Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
Christian doctrine was shredded to pieces by biblical scholars in the 18th and 19th centuries, but the information didn't get out to the bulk of people beyond the academic world. With the Information Age, this will all change.
[Farrell Till, The Skeptical Review]
Chelifores, chelicerae, and invertebrate evolution
Ten questions to ask your biology teacher
Transcription factors and morphogens
Upstream plasticity and downstream robustness in evolution of molecular networks
Modules and the promise of the evo-devo research program
Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.
« Everyone, go say ‘Happy Birthday’ to Greg Laden | Main | Ray Comfort answers a question »
Category: Politics
Posted on: June 24, 2008 8:23 PM, by PZ Myers
It was pretty much a given anyway, but now that James Dobson has given his screeching purple anti-endorsement, I cannot fail to punch that chad for Obama.
Another interesting bit in that article: Dobson also will not vote for McCain. It would be wonderful if the fundagelical right would simply recuse themselves from all elections henceforth in that way.
Comments
In Christian terms, Dobson is the spawn of Satan and deserves to be rebuked by all Christians for his lies and the evil that he espouses.
Let's hear it for Senator Obama, a man who actually knows what good is.
Posted by: freelunch | June 24, 2008 8:26 PM
Yeah, but "Obama to Dobson: Fuck You" would have been a great headline. Otherwise, I just feel the sort of numbed frustration that I usually get when the decision of who will be the next leader of the free world is framed in terms of some pissing contest over people's imaginary friends.
And whose idea was it to put that extreme closeup of Dobson's ugly, hateful mug at the top of that article? I'm glad I don't have any pets, I'd have to peeling them off the ceiling right now.
Posted by: Rey Fox | June 24, 2008 8:33 PM
Irony alert! Irony alert!
To avoid damage please turn off your irony meters before reading the linked article.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | June 24, 2008 8:35 PM
And the McCain camp breathes a sigh of relief.
Course, Dobson actually does have a point. If you're claiming a Bible-based religion, why the hell not follow the Bible in "real life" (including Paul's admonition for slaves to obey their masters)?
That's the endless quandary for the liberal Xian. It doesn't go away just because the Xian (Obama or McCain) solemnly promises not to follow the Bible (if not in those words).
Just for the big picture, mind you. Obviously we're going to have to vote for Xians who are in a quandary of what the Bible is supposed to mean for the foreseeable future.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | June 24, 2008 8:38 PM
Why don't we all just talk it out and decide on someone we would like to vote for, instead of the people we're given to vote for. That's the way this democracy thing is supposed to work, afterall.
Having said that, I do happen to be an Obama supporter. He capitalized on a unique moment in U.S. politics by having the good sense to realize U.S. citizens like being spoken with as if they are intelligent. Some of his statements have turned my stomach, of course; those he made in regards to vaccine skepticism, for instance, but given the unearned apotheosis of Bobby Kennedy, it's no surprise that a running politician wouldn't come out and call Robert Kennedy's son a raving lunatic.
He's most certainly a capable campaigner; lets just hope it doesn't go to his head like it did with Clinton.
Posted by: Julian | June 24, 2008 8:39 PM
This statement is a lone lifejacket of reason floating in a sea of insanity.
Posted by: SC | June 24, 2008 8:42 PM
"he's deliberately distorting the traditional understanding of the Bible to fit his own world view..." Dobson
hmmmmmmmmmm
Posted by: Chigurh | June 24, 2008 8:44 PM
I love it.
Obama says that different people interpret the Bible in different ways, so, that even if we were a purely Christian nation, we would still be in conflict. Could anyone claim otherwise? Why Doby can!
Doby, in his typically arrogant way, cannot see this to be true, as his interpretation of the Bible is, of course, the only correct one, so there would be no conflict in his eyes. This is the same reasoning that claims no one was ever killed due to Christianity, because, if anyone kills you due to their Christian beliefs, then they were not truly Christians. Same reason there are no Christian pedophiles or robbers or anything else you do not like...
