Buck Naked Politics

Christmas Message from the Famous Victorian Progressive, Charles Dickens

by Cockney Robin | This illustration -- and the excerpt which follows -- is from A Christmas Carol.  It made a deep impression on me as a child.  I'm not a man of any religious belief, but this scene might be partly responsible for my progressive politics today. Dickens, whose books I started reading in my teens, had a significant role in correcting abusive aspects of his society.

Right,  I can't say "God bless us everyone!" since I am not a believer, but I can say, "Let us keep Christmas in our hearts all the year round."   I'm a soppy old git!

A Christmas Poem by the Author of "Richard Corey"

by Damozel | This poem is by Pulitzer Prize-winning American poet Edwin Arlington Robinson (1869-1935)---best known for "Richard Corey," "Miniver Cheevy," "Reuben Bright," and "Mr. Flood's Party."

Karma
Christmas was in the air and all was well
With him, but for a few confusing flaws
In divers of God's images. Because
A friend of his would neither buy nor sell,
Was he to answer for the axe that fell?
He pondered; and the reason for it was,
Partly, a slowly freezing Santa Claus
Upon the corner, with his beard and bell.

Acknowledging an improvident surprise,
He magnified a fancy that he wished
The friend whom he had wrecked were here again.
Not sure of that, he found a compromise;
And from the fulness of his heart he fished
A dime for Jesus who had died for men.

Edwin Arlington Robinson

Meyerson on Christian Hard-liners in the GOP

by Damozel | A note at The Sideshow prompted me to write a quick piece on Harold Meyerson's WaPo op-ed, "Hard-liners for Jesus."  Though it's political, my own take on it incorporates a certain amount of current and past personal experience (and I don't want this to be where I blog about my religion).  So I address the article (which---a comparison so inflammatory that the people to whom it's addressed are going to use outrage to avoid looking at Meyerson's uncomfortable arguments---equates hard-liners to the KKK).  Read more:   The Passing Show:  the Uses of Prayer, the British Spongebob, Sideshow, and the Church of Christ without Christ

The Archbishop of Canterbury Says a Few "Controversial" Words on the Nativity Story

by Damozel |  Strictly speaking, it's not a political story at all, except to the extent it seems to have got the knees of some conservatives reflexively jerking and their Christmas stockings consequently in a twist.  Macsmind, who has an "honorary degree in theology" begs to differ with" "theologian"" (quotes his)  Oxford-trained Dr. Rowan Williams, whom he seems to suspect of being an operative on the "war on christmas," even though Dr. Williams actually said nothing inconsistent with what Macsmind seems to be saying.   

Crunchy Con, on the other hand, is afraid that if we don't train up our children to unquestioning belief in every word of the Bible, we will lose the war on terror.  Or at least that's what I think he means.  Being a mere soppy liberal and lacking an honorary (or any) degree in theology, I may have missed his real much more subtle point and mistaken it for a ridiculously far-fetched argument.  Read more: Ricky Gervais, the Archbishop of Canterbury & The Nativity Story. See Memeorandum here. 

UPDATE. And thanks to The Sideshow for pointing me to this germane op-ed on hardliner Christianists.
. 

Will the Theocrats Decide the Next GOP Ticket?

Posted by Damozel |I see in my battered (circa 1960's) magic eight-ball---which my grandmother once called an instrument of the devil--- a Romney-Huckabee ticket, with the GOP using the reverend Huckabee to dilute resistance among the base to Romney's Mormonism.  Could that be possible?  If---speaking as a Democrat---I had to choose, it would be Romney by a moonlight mile; I don't like the things he says, but his record seems to suggest he might not be as bad as he seems.   Might we wind up stuck with both?  It is a bit of a worry presently, thanks---according to WaPo---to all those church ladies who would feel much better about politics if the president were both a president AND a preacher. 

Women now support him over Romney by an 18-point margin; men divide their votes about evenly between the two.

Mike Huckabee: God's Candidate or Ignorant Caster of Stones? You Decide!

PREVIOUSLY.  On the right hand, there is this:

Exhibit A:  Huckabee got himself photographed in front of a window that in the photograph looked just like a cross, prompting Ron Paul to quip (ill advisedly, some would say):  "It reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said. He says, 'when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross.'"  The ad agency protests it was "unaware of "this whole cross imagery."" 

