Don't think you're reading my comment right: Marsha is even more facepalmy than most of TN's elected officials (the federal ones anyway), and that she's a very superficial thinker, no deeper than platitudes, bumperstickers, and conservative bromides. Palin-league, in other words.
As a Tennessean, we have so much to facepalm over when it comes to our elected officials, but Marsha is on a level of her own. Anyone capable of thinking beyond bumpersticker platitudes can run circles around her on the Sunday shows or in a debate, but her district is carved to give her a constituency of the willfully ignorant, so...
Why in the world doesn't the church just sell the trademark to Adidas, for, say, 10 grand? That's way more than they'll ever make unless they've got a 1000 year plan for return-on-investment. The trustees of the church should really question how the leadership is spending church -- i.e. charitable -- resources.
No doubt about it. Too bad American conservative Christians don't do that. Instead of helping the poor and other very Jesus-y things, they want to persecute others by pressing their religious laws into law.
You're either trolling or don't understand what you've been reading here for years. The subject matter Techdirt covers is inherently about politics. Patents, copyright, surveillance, privacy, security, etc., etc. -- all politics.
As for the poor maligned American "Christian," who seems to consider it his moral duty to force others to live according to his narrow beliefs, consideration of that subject would only lead to being blinded for a couple of weeks while I wait for my eyes to roll forward again.
I'm absolutely no fan of Comey's, but just look at the way FBI agents are leaking to the press about who the emails are supposedly between and even how many there might be. There was no chance he could have held this off even if it would have been the right thing to do (which I'm not convinced it would have been).
By instead lying and trying to obfuscate the issue however they keep the attention on both the emails and their (bad) attempts to discredit them, and what was a minor issue that would have fallen to the wayside is instead kept front and center.
Welcome to the Clintons. They do this all the time. Hell, this is the second time they've played the Obfuscate, Lie, and Spin game about emails. It's a different tactic in this case, but the same old game.
I've publicly declared that this particular lefty-lefty will not defend, deflect, or otherwise compromise my intellectual integrity for them ever again.
This election is not about angel vs devil. For whatever reason, it is about moderate turd vs humongous turd. Whoever approaches election day with the "turd is turd" stance deserves to end up buried in shit way over his head.
This is not only the most succinct, but also the most accurate description of this election. Brilliant. Kudos to you, sir.
Standard operating procedure for a Clinton. they love to go right up to the outer edge of the line, even a half-step beyond sometimes, but when they do rather than own it they'll spin like the Looney Tunes Tasmanian Devil to obfuscate, cover up, and lie, and they'll gladly solicit the same from others. It's why so many lefty-leftists (what Howard Dean called the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party) trust her even less than Republicans.
Um, no. You're thinking "progressive" as in turn of the 20th century Progressives, which were what we would consider liberal Republicans today. But that's not the way it's been since the 60s. When Democrats moderated and cast off their working class constituency in the 70s and 80s, they decried progressives as being too far to the left.
Check out Thomas Franks's (an historian) writing, esp. "Listen Liberal" for the history of the rise of "Third Way" Democratic politics, i.e. movement to the center, which gained the upper hand under (Bill) Clinton. It's a great history, and corrected my understanding of the terms "progressive" and "liberal" as well.