Posted by: Lago | June 24, 2008 8:44 PM
Seems like Dobby is trying to use all the same criticisms that have been leveled against him over the years, just like nearly every other pig-headed creationist I've had the misfortune of talking to.
Repetition and using statements out of context suits them.
Self-reflection does not.
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | June 24, 2008 8:45 PM
I hope Obama just ignores this rattling, Christian fuckwit. I think just about everyone has heard enough about religion this election to make them sick of the whole irrational concept.
Posted by: Capital Dan | June 24, 2008 8:46 PM
"What the senator is saying there, in essence, is that 'I can't seek to pass legislation, for example, that bans partial-birth abortion, because there are people in the culture who don't see that as a moral issue,' " Dobson said. "And if I can't get everyone to agree with me, than it is undemocratic to try to pass legislation that I find offensive to the Scripture. Now, that is a fruitcake interpretation of the Constitution."
is he literate?
Posted by: chigurh | June 24, 2008 8:47 PM
Glen, I think you missed something there. Dobson wasn't claiming that politicians should govern based on a literal biblical interpretation. Obama was rightly pointing out that it would be naive to write laws with backing only in the scripture, or to codify every scriptural admonition. Dobson seized on this to assert that Obama has a weak understanding of the Bible, which I think is a pretty lame distortion.
I suggest that everybody read the speech which Dobson was referring to, if you haven't, it's very interesting. It includes the fact that Obama's father is a Muslim apostate, that his mother is a skeptic and that Obama himself didn't start attending church until he was 27.
http://obama.senate.gov/speech/060628-call_to_renewal/index.php
Posted by: ajrw | June 24, 2008 8:51 PM
@ Brownian #3
"Irony alert! Irony alert!
To avoid damage please turn off your irony meters before reading the linked article."
Too late.
Posted by: Wild Bob | June 24, 2008 8:53 PM
Dobson hates him?
Phil Lesh likes him?
Is it November yet?
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | June 24, 2008 8:54 PM
@6
i think that is the nicest way he could have worded that without giving ground either way. brilliantly phrased. the irony that the religious nuts do not realize how very generous Obama is being is saddening
Posted by: chigurh | June 24, 2008 8:56 PM
"'Democracy demands that the religiously motivated translate their concerns into universal rather than religion-specific values," Obama said. "It requires their proposals be subject to argument and amenable to reason.'
Dobson said the suggestion is an attempt to lead by the 'lowest common denominator of morality.'"
So there you have it, reason is the lowest common denominator. America should be hanging its collective head in shame at the fact that Dobson has become powerful enough to have his absurd worldview aired on cnn.com.
Posted by: RDS77 | June 24, 2008 8:57 PM
Sometimes I think Dobson is sincere and really believes the bilge he spews out. Other times I consider how Focus on the Family is just a cash machine designed to keep him hip-deep in shekels. (Focus on the Family markets all of Dobson's books and tapes, but he retains all the rights and skims off more moola than he would with a traditional publication contract with royalties. Focus on the Family is also a publisher that's exempt from taxes.)
Dobson, by the way, is not a theologian, minister, or any kind of cleric. He's a psychologist who has found his calling by fronting for a right-wing Christian organization. God is damned good business.
Posted by: Zeno | June 24, 2008 8:58 PM
Dobson is complaining because Obama can pick and choose passages in the Bible to believe?
The irony is delicious, people are right.
Posted by: Geral | June 24, 2008 9:00 PM
These people have a very...interesting relationship with the OT.
Posted by: SC | June 24, 2008 9:08 PM
It's not a poll, just a place to register your disapproval of Dobby, and it has a place to add your own comment:
http://www.jamesdobsondoesntspeakforme.com/
Brilliant!
Posted by: Blaidd Drwg | June 24, 2008 9:12 PM
Xenu is laughing at both of them.