It's the window frame in the background," Woolson said. "Once you've got it in your head that it's a cross, it's a cross." He said he didn't know if it was deliberate or not. "People are free to view the ad anyway that they'd like to view the ad."  (USA Today)

In other words, look and it shall be revealed to you!  In fact, it's exactly like the image of Virgin Mary in the window of that building in Clearwater.  Could it be yet another Sign that the Lord's money really is on Hucklebee? 

Christopher Hitchens: "It's Perfectly Reasonable to Reject a Candidate for his Religious Views"

Posted by Damozel | Christopher Hitchens would like for conservatives to know that Article VI of the Constitution only precludes the government from disqualifying candidates based on their religious faith.  It does not prevent Hitch from refusing to vote for Mike Huckabee ("an unusually stupid primate...who does not have the elementary intelligence to recognize the fact that this is what he is") or from calling him a "smirking hick." (Slate) The first amendment says that Hitch not only doesn't have to vote for Huck; he doesn't even have to be civil when he speaks about him or his followers. (Slate) 

Mainstream Republicans Horrified Over Apotheosis of Huckabee

Posted by Damozel | D. Cupples always cautioned me about assuming too soon I knew how the primaries would go.  Who'd've thought God would personally endorse Mike Huckabee, causing him to soar up, up, up in the polls, to the delight of his supporters? 

Impossible not to be diverted by the discomfiture and shock/horror of the Main Street and Wall Street Republicans, who thought that the "values voters" would know their place (under the table gathering up crumbs) and not suddenly rear up with demands for a seat at the head of the boardroom table.

Conservatives Panicking Over Religious Right's Takeover?

Posted by Damozel | Amusingly, conservative pundits are in a panic at the hijacking of their party by the Bible bashers.  They're finally sensing that there may be a downside, are they? Krauthammer: 

"This campaign is knee-deep in religion, and it's only going to get worse. I'd thought that the limits of professed public piety had already been achieved during the Republican CNN-YouTube debate when some squirrelly looking guy held up a Bible and asked, "Do you believe every word of this book?" -- and not one candidate dared reply: None of your damn business."(The Washington Post) 

What did Krauthammer and Rich Lowry expect?   As we've been saying since way before Huckabee's recent ascension---pun intended---in the polls:  Lie down with born-agains, evangelists, and apocalyptic Christians; wake up in "the party of God."  (Actually, I'm not unsympathetic; "values voters" may have hijacked the Republican party, but they've hijacked my religion.)

Why Religion is a Problem for GOP candidates

How did anyone people miss "the cartoon Mitt Romney doesn't want you to see" the first time it went around?  It makes me very uncomfortable to see Democrats raising the issue of any candidate's specific religious belief.  Besides, a tape purporting to show a religion's traditional creation and other myths is going to look pretty weird to anyone who doesn't understand its "inner truth" (from the point of view of actual practitioners).  All belief systems look strange to those outside them.   I mean, would Mike Huckabee look if someone makes a similar cartoon showing the events of Genesis and Revelations exactly as related there?   Melissa McEwan of Shakesville nails it.

Gov. Romney's Discourse on Faith Offends Some; Is Too Little and Too Late for Others (Updated)

Posted by Damozel | UPDATE.  Governor Romney made a very nice speech, I thought.  Obviously, I wasn't listening closely enough.  Others who were listening more closely were deeply offended by the part of it that didn't give the same weight as JFK did to the right of Americans to choose no religion.   At The Washington Monthly, Kevin Drum writes:

Huckabee Claims a Key Endorsement (Updated)

Posted by Damozel | Meanwhile, Mike Huckabee is taking the whole faith-in-politics thing in the opposite direction from Governor Romney.  It seems that Huckabee is God's candidate.  No wonder, then, that Mitt Romney is trying to distance himself from the whole issue.

Can Romney Take the Religion Out of GOP Politics?

Posted by Damozel | Mitt Romney is giving a speech on Thursday regarding the issue of his Mormon faith, by which I expect he means he is going to say that its weight should be nil.  According to The Corner at National Review Online---and who would know if not they?---he has carefully studied the 1960 JFK speech, in which Kennedy refused to disavow either his Catholic faith or his commitment to becoming president.   

