A New Blog

Check out Political Juice a new left-leaning political blog by a Mormon. The author has promised a series of posts on Mormonism and Politics. His first one is on the death penalty. There is no stunning theological or political insights here, but he does have a nice collection of quotes from Brigham Young and Joseph Smith on the topic as well as a discussion of everyone’s favorite doctrine…blood atonement!

26 comments for “A New Blog

  1. David King Landrith
    May 18, 2004 at 10:03 am

    Left leaning? These “Political Juice” guys have fallen over the edge of political sanity. If hate speech laws are ever seriously enacted, one has to wonder if they’d apply to this kind of extremism.

  2. Randy
    May 18, 2004 at 10:14 am

    Nothing like a little hyperbolic overreation to get us started in the morning. Shesh.

  3. May 18, 2004 at 12:50 pm

    Hate speech? Extremism? Huh?! Let’s take it down a notch, eh?

  4. May 18, 2004 at 4:19 pm

    PJ isn’t what I would call hate speech.
    I will be copying his quasi-non-partisan comparison of Bush & Kerry at the mormons4bush website.

    I think his first entry was pretty good. I just want to show you the other slant in greater detail. :)

  5. David King Landrith
    May 19, 2004 at 1:18 am

    I meant it kind of tongue & cheek and partly ironical (e.g., non-left-leaners tend to dislike hate-speech laws). I’m guessing I should try to do a better job of making that obvious.

    (On the other hand, they do call for Rumsfeld’s resignation based on fake internet porn…)

  6. May 19, 2004 at 11:42 am

    “they do call for Rumsfeld’s resignation based on fake internet porn”

    I’m assuming this is a joke as well?

  7. Ben S
    May 19, 2004 at 12:49 pm

    I think David King Landrith is referring to the calls for Rumself to resign based on extremely explicit images of soldiers and “Iraqi” women. Turns out the images were from a pr0n site that imitates such things, not Iraq. This fact has not led the accusers to retract their demand that Rumsfeld resign, AFAIK.

  8. May 19, 2004 at 2:52 pm

    I don’t think anyone’s criticism of Rumsfeld is based on those photos alone–the verified photos from Abu Ghraib are plenty incriminating.

  9. lyle
    May 19, 2004 at 3:50 pm

    Ben/Jeremy: (Start slight sarcasm) Yeah, but it would be too much to ask for false accusations made vs. Rumsfeld to be publicly retracted, right? Maybe the left-leaning accusers who referenced the fake-porn shots could _Apologize_? nah…i mean…apologies are only for those you disagree with, right?

  10. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 3:58 pm

    Left-leaning accusers who reference fake stuff occasionally make retractions, but bury them (as in the case of the New York Time and Washington Post) on page Z-19 in very small print.

  11. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 3:59 pm

    New York TimeS, sorry.

  12. lyle
    May 19, 2004 at 4:32 pm

    Thanks for the info Kingsley! My respect for the NYT & WA Post have now increased by about…two sentences of 8 point font.

  13. Randy
    May 19, 2004 at 4:34 pm

    Right-leaning accusers who reference fake stuff, of course, always make retractions, and always do so with the same fanfare that accompanied the initial accusations. [I trust the scarcasm is apparent enough here, but if not, now you know.]

    Why is it that one can’t even reference a new “left-leaning” website around here without attracting this kind of silliness? Just boggles my mind . . . .

  14. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 4:40 pm

    If only right-leaning accusers who reference fake stuff had voices as loud and far-reaching as the NYT and WP! Of course, any challenge to the supposed objectivity of these papers is “silly” from the get-go, so there’s no point in discussing it …

  15. Randy
    May 19, 2004 at 4:48 pm

    Don’t even get me started Kingsley. I would say more, but I’m afraid Kaimi would shut me down.

  16. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 4:59 pm

    Randy: I am truly sorry to hear that. Civil conversation an impossibility, etc. It certainly holds true to the stereotype of left-leaners appealing to great emotion etc. as a reason for not exploring certain issues.