Posted by: Doubting Foo | June 24, 2008 9:16 PM
Note to James Dobson: No understanding of the Bible, Traditional or otherwise, extends further than the hairy outer limits of a particular reader's thick skull. And if you claim that God spoke to your heart and told you how to interpret the thing, well, we know that sometimes God tells whoppers, such as "Vladimir Putin's a swell guy" or, "Satan is waiting for you in California."
About a million years ago I read a short story by Umberto Eco that included a passage written from the point of view of an editor who had received a copy of the Bible. The editor's take was that no one would read the thing. He suggested that virtually everything be cut except the really juicy stuff (the Conquest of the Holy Land, David and Bathsheba, etc.) and that the whole shebang be retitled "Red Sea Desperadoes."
Posted by: Jeph | June 24, 2008 9:19 PM
SC@ #6:
I want to meet whoever writes Obama's speeches (if it's not Obama himself) and just basically gibber in gratitude at them for the quality of their work. It's been a while since I've actually enjoyed listening to a candidate speak.
Posted by: John Bode | June 24, 2008 9:24 PM
I never really understood how a Catholic could be so interested in Biblical literalism. It seems so antithetical.
Anyway, I never really saw Dobson as the loudest voice in Uber-Christendom, I just remind people that his previous enemy was a cartoon sponge.
Posted by: The Chemist | June 24, 2008 9:26 PM
Say what you want about Obama but at least he's making all the right enemies.
Posted by: Galactus78 | June 24, 2008 9:31 PM
Dobson... ugh... what a maroon...
I'd punch him in the "Chad."
~Dan
http://jazzsick.wordpress.com/
Posted by: Dan | June 24, 2008 9:44 PM
Here's to hoping Bob Barr takes away more votes from McCain as Nader will take from Obama.
-Brian
http://www.godless-heathen.com
Posted by: Brian | June 24, 2008 10:07 PM
#2 Rey Fox: ...who will be the next leader of the free world...
Without wishing to offend anyone here, but the use of this phrase just irks the heck out of me. Does anyone truly believe that Shrub occupies such a position? Is this not just another sign of American arrogance and insularity?
Just wonderin'
Posted by: Ray M | June 24, 2008 10:10 PM
Dobson to Jesus: "Your kingdom may not be of this world, but MINE is!"
Posted by: hje | June 24, 2008 10:11 PM
Boy `o`boy am I glad I don`t live in the US ,I would hate to have to vote for either of those 2.
Realistically, tho ,do you really think America is going to vote in an AfricanAmerican for president?
Can`t see it myself , I think it would be good for not only the US, but for the rest of the world as well,but sorry ,just can`t see it happening .
Posted by: RT NZ | June 24, 2008 10:26 PM
I just remind people that his previous enemy was a cartoon sponge.
and we all know why...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIBmnfvXy7M
;)
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 24, 2008 10:32 PM
"In the speech, Obama said, "Even if we did have only Christians in our midst, if we expelled every non-Christian from the United States of America, whose Christianity would we teach in the schools? Would we go with James Dobson's or Al Sharpton's?"
In response, Minnery said, "Many people have called [Sharpton] a black racist, and [Obama] is somehow equating [Dobson] with that and racial bigotry.""
ummmmm I'm not sure what the problem is with that. Dobson may not be racist in public(feel free to prove me wrong on that, I'd love to see it) But he is a raving homophobe and just an all around f***tard. IMHO he is more of a scumbag then Sharpton.
Posted by: justin | June 24, 2008 10:32 PM
God is damned good business.
I realized just how true this is when I learned that Ken Ham made $175,000 in salary at AiG in 2006 (excluding royalties I'm sure). And I bet this line of business is recession-proof.
