Friday, May 26, 2006

Hastert and Pelosi look silly, or worse

* peggy noonan on DaVinci Code (via wolcott):
" "I do not understand the thinking of a studio that would make, for the amusement of a nation 85% to 90% of whose people identify themselves as Christian, a major movie aimed at attacking the central tenets of that faith, and insulting as poor fools its gulled adherents. Why would Tom Hanks lend his prestige to such a film? Why would Ron Howard? They're both already rich and relevant. A desire to seem fresh and in the middle of a big national conversation? But they don't seem young, they seem immature and destructive. And ungracious. They've been given so much by their country and era, such rich rewards and adulation throughout their long careers. This was no way to say thanks."
unhinged. again.

* kleiman:
"So I fully agree that Hastert and Pelosi look silly, or worse, in criticizing the FBI for doing the job they and their colleagues have refused to do, and indeed have helped to obstruct. But the right solution is not to applaud the Bureau for its power grab, but to insist that the Congress start to do the right thing. If the current leadership won't do so, the Democrats, at least, ought to find themselves new leadership, pronto."

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

I do not understand the thinking of a studio that would make, for the amusement of a nation 85% to 90% of whose people identify themselves as Christian, a major movie aimed at attacking the central tenets of that faith, and insulting as poor fools its gulled adherents.

where was she when it was like a best seller for fuck knows how long? did she complain then? gah...what an asswipe.

lukery said...

she really is foul - although it's fun (but easy) to tear strips off her every now and again

Anonymous said...

Maybe they were appealing to all of us who are disgusted by the pedophile priests. Celibacy was not established in the Catholic church based on theological reasons but rather so the church could acquire property. If a priest was married and had children, as they initially were, and they inherited property from their family, it went to their heirs. But, if they had no heirs, it went to the church. As a result, more wierdos than normal men are attracted to the proesthood. So, it is divine justice that the church is having to part with so much property to settle the claims against it. If the DaVinci Code brings the chruch back to its senses about the role of women in divine life, then its done its job. I'm not holding my breath, though.

lukery said...

"so the church could acquire property"
thnx. didnt know that.

"if...brings the chruch back to its senses"
rflmao