  17. lyle
    May 19, 2004 at 5:06 pm

    down friends, down. as one recently chastised for impatience/lack of civility…i know we can discuss the issue: but probably in a thread of its own somewhere.

    note…while I may disagree with PJ (the subject of this thread), I did defend his site from charges of hate speech.

  18. Randy
    May 19, 2004 at 5:22 pm

    Boy Kingsley, you’ve got me pegged.

  19. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 5:25 pm

    Truly sorry to hear it.

  20. Gary Cooper
    May 19, 2004 at 5:49 pm

    And now, for a rest hymn, let’s all sing a primary song! All together now!

    When you chance to meet a frown, do not let it stay! Quickly turn it upside down and smile the frown away…

  21. Kaimi
    May 19, 2004 at 5:57 pm

    Guys, guys,

    First, let’s be civil all around.

    Second, PJ did call for Rumsfeld’s resignation, in part based on photos that turned out to be false. A credible argument can be made that non-false photos are equally damaging. Also, note that the evil-liberal-media has in the past reported findings of WMD’s in Iraq, which was happily linked on numerous hawkish and right-leaning blogs (and which later turned out to be false).

    Third, the Boston Globe story in question ran on page B2, and it was not a direct photo, but a picture of a politician and his presentation. The retraction, on page A2, was more prominently placed than the picture. See http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/05/13/may_13_2004/ .

    Finally, I find it amazing that a pointing out of a web site can start this kind of back-and-forth. Maybe we need a thread about the media, so these ideas can be aired.

  22. Kingsley
    May 19, 2004 at 6:25 pm

    Kaimi: Never claimed the liberal media was evil, only that it was liberal. John O’Sullivan over at National Review Online has a great article about the ramifications of this fact on the Rumsfeld situation (among others, such as Berg/Abu Ghraib, etc.). My apologies to Randy (sincere this time) for being snippish.

  23. Randy
    May 19, 2004 at 6:44 pm

    No harm no foul, Kingsley. My apologies as well.

  24. David King Landrith
    May 19, 2004 at 7:02 pm

    For the record, I’m not at all amazed that bringing up internet porn made the thread more productive of comments.

  25. PJ
    May 20, 2004 at 1:26 pm

    Wow. For my own two cents:

    How does anybody from the right–the realm of Rush Limbaugh and that Savage nightmare–even joke about PJ being filled with hate speech?

    Second, I call for Rummy’s resignation because he’s run the war badly, and there seems to be some suggestion that this prisoner scandal might go all the way up the chain to his door. The photos (that later turned out to be false) only accentuated the call for resignation. Moreover, I think it would be politically wise for Bush to call for it (though I don’t necessarily want Bush to do anything that helps him politically).

    As for retractions–the comments on that post make note of the falsity of the photos in question. Neither the left nor the right is especially talented when it comes to retractions, but I am perfectly willing to acknowledge when I’m wrong. Did I post a separate entry devoted to the admission? Nope. But not because I’m a sinister liberal demon. I was just busy writing other things and focusing on other issues–and thought the comments to the original post would suffice.

    Apparently not, if you’re a rightie. But then, we lefties have had some concerns about an absence of retractions, too. Bush’s utter inability to admit any mistake whatsoever comes to mind…

  26. Kingsley
    May 20, 2004 at 1:48 pm

    PJ: Perhaps you could hop on over to the Media thread, and give some examples of Limbaugh’s “hate speech.” Savage is another matter—but surely, when it comes to zealots, the Left isn’t entirely unencumbered? Remember Alex Baldwin’s little rant? “ … If we were in other countries, we would all right now, all of us together, would go down to Washington and we would stone Henry Hyde to death and we’d go to their homes and we’d kill their wives and children.” That being said, I quite enjoy your site (and I’m a “rightie”!).

Comments are closed.