Posted by: hje | June 24, 2008 10:36 PM
There's a lot to like about Obama, but it is instructive to remember there's a lot to be wary of. Obama supports crappy health care, has rejected the public financing system he swore to adhere to, and supports the FISA compromise which removes warrants from eavesdropping and gives immunity to telecomms that broke the law. The last one really burns my ass and is pushing me towards Nader.
It would be interesting for people to write a short summary of what they thing the world would be like one year after Obama wins, squirrel it away, and then pull it out a year after the inauguration (whether or not he wins) and see how it compares to reality.
Posted by: Phaedrus | June 24, 2008 10:40 PM
I've read somewhere that Dobson's Focus cash machine is losing membership and donations to the Dobson expensive life style fund are down.
He is an evil flakey troll.
I remember when he was attempting to persecute a cartoon sponge. Pretty funny. Either he or another clone were at one time trying to out one of the telly tubbies.
Posted by: raven | June 24, 2008 10:41 PM
James Dobson:
I think we should take him seriously on this. After all, if anyone knows about distorting the bible to fit his own world view, it's James Dobson. If anyone knows about "confused theology", it's James Dobson. :)
Direct quote from the article:
Isn't this the guy whose primary political issue is "thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman"? I wonder which book that's from...
Dobson the demented fuckwit again:
So, apparently in Dobson's fantasies, the way to pass laws in a democracy has nothing to do with the will of the people.
But then, I guess he knows whereof he speaks. If anyone has experience with fruitcake interpretations of the Constitution, it's James Dobson. :P
Posted by: phantomreader42 | June 24, 2008 10:50 PM
Geral @ 18,
"Dobson is complaining because Obama can pick and choose passages in the Bible to believe?
The irony is delicious, people are right."
Couldn't sum up how I feel any better myself.
Posted by: Dahan | June 24, 2008 10:51 PM
raven @ #35:
Actually, as I recall that was his butt-buddy, the late and unlamented Jerry Falwell.
Posted by: phantomreader42 | June 24, 2008 10:53 PM
John Bode @ 23,
Obama writes some of his own speeches, including the one on race a month or two back, however Jon Favreau is his head writer. David Kusnet, one of former President Clinton's speech writers, also became involved this last month.
Posted by: Dahan | June 24, 2008 10:58 PM
"but the use of this phrase just irks the heck out of me."
I was just going for quick recognizable rhetoric. I guess that phrase has fallen out of favor somewhat in recent years though. Wonder why...
Posted by: Rey Fox | June 24, 2008 11:07 PM
Dobson's the fruitcake, just another blind fool with a megaphone where his mouth should be.
What I want to know is... who is Tinky-Winky backing?
Posted by: Kseniya | June 24, 2008 11:07 PM
The best part of all this is that, so far, all the articles I've read on this don't cover Dobson very sympathetically. He's coming across as a shrieking idiot, and Obama is coming across as independent, thoughtful and self-possessed.
I think fundie political power in America has finally reached its twilight. Dobson doesn't know it, but he's burying himself and his movement with his ridiculous carping. History has passed him by, at last.
Posted by: Hank Fox | June 24, 2008 11:14 PM
Hank, I cannot fully express how much I hope you're right.
Posted by: Kseniya | June 24, 2008 11:17 PM
John Bode said:
An amusing take on Obama's "content free" campaign speeches.
Posted by: Damian | June 24, 2008 11:20 PM
The Dobson business plan:
1. Bash gays (or SpongeBob)
2. ?
3. Profit!
Posted by: hje | June 24, 2008 11:24 PM
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | June 24, 2008 11:24 PM
Dahan, #39, wrote:
Jon Favreau? As in the actor/writer/director responsible for Swingers? I'd definitely vote for anyone he'd write for.
He's money, baby!
Posted by: Wowbagger | June 24, 2008 11:26 PM
Why Obama, PZ? You just said Dobson said he would not vote for McCain either. How does that help you decide? Twenty years Obama's been listening to the drek spewing from Trinity church. And NOW he decides it's not quite right?
