Free Republic

People can talk about what Hispanics *should* want in terms of policy or a candidate, but until they actually give concrete evidence of actually supporting it in large percentages, I have to remain skeptical.

The ONA poll was commissioned to Gravis, which has a mediocre rep, a heavy Republican bias. Maybe they're on to something here, but I'd really like to see it borne out among more reputable pollsters (let alone the ballot box) before I let it get any hopes up. Because pretty much every other poll on Hispanic preferences to date has shown far grimmer results.

More evidence that Democrats push an aggressive immigration package at their peril.

At last - a video version of Iowahawk’s still advert. Fantastic.

At last - a video version of Iowahawk’s still advert. Fantastic.

A recent poll claimed that about half of all professing Christians don’t believe that Jesus is God, or that the Holy Spirit and Satan even exist.

Apparently Arianism is harder to stamp out than we once thought.

That's the key - it has to be 1) unique content, and 2) unique content that people want. The WSJ has both.

It's possible that other papers could have such content, but they'll have to examine that carefully: What do they provide that no one else does and that readers actually want? For most papers, the answer will be: local news/sports coverage.

And they'll have to find a way to price it affordably.

If it's racist to question Obama's history, truthfulness, intellect, loyalty, anti American friendships, anti American behavior and general deportment as a congenital liar and narcissist...

I hope not. This site would be out of business.

But it's certainly possible to do these things without mentioning his race.

It may not have been your intent, but you have to consider how these words come across.

I don't think the Navy alters its ROE simply because of the skin color of the president. One can imagine a number of possible black presidents - say, Colin Powell (be he RINO or not), Michael Steele, etc. - which wouldn't seem likely to prompt such questions.

If Obama is proven to be the fraud and interloper many suspect, every one of his edicts, bills, laws, dictates, Supreme Court selections, et al, will be overturned...

If by some tremendous chance he were disqualified - something I can't see happening, more likely the statute would be ruled unconstitutional - Joe Biden would become president, and at worst all of his previous executive orders would be confirmed. I'm not sure that's any improvement.

They no doubt do have arms aboard - but probably have standing orders to evade rather than engage.

I'm curious why it had no combat escort.

Would the Navy behave so cowardly under a WHITE Christian natural born citizen President?

This is satire of some kind, right?

Levy also worked for Sam Alito in the Reagan Justice Department - some interesting twists in his legal career, that’s for sure.

Whatever his position on gun control - the position you argue as a lawyer is not always what you really believe, so it's hard to tell here - what a tragic waste.

Apparently he was given 48 hours notice of his termination. Makes you wonder if the firm is rethinking how they handled this.

Obviously there was more going on in Levy's life before the layoff. And it's sobering to realize - if a superstar like this guy can get axed, no one is really safe. Or at least not in the legal community.

But we can kick YouKnowWhat in the 2010 election.

That won't be easy. The GOP has more seats to defend in the Senate in 2010, and more open seats to defend as well.

Not until 2012 will Democrats have more turf to defend in the Senate.

"Can anybody name just three things it has done to make the U.S. a better place to live and work?"

If that is the standard, a great deal of scientific research would have to go out the window right now.

It's not just about pictures. Hubble has a considerable array of instruments, and through them we have learned a vast amount about the universe we live in. And who knows? One day this pure scientific knowledge could one day become the basis for more practical advances.

Hubble has not been cheap. But there are far worse ways to spend government money.

Drinking alcohol is encouraged in the Catholic church.

There is nothing sinful about drinking alcohol. If there were, there would have to be some hard questions about Christ's first miracle.

Drinking to excess, certainly. But I don't see the Scriptural basis for tee-totaling as intrinsically necessary.

The RCC needs to put more emphasis on the primacy of God’s word rather than the primacy of Rome’s word.

That's a Protestant way of framing the discussion, and one we can't accept as Catholics. It is the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church, that permits us to understand what Scripture *means* - Scripture that reached its canonical state in the bosom of the Church herself. Tradition + Scripture - it is not an either/or proposition for us, but both/and. We *should* read Scripture more often - no question. We should also read the Church's doctors and Fathers, so that we read Scripture with them.

Having said that, I will offer an ecumenical observation: These days, the greatest sectarian quarrels are increasingly not between the denominations, but within them. A Missouri Synod Lutheran likely has much more in common with orthodox Catholics on moral teachings (and probably a good deal else) than he does with, say, a lot of what goes on in the ELCA.

“Their finest hour” was only made possible by a bunch of American workers putting in thousands of ‘their finest hours’ to manufacture the war machine products that carried Britain’s ass during the years in the war before our troops arrived.

Lend Lease helped the Brits, no question, but not to win the Battle of Britain - the Hurricanes and Spitfires were entirely British designed, built and manned. Their radar networks were entirely of their own devising (and well ahead of anything America had at the time).

Britain could not have won the war without America. But they weren't losing when we came in, either. And there's no questioning their dedication or tenacity.

There's serious anti-Americanism in Britain, but these old vets aren't the ones to go after on that score - they know better than anyone what they owe to America, and unlike most of their younger compatriots, they put it on the line when it counted. I'd chalk it up to old resentments at that the Hollywoodization of their story - something even Americans can sympathize with.

Baloney. They had Neville Chamberlain in office, and were a bunch of ‘head-in-the-sand’ wusses whose unique advantage against Hitler was being across a body of water. Otherwise, they would have gone down as meekly as France.

And America had Charles Lindbergh, Joseph Kennedy (a bigger appeaser than Chamberlain ever was) and Joseph Nye, and a unique advantage against Hitler of being across an even bigger body of water.

The Brits unfortunately did have Chamberlain and their share of pacifists. But they also had Winston Churchill and Anthony Eden.

They hid inside while Germans bombed the hell out of their cities from the air, only taking time for an occasional glance over their shoulders to the west to see if those ships from America were anywhere close to the horizon yet. Gimme a break.

You have heard of the Battle of Britain?

Whatever they're like now (or those not in Afghanistan or Iraq), it's hard to argue that 1939-1945 wasn't "their finest hour."

No, it simply didn't happen, maybe 300,000 Jews died. At best.

You're saying the Holocaust did not happen?

Will he be recognized as a bishop, or even a priest, in the Roman Catholic Church? Or is he just getting his membership back? It’s also not clear how he got to be a bishop in the first place, if the man who was Pope at the time actively disagreed with the plan for him to become a bishop.

All that has been done is to lift his excommunication, effective this week. He remains suspended a divinis. which means he cannot confer any of the sacraments, establish new parishes, or employ any of the other powers of bishops. That remains true of all other SSPX bishops and priests - further talks are needed to fully regularize their position with the Church.

Williamson (and the other SSPX bishops) were excommunicated in the first place precisely for being ordained. Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre consecrated these four bishops in June 1988 without any authorization by the Pope, and in so doing all involved automatically incurred late sententiae excommunication.

Because Lefebvre had the power to consecrate new bishops, Williams (alas) is technically a valid bishop, but he is not a licit one, because he was not authorized to become one by Rome.

As for his ideas on the Holocaust, they are ludicrous but not technically heresy and therefore don't affect his excommunication. But I dare say he will have to recant before he is regularized as part of any deal with the SSPX, assuming he is regularized at all.