Byron York of National Review Online quotes Romney as follows:

Achenbach on Mike Huckabee, Adam & Eve, and UFOs

Posted by D. Cupples |  I love it when the Washington Post's Joel Achenbach gets into politics.  Friday, Achenbach shared his two cents on presidential candidate Mike Huckabee at WaPo's The Trail:

"Mike Huckabee has emerged as perhaps the most fascinating figure on the campaign trail this side of Elizabeth Kucinich. He's affable, funny, plays rock guitar, pardoned Keith Richards (name ONE thing that any other candidate has done that's as cool as that), has completely cornered the Jenny Craig/Weight Watchers vote, and is running as a rock-solid conservative even as his governing record leads some folks to call him a liberal.

"He's also a Southern Baptist preacher, and believes, he says, in Adam and Eve....

"One of The Trail's readers posted a comment the other day about the Dennis Kucinich UFO encounter, saying, in essence, why is that any weirder than the supernatural events that are described in the Bible and are central to Christian faith? (The commenter put it more colorfully.) But it's no mystery: Christianity is mainstream in America, whereas atheism or UFOlogy or even Mormonism is not. Christian candidates don't have to explain themselves -- unless, like Huckabee, they get too far into Adam-and-Eve territory...."

You can read Achenbach at WaPo's Achenblog. [Photo by D. Cupples, feel free to use it]

Mr. J.Q. Public: Which GOP Candidate Will Keep Us Safe Against the Threat of Illegal Aliens?

by Mr. J.Q. Public, III, Conservative |  Note:   Damozel, one of this blog's administrator's has designated this piece "satire" because, evidently, a load of liberals--as always terrified of the truth---objected to it.  I object to this craven attempt to placate the mob.  It is not satire and I was entirely sincere.  If my fearless truth-telling gets me banned from this blog, I will walk away, a martyr to the cause, and start my own, rival blog.  Then we'll see. 

Democratic candidate Bill Richardson -- known for his pro-illegal-immigration opposition to the practical solution of building a giant 1,000-mile border fence to protect us from the menace of Mexico -- announced to supporters in Texas that he would get to the bottom of the 60-year-old mystery of the  Roswell flying saucers, once again revealing his tendency to put the welfare of aliens who illegally penetrate our atmosphere before the safety and security of the American people.   

As you would expect from a Democrat, he implies that the Department of Defense is somehow involved in an ongoing cover-up rather than stepping up with a plan to prevent further alien incursion into US airspace.  As Jules Crittenden says, you don't have to wonder what the other Democrats will say on this issue:  they will just whine about the human rights of aliens that aren't (as far as we know) even human and wonder why they hate us.

In Truman Lied, Aliens Died, Crittenden reveals that Giuliani is the only Republican so far to acknowledge the necessity of a "strong, extraterrestrial defense."

The Church of Ann Coulter, Perfected Christian

Posted by Damozel | Donny Deutsch and other Jewish people shouldn't assume that Ann Coulter's views on Christianity are held by most Christians or even Ann Coulter herself.  I cherish the madness of Ann Coulter and all she has done to promote the cause of liberalism, and I don't want to be uncharitable, but I still boggle every time she claims to be espousing the religion of Jesus.  I am pretty familiar with the Gospels, and I'm pretty sure that Christ wouldn't have endorsed certain statements attributed to Coulter (which I gleaned from this October 2001 column at the Washington Monthly.

McCain: "Christian Nation"

Posted by Damozel | Ruh-roh!  Poor John McCain's really put his foot in it this time.  In an interview at Beliefnet.com, he said:

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who has a grounding in my faith." (CNN)

He also said...

"I just have to say in all candor that since this nation was founded primarily on Christian principles, personally, I prefer someone who has a grounding in my faith." (CNN)

Now, of course, he's in big, big trouble with those Americans who don't happen to be of his faith, especially those not of his party.  For example, the Jewish Democrats found his statement "repugnant."  So he has now "clarified" his statement, as follows:

Salon's Helpful Advice for Log Cabin Republicans: The Illustrated Nutshell version

posted by Damozel | If you're gay and fundamentally averse to Democrats, Salon has published a helpful guide to the GOP that will at least keep you from voting for Republicans who really despise you.