Posted by: homostoicus | June 24, 2008 11:45 PM
Here here, PZ!
What I can't understand is why Dobson's statement made headline news, however briefly. Who cares what the guy says in the first place. The least the media could have done was point out the blatant sexism in calling Obama a 'fruitcake'. Dobson has a history of brandishing femininity as a weapon just like with Tinky-Winky as Kseniya reminded us.
Posted by: aratina | June 24, 2008 11:46 PM
(I think it was Falwell, but - what's the diff? (None.))
Posted by: Kseniya | June 24, 2008 11:53 PM
So, someone claims that someone else has twisted the Real(TM) meaning of scripture for their own purposes. That's interesting.
In other news, the sun rose this morning as expected. Indications are that it will most likely set later today, again.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | June 24, 2008 11:59 PM
didn't Jesus say something about "give to Caesar what's Caesars?" in regards to taxes...
sounds like churches shouldn't be tax exempt
Posted by: John Lightfield | June 25, 2008 12:02 AM
Oh. Just in cased anyone missed it: Pot. Kettle. Black.
Posted by: Crudely Wrott | June 25, 2008 12:02 AM
My bad. Dobson and Falwell run together in my mind. It still was a sexist characterization.
Julian wrote:
Trying to remember the vaccine quote, I googled up this link that pretty much proves Obama was talking about a person in the audience when he said that some people believe in a link between autism and vaccines, "this person included."Posted by: aratina | June 25, 2008 12:07 AM
Dobson is an evil bastard. Fuck him. A sniveling bastard who lives to meddle in other peoples lives. An ignorant shit who drools smarmy blather while fleecing his ignorant, credulous flock. I hope he gets the drizzling shits and lives forever.
Posted by: waldteufel | June 25, 2008 12:16 AM
I want to meet whoever writes Obama's speeches (if it's not Obama himself) and just basically gibber in gratitude at them for the quality of their work.
last I checked, it was the same guy who ran John Edwards campaign, and wrote many of Edwards' speeches as well.
In fact, it's the reason I'm betting that Obama will end up picking Edwards as his running mate.
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 12:17 AM
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | June 25, 2008 12:25 AM
Posted by: homostoicus | June 24, 2008 11:45 PM
Quite right and Obama's reversal on public campaign financing is just one more in a long line of reversals made to help Obama take the Oval Office.
I guess, changing whatever it takes to win is the change Obama has been talking about all along.
Posted by: Joel | June 25, 2008 12:27 AM
"In fact, it's the reason I'm betting that Obama will end up picking Edwards as his running mate."
Edwards said back in April or so that he wasn't interested. We'll see. That would be a nice ticket.
Posted by: Rey Fox | June 25, 2008 12:27 AM
Not just "meddle" - he'd rather have women run a higher risk of developing cervical cancer than allow them, as adolescents, to be immunized against HPV. That's a bridge from meddling to misogyny to murder. Screw him, his assholier-than-thou attitude and his potentially lethal sexual neuroses - lethal to women, of course, but no risk to himself, the soulless fuck.
Posted by: Kseniya | June 25, 2008 12:28 AM
The difference is that Falwell has fed countless maggots and is well composted.
so... the conclusion is that Dobson would be of more use if he jumped into a chipper-shredder and fertilized someone's lawn?
just making sure, before I wholeheartedly agree.
:p
btw, there were 300 lbs. of Falwell meat to feed the maggots and fertilize to local flora.
How's Dobson doing in the weight dept. these days?
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 12:31 AM
Edwards said back in April or so that he wasn't interested.
he re-opened the door on June 15.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 12:35 AM
Yet more proof that evangelical Christians halt development at the Concrete Operations stage. I swear, it's as though fucking Dobson is offended by the very idea of abstract thought. I can see it in my mind right now:
"This concept of 'translation when communicating' confuses and infuriates us!"
