving 'The View'
ABC has been unable to come to a contractual agreement with Rosie O'Donnell. As a result, her hosting duties on "The View" will come to an end mid-June. "They wanted me three years, I wanted one year, and it just didn't work," said O'Donnell on today's show.

Comment: Major bummer. We've taken to TIVOing "The View" and making it part of our evening's entertainment. We'll totally miss her ... Rosie rocks!

Leahy, Specter demand more answers from Gonzales
The leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, in a bipartisan letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, indicated that they were displeased with his performance at a panel hearing last week and demanded additional answers. Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and ranking Republican Arlen Specter (Pa.) chastised Gonzales for failing to answer questions that “should not have been a surprise,” noting that the attorney general rigorously prepared for the April 19 hearing. “By some counts you failed to answer more than 100 questions, by other counts more than 70, but the most conservative count had you failing to provide answers well over 60 times,” the senators said.

Comment: See above ("About time!")

Finally, in Episco-Blog-News, titusonenine has objectively retitled today's Boston Globe article:

Episcopal leader holds firm on gay rights

as

Episcopal Leader Will not Retreat from the new North American Theology Dividing the Anglican Communion

Comment: Much better, doncha think? And -- if you have you asbestos underwear handy and want to venture into T-9-Comment-Land (not recommended for the faint of heart) do check out how Bishop Katharine's comment "This is an issue for some clergy and a handful of bishops in our own church, and for a handful of primates across the communion, who believe that this issue is of sufficient importance to chuck us out..." is being spun as and Imus-equivalent-racial-slur.

Here endeth the lunch hour ... I'm getting back to work!

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is racist to the extent that her other comments (which you did not quote) show her to believe that the American Episcopal Church is more morally evolved than the Africans, whom she insinuates are more provincial and therefore less able to understand moral truth. This is precisely the kind of argument that academics have called racist for years.

You should at least recognize the argument and quote the right passage that is being criticized.

In any event, it is factually inaccurate that it's only a few primates who are concerned about the issue. Between Lambeth 1998, Dromantine, Dar es salaam, Archbishop Carey, and Archbishop Williams, there has been widespread and serious concern about what is happening in the Episcopal Church.

Anonymous said...

r&r,

I believe that this is the quote you have in mind?

"Where the protesters are, in some parts of Africa or in other parts of the Anglican Communion today, is where this church and this society we live in was 50 years ago, and for us to assume that people can move that distance in a year or in a relatively instantaneous manner is perhaps faithless,"

I got that quote . . . here on "An Inch", all of *one* entry below. Too tired to scroll down, before you make insinuations about our host?

I've already argued (on Fr. Jake's), that I believe it is unwise for ++KJS to frame this conflict thusly (not because it's not true, but because people---ALL people---tend to fly off the handle when they're described as backwards, child-like or even merely "behind the times").

At the same time, what she calls "perhaps faithless" is, I believe, the ONLY moral, faithful thing to do: say to the "protesters . . . in some parts of Africa or in other parts of the Anglican Communion today" (and I every reason to believe that those "other parts of the AC" she referred to include, say, CANA in Virginia! ;-/) that your oppression of LGBTs in Church *or* State is IMMORAL and unBiblical. Stop it, in the Name of Christ, RIGHT NOW. Period.

NO waiting for others to "catch up": the Holy Spirit has *moved* and the ship has sailed!

If you don't . . . well, it's not that we (TEC) will break communion w/ you. Au contraire, we'll track you down and inflict our queer-lovin' selves more in-your-face, around CHRIST'S table, than ever! Come, Lord Jesus, Alleluia! :-D

Lastly, r&r: instead of you getting all accusatory on Susan+, how 'bout you do some 'splainin for re that ridiculously BIASED T19 change-of-headline "Episcopal Leader Will not Retreat from the new North American Theology Dividing the Anglican Communion"?

WHAT "new...Theology"? (It's circa first century Palestine theology, friends!)

WHO is "dividing the Anglican Communion"???

Give me a break!