Maybe you are rich and you don't want anyone to raise your taxes. Perhaps you are just determined to stay the course in Iraq, privatize Social Security, and drop oil wells into the Alaskan wilderness. Jack Abramoff might even be an old drinking buddy. It doesn't really matter. Whatever the cause, you are in a quandary. Your only viable choice in the coming presidential election is to vote for a Republican, and that means voting for a party that has spent much of the last decade casting you and your way of life as an assault on the wholesome goodness of the American family.....What is a right-leaning homosexual to do in this presidential election? Start by taking a closer look at the candidates in the Republican field.  (Salon; links in original)

Yes, my gay-yet-unshakeably-conservative friends, you can choose your own brand of you-neglecting/persecuting authoritarian right wing leader, from Giuliani----who is desperately trying to "distance" himself from his gay-friendly past---to Sam Brownback, the defender of the faith and the family, who has no such friendliness to retract or conceal.  So which shall it be:  the candidate who doesn't really hate you but will turn his back on you without remorse to get elected or the one who unabashedly despises your lifestyle?

So let's join Scherer and Van Heuvelen for a closer and more systematic look at the "field," shall we?

It's The Hypocrisy, Stupid (Part 2). Another GOP Senator Embarrasses Himself and Others.

Posted by Cockney Robin | "Singing Senator" Larry E. Craig---until today, chairman of Mitt Romney's Idaho campaign---joined the roster of Republicans caught out behaving in ways seemingly at odds with their publicly expressed views.  Craig was arrested, it appears, for....well, nothing at all by British standards, but by American standards, "disorderly conduct" as follows:

[The Capital Hill newspaper] Roll Call, citing a copy of a report by airport police, said officers had been conducting a sting operation inside the men's room because of complaints of sexual activity there. The police report gives this account of the arrest:  

The undercover officer was monitoring the restroom on June 11. A few minutes after noon, Craig entered and sat in the stall next to him. Craig began tapping his right foot, touched his right foot to the left foot of the officer and brushed his hand beneath the partition between them. He was then arrested.

While he was being interviewed about the incident, Craig gave police a business card showing that he is a U.S. senator. "What do you think about that?" Craig asked the officer, according to the report obtained by Roll Call.(Washington Post)

I'm actually kind of curious to know the copper's exact answer, but WaPo doesn't say.

Craig claims that his gestures---i.e, the foot-tapping and the hand-brushing--- were "misconstrued."  Well, that's plausible. Maybe his cubicle was out of bog roll (toilet paper to you yanks) and he was groping around for it.  Cleanliness is next to godliness after all.  But he doesn't explain his actions in this fashion, perhaps because it would be indelicate.  Instead, he says:

"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct," Craig said. "I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."(Washington Post) 

Censorship of Free Discussion at the BBC?

  Posted by Cockney Robin | Much like Karl Rove (allegedly anyhow), I am not fortunate enough to be a person of faith   As to other people's beliefs, it's all much of a muchness as far as I'm concerned:  equally deserving of respect if you're the polite sort (as I fancy I am) or equally deserving of disdain if you're not.. It's not the sort of thing I normally discuss; in fact, Damozel's post on the religious faith of your typical Englishman is dead on as regards my own attitude and I flatter myself was at least in part inspired by one of our conversations.

So I was very surprised to read allegations here that the BBC caved in to pressure to censor what I'd call a fairly innocuous (if arguably spurious) statement concerning the life of Christ and the beliefs of his contemporaries about him. 

Evidently, some commenter at the BBC posted a note which stated that Jesus Christ suffered a certain amount of ridicule during his life over his (as far as casual observers knew; I'm not taking sides!) fatherless status.   In other words, he was accused of being a (technical) bastard.  I've heard the same story. 

In the tour de force  Holy Blood, Holy Grail, the  nonfiction predecessor of The Da Vinci Code (which I have not read, I'm afraid),   I am fairly certain that authors Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln allege that some of his contemporaries (and their descendants) who didn't like him used to sneer that he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Pantera. At any rate, these allegations are not unknown to contemporary fiction as this comment (googled at random and published at The Da Vinci Code Movie website) illustrates.  This is of course not a fact as such, but an allegation or report or rumor or legend.  To state it as historical fact may be misleading, but it is not a slur.