Posted by: silentsanta | June 25, 2008 12:37 AM
Kseniya,
Yeah, it's that attitude where it's 'if it's God's will then they won't get HPV' - but completely different when it comes to the surgically-implanted device that allows their black hearts to keep pumping - or that blue pill that counteracts impotence.
Posted by: Wowbagger | June 25, 2008 12:37 AM
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | June 25, 2008 12:40 AM
Or throw his putrid carcass from a helicopter while filming in order to create a symbolic YouTube homage to the scene from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.
Posted by: Wowbagger | June 25, 2008 12:43 AM
Not so much meat as blubber: if he'd died on the beach, GreenPeace would've dragged him into the sea
not if it was in Oregon...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtVSzU20ZGk
"What to do with one 5' 300 lb whale on a beach, near Florence"
:p
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 12:43 AM
Not that I needed another reason, but I always enjoy anything that I know irks Dobson and his ilk. I'm almost tempted to get gay-married just to piss them off. But it's so hard to meet nice black illegal-immigrant Muslim atheist evolution-believing environmentalist comprehensive sex-ed advocating socialist non-child beating gay men that are ACLU members around here.
And (IIRC) it was Dobson that went after Sponge Bob, and one of the PBS cartoons. Tinky Winky(sp?) was Falwell.
Didn't John Cleese volunteer his services as speechwriter to Obama were he to win the nomination? That should make the convention a lot more interesting.
Oh, and great handle there, Blaidd Drwg. Saturday can't get here soon enough.
Posted by: Ragutis | June 25, 2008 12:55 AM
Or "What not to do with one 5' 300 lb whale on a beach, near Florence". Hilarious, but what a bunch of morons!
Posted by: Emmet Caulfield | June 25, 2008 1:03 AM
Wowbagger @ 47,
Sorry, not the same guy. This one also did work for Kerry during his last run at President.
Posted by: Dahan | June 25, 2008 1:04 AM
If I decided based on which politician didn't have some lame-brain assaulting his character, I'd never vote.
Obama's probably the best choice available, but even letting Dobson influence that vote in a negative way is probably giving him more power than he deserves.
Posted by: Cujo359 | June 25, 2008 1:11 AM
Not at all thrilled with Obama about the FISA thing...
But you take what you can get.
Posted by: craig | June 25, 2008 1:47 AM
PZ will have to create a Wackaloon of the Month award... Ham and Dobson going head to head....
Posted by: Kaddath | June 25, 2008 1:49 AM
It's good if they don't vote for McCain, but bad if they vote for Chuck Baldwin instead (Baldwin is hoping that he can pick up the super-conservative vote, for whom McCain is too liberal).
Posted by: Josh | June 25, 2008 1:52 AM
The Irony - and possibly the Farce - are strong in our boy Dobby. His highly selective and supposedly "traditional" Fundamentalist "understanding" of the Bible only dates back about 100 years in its current form.
(Evangelicalism certainly existed before that, but it generally included some progressive emphasis on social justice as well as personal salvation. To find something close to modern-day Fundamentalism you have to go back to the First Great Awakening in the colonial era and add a generous dash of Puritan/Calvinist legalism.)
The whole "God of the Bible" shitpile pisses me off in thermonuclear technicolor. In a real sense, the Bible itself has become a "god." Robert Price, "The Bible Geek" (and author of The Reason Driven Life) calls it "this paper idol," and he's right.
@ Blaidd Drwg #20: I just passed your link on to about two dozen of my fellow Fundamentalism-hating people of faith, including the pastors of my former church. I'm sure it will spread out from there.
Fuck Fundamentalism and the three-legged mangy mule it rode in on. That shit gets people killed. God/Allah/Buddha/FSM/Ceiling Cat/Pink Unicorn/To Whom It May Concern save us from its followers!
Posted by: themadlolscientist | June 25, 2008 2:15 AM
Obama gave Edwards a jetski- FINALLY!
ok I watch Colbert too much..
