God returns to the DNC


Bestowing the Silk Scarf
"Hmm, he called me 'Quod', the way men do just before a duel of some kind."

Perhaps you misunderstood his tone, Sir Quod, as I didn't experience the reflexive action of reaching for a silk scarf to bestow.
Well, yeah quite true, Lee. but Anthony asked.

By the way did anyone get the Prince of Dendarii reference?
(Hmm, he called me "Quod", the way men do just before a duel of some kind. Must have ticked him off, which wasn't the reaction I WA trying to elicit. Need to reply quickly, even if I'm out of ideas for getting back on topic. Wouldn't want to get anthinated - with or without extreme prejudice.)

I'll let you google the phrase on your own, Anthony, but I'll give you one link at least:

To my way of thinking, it indicates passion - neither intrinsically good nor intrinsically bad, but certainly preferable to ennui. I think you contribute and generate passion here, and that's a good thing - even, or maybe especially, when people disagree with you, but also when they don't. OK?

And I understand the Democrats's desire to avoid offense, but some Muslims have made it clear that they will cease being offended only when the last Jew is dead. They want us to accommodate them. I say they need to accommodate the Jews.

(Whew! Won't get yodinated with extreme prejudice - this time.)
There is a lot of things America should leave others to decide on their own Anthony-I assume you are Anthinator. Unfortunately the location of Jerusalem is an international issue. It is not fashionable in Europe to send envoys to instead of Jerusalem. And of course a nation has just as much right to send envoys where it wants as to put it's capital where it wants. And many Americans have more in common with the European intelligentsia then with America.

In many ways, people pay an irrational amount of attention to the doings of Israel. The fact is many younger nations acquired their present capital by right-of-conquest almost within living memory or at least the memory of our fathers and grandfathers so singling out Israel is kind of strange. But Israel does often get singled out.

And I(jason taylor) do prefer my own name which is good enough. I just thought I would try the nickname function. Anyone catch the reference?
"One that I think everyone would find to be fitting is "ToTheAnthDegree"."
-Explain yourself, Quod..
One that I think everyone would find to be fitting is "ToTheAnthDegree".
I found my nickname!!

Sad...history was my #1 best subject in high school. Now I can't even remember what year the War of 1812 was fought :P

" And irrespective of how you feel about Israel as a nation, I think we could all agree that all-out war there, or nuclear strikes by either or both sides, would not be good. That point seems lost on the DNC."
-I see what you mean...I'm not saying their "on their own" so to speak, but aren't they capable of deciding some things on their own? Why does the US always have to decide everything?
Yes, Lee my splendiferous, glorious, knowledge before whole scholars are ashamed and loremasters abashed is a thing not to make jest of but to prostrate yourself before!
Actually, Anthony, I was just razzing Jason to try to get him back on his track of providing detailed historical references. (I was going to say "back on his game", as one might say of Peyton Manning, for example - woops, sorry, saw Sunday's game on the plane ;-) - but I didn't want to imply that Jason's area of expertise is a game; I believe history is vitally important, and Jason's knowledge of it is extremely valuable.) As far as Jerusalem being Israel's capital, I think to avoid saying that is to say that Israel is on its own among hostile neighboring nations. And irrespective of how you feel about Israel as a nation, I think we could all agree that all-out war there, or nuclear strikes by either or both sides, would not be good. That point seems lost on the DNC.

"AnthQuod"? Hmmm . . . How about "AnthOlogy"? "AnthRopic"? Etc. I suspect the addition of this new feature was instigated by Holley "Nobody Ever Suspects Me" Raggard.
Actually Anthony 1776 was a jihad for the whole 13 colonies not Philadelphia and mostly done by Congregationalists and Presbetyrians not by Quakers and Anabaptists who inhabited Pennsylvania.
"1776, Jason? ;-)"
-And somehow you managed to read my mind, Lee. I was going to respond with the exact same thing but you beat me to it!! I just couldn't understand how it mattered if WE as the United States recognized Jerusalem as he capital of Israel. It's not our country, sometimes I wish we could just mind our own business here and there...

And thank you for the welcome back! It's good to be back on BP/PFM, as well as Facebook, Google, my Yahoo! email, etc. etc.

I've noticed a new "Nickname" option on here...what do you think, does "AnthQuod" sound like it has a nice ring to it...? :o ;)
1776, Jason? ;-)

Welcome back, Anthony!!

The clip I saw of the floor vote jumped from a close-up of the speaker to a shot of a man and a woman holding a banner that said something about "Arab Americans". They were part of the "no" votes, and of the chorus of boos. One could reasonably assume they weren't atheists, so they must have been against acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel's capital.
Anthony, recognizing Jerusalem is recognizing right-of-conquest from the six day war. Not recognizing it is claiming that the six day war was unjust. So someone will automatically be peeved.
And Pennsylvanians are smarter then most. No one has gone on a Jihad for the sake of Philadelphia.
After being offline for 2 weeks I'm trying to catch up on all that's been posted on here...so...

I watched this myself and, being the dumb and ignorant Pennsylvanian that I am, posed this question:

Doesn't Israel get to decide what their capital should be?
Backtracking won't work. Voters will simply write that off as cowardice adding insult to injury. They would be beter off to the original.
Villaraigosa obviously expected it to pass and ran roughshod over the dissenters.
In truth, Ellen, those meters notoriously favor the loudest, even if it's a minority.

Lee, I'd probably go along with it being the president making it happen. I was listening to SRN News the evening the platform was approved, and they said it was passed unanimously. I'd hate to think that could be the case if there were many preachers among the delegates. More likely, the administration saw the firestorm that had been created and realized that Christians and Jews will take only so many slaps to the face before finally running out of cheeks.

As far as Villaraigosa's decision, he apparently-and wisely--realized that with God and the administration both supporting the amendments, that must count for at least two thirds.
Perhaps sound meters with a readout that all involved can see as the votes are given would be a more partial judge of such votes.
National Review's Kathryn Jean Lopez has an amusing take on this story:

More seriously, I heard on a local radio station an interview with a reporter on site at the DNC. The reporter claimed that it was African American pastors who initiated and insisted on the changes. The mainstream media are claiming that instead, this was President Obama's personal intervention, requesting the corrections to align with his personal views. Interesting.

BreakPoint Blog