i was trying to avoid another "my god what's the hell is happening" post, but...

[acroyear]

when the reuters headline is "Republicans Nominate Bush, Sing His Praises", I have to *seriously* wonder 1) what the hell is going on that they need to use such religiously-tainted fodder like "Sing His Praises", and 2) where the *hell* assholes like Rush get off saying there's anything like a "Liberal Media" that can spout out such claptrap.

(b.t.w., the article was written by "John Whitesides, Political Correspondent". maybe desmond can tell me if he's as bad as some of the other pro-republican people like coulter or not.)

now given that the article mentions how democrats simply don't see any "compassion" in "compassionate conservatism", it may be that the headline is actually intentionally mocking the proceedings.

the trouble with satire is that nobody can tell the difference anymore.

Comments

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

possible. in fact probable. the situation is that it fits directly into my metaphore (and Doonesburys if you're reading this week) of GWB as a "Caesar" acting the role of exercising absolute power whenever possible (since the reality of both Rome and now are that its actually rare to be able to do so...possible, but rare).

The phrase, added to the modern church by the Romans (through their interpretation of the parts of the old testimate they felt were important), plays right into that comparison.