Posted by: bbcaddict | June 25, 2008 2:18 AM
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned before, but during one of his more newsworthy speeches, it may have been the one on Race in America, he spoke to all the different ethnicities, customs religions and mentioned 'non-believers' as part of the American Mix.
I haven't heard us mentioned before in a presidential race.
I may have the particular speech wrong, as it is all a blur, but he has definitely decided to include us as part of the human race....
that ummmm
votes
hehehe
Posted by: scooter | June 25, 2008 2:55 AM
I admit it is a shame Obama clings to any religion at all after some great insights such as #6.
I would argue, however, that any American able to vote has a moral duty to vote for the lesser of two evils. (Its going to be Obama or McCain, and that's a fact) Voting for a third party candidate will accomplish nothing as far as the next four years are concerned. Perhaps one has a right to vote his support for a third party candidate, but does that trump the right of all people to not be subject to unjust war, domestic spying (Obama failure admitted @#34), or access to truthful national security information and/or honest government?
Recognizing objections to this argument, I can't help but cheer for Obama in the face of such unthoughtful objection such as Dobson's.
Posted by: Evan Henke | June 25, 2008 2:57 AM
Obama-Edwards. Now that's my dream ticket!
Posted by: themadlolscientist | June 25, 2008 2:58 AM
President Obama and Vice-President Neil deGrasse Tyson. That's my preference.
Posted by: BobC | June 25, 2008 3:11 AM
As we were discussing on another blog, Dobson seems to have gone batshit insane over the years, he never used to be a complete lunatic in his younger years, some of his Character Counts radio spots were actually pretty decent.
Of course now, he's completely off his rocker, utterly delusional and prone to making the most ridiculous statements imaginable. Typical fundie, in other words.
Posted by: Cephus | June 25, 2008 3:35 AM
Obama supports crappy health care
He also supports good health care. In his victory speech he said that, when we achieve universal health care "and we will", that Hillary Clinton will have played a big part of that.
has rejected the public financing system he swore to adhere to
Can't you make your argument without lying? He never did any such thing. His position was always conditional on the Republicans not allowing their 527's to do their dirty work for them, but McCain has refused to do so -- and has illegally abused the system, for which the DNC is suing him.
and supports the FISA compromise which removes warrants from eavesdropping
Yes, that's a pisser.
and gives immunity to telecomms that broke the law
In Obama's statement he reiterated his opposition to immunity. However, it looks like he may break his pledge to filibuster it -- but he hasn't yet had the opportunity to do so.
The last one really burns my ass and is pushing me towards Nader.
Oh, that's really effective. Great idea, making Voltaire's "the best is the enemy of the good" your guiding principle. McCain has a 0 score on reproductive rights and a 0 score on the environment. Very recently he excoriated the SCOTUS for restoring habeas corpus while Obama defended it, but that's immediately forgotten because Obama is a flawed human being who, as he has said repeatedly, will disappoint. Absolute judgments are the modus operandi the religious, whereas rationality demands that we weigh likely outcomes and do what favors those we want -- which pretty much means, in this case, voting for Obama and convincing as many others as we can to do the same.
Posted by: truth machine | June 25, 2008 3:41 AM
last I checked, it was the same guy who ran John Edwards campaign, and wrote many of Edwards' speeches as well.
Obama's speech writer is and has been the 26 year old Jon Favreau, who has never run anyone's campaign.
"Edwards said back in April or so that he wasn't interested."
he re-opened the door on June 15.
In your quotation he reiterated that he isn't interested. Telling a reporter, when asked, that he will consider not turning down a direct request from the candidate to be VP is nothing like expressing interest.
Posted by: truth machine | June 25, 2008 3:53 AM
hattip to TM.
Having just reviewed all the issues raised in the post you responded to, AFAICT you're absolutely dead on.
perfect response.
I found plenty of sites that detail why Obama refused to play by the rethuglican rules wrt to public financing.
as to Obama's methods of raising campaign funding, one writer for Newsweek who analyzed the entire situation had this to say:
http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/06/19/the-problem-with-obama-s-public-financing-acrobatics.aspx
let McCain and his supports try and swiftboat that all they want. see how far it gets them.
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 3:57 AM
the decision of who will be the next leader of the free world
If anyone has a claim to that title, it's surely the head of government of the world's largest democracy. I wonder how many in any of the countries whose citizens comment here regularly could name him/her, without looking it up?
Posted by: Nick Gotts | June 25, 2008 4:03 AM
Telling a reporter, when asked, that he will consider not turning down a direct request from the candidate to be VP is nothing like expressing interest.
I never said "interest", I said the door was open again.
Still, I'd say he's just trying to keep the heat off until an announcement is made.
All available information suggests he's on the short list, and since he expressed "public disinterest" in April, it seems unlikely he would be on the short list if what he said in June was meaningless.
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 4:05 AM
...another issue is how he was treated in the 2004 elections by Kerry, and I'm sure he wants some assurance from Obama that if he accepts the nomination for VP, he won't be treated the same way.
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 4:09 AM
Quite right and Obama's reversal on public campaign financing is just one more in a long line of reversals made to help Obama take the Oval Office.
A complete and utter lie. OTOH, McCain has not only flipped on public campaign financing, committing to it in order to secure a loan and then opting out -- which he got away with because Bush and the Republicans stonewalled on appointing a quorum to the FEC, but he has also flipped on warrantless wiretapping, Roe v. Wade, litmus tests, gay marriage, the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday, Bush's tax cuts, the estate tax, torture, habeas corpus, ethanol, Bob Jones university, the Confederate flag, the moratorium on offshore drilling, the windfall profits tax, privatizing Social Security, Yucca Mountain, normalization of relations with Cuba, negotiations with Hamas, negotiations with Syria, "the fence", the DREAM Act, his own immigration legislation, John Hagee, Rod Parsley, the Lieberman/Warner global warming legislation, raising cigarette taxes, earmarks for Arizona, balancing the budget, the Law of the Sea convention, whether we would win easily in Iraq, and on and on. Oh, and he thinks Shiites and Sunni are interchangeable.
Posted by: truth machine | June 25, 2008 4:19 AM
...add that he also flipped his own religion for the current race.
in 2007, he started claiming to be a baptist instead of an episcopalian.
not that I really think either candidate really has a strong identity with any particular xian denomination, but it IS just one more thing he has flipped on.
http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/09/mccains_religio.php
Knowing rethuglican strategy, they likely will take McCain's radical waffling and try to project it onto Obama.
Posted by: Ichthyic | June 25, 2008 4:25 AM
I never said "interest", I said the door was open again.
What I quoted was
"Edwards said back in April or so that he wasn't interested."
he re-opened the door on June 15.
Re-opened the door to what? What door had he closed? If it wasn't "interest", then your comment was non sequitur. I think my noting that Edwards did not express interest on June 15 is on point.
All available information suggests he's on the short list
What information is that? I would note that there's a certain tension between "information" and "suggests".
and since he expressed "public disinterest" in April, it seems unlikely he would be on the short list if what he said in June was meaningless.
I'm having trouble making sense of that. What he said in June is "obviously this is something that I've done and it's not a job I'm seeking". So if he is on the short list, it's in spite of the fact that he isn't seeking to be (or at least claiming not to be, and if we don't take him at his word then indeed his statement is meaningless).
I like Edwards and almost voted for him (in my state primary, before he dropped out), and think he would make a fine VP, but I don't think he would be a very good choice politically, and I personally doubt that he will be the choice, but I'm not basing that on any available information other than that the Obama camp usually (but not always;
Patti Solis Doyle is an obvious counterexample) makes good political decisions.
Posted by: truth machine | June 25, 2008 4:37 AM