About Me

Name: Ed Lilly
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Maybe it's just a "conspiracy" backed by Big Belt?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Sunday, July 20, 2008 9:57:24 AM
A south Chicago suburb is the latest place to try to legislate against young men who wear their pants around their mid-thighs:

LYNWOOD, Ill. (AP) - Be careful if you have saggy pants in the south Chicago suburb of Lynwood. Village leaders have passed an ordinance that would levy $25 fines against anyone showing three inches or more of their underwear in public.

Eugene Williams is the mayor of Lynwood. He says young men walk around town half-dressed, keeping major retailers and economic development away. He calls the new law a hot topic.

The American Civil Liberties Union says the ordinance targets young men of color.

Young adults in the village, like 21-year-old Joe Klomes, say the new law infringes on their personal style. He says leaders should instead spend money on making the area look nicer.

 

Interesting how the ACLU automatically drags race into it, saying it targets young men of color.  From my experience this past school year doing a fair amount of substitute teaching, I can say that the tendency to wear baggy pants way too low, exposing one's boxer shorts, is not a phenomenon that is limited to young men of color.  Perhaps in other areas, and if looking at the nation as a whole, the numbers show a different story.  But my own eyes tell me differently here in small town New Jersey.

More interestingly, as the story clearly notes, the ordinance calls for a fine against anyone who violates it.  I expect that the goal is indeed to have a selective, and discriminatory effect.  But it is one that is directed at all young men.  Young women, at least from what I have seen in the greater Trenton area, have not adopted the drooping, baggy pants style with 6 inches of boxers showing.

I guess that's just more of how the game gets played.  By harping on the racial angle, the ACLU hopes for publicity, and in the inevitable court challenge, by making it about race they hope to get "strict scrutiny" analysis, which is pretty much impossible for a government body to pass.  If they only focus on the more realistic gender discrimination, then there is at least a chance that the ordinance could survive the less exacting "intermediate scrutiny" test applied by the courts.

 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why don't these kinds of things ever happen to that other Stanford alum?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Sunday, July 20, 2008 9:53:44 AM
Michelle Wie, a Stanford  student who knows a little bit about golf at its highest levels, has been disqualified from this weekend's play at the ongoing LPGA event for failure to sign her scorecard before leaving the scoring tent after Friday's round of play.

If you click through to the story and/or watch the embedded video in the story from ESPN News, Wie offers no explanation, citing it as just an inexplicable, but honest, mistake.

Perhaps she's right, but Wie has a curious history already in competitive play.  Just off the top of my head, I can remember her having a 2 stroke penalty assessed after a round at the Women's British Open for grounding her club in a hazard.  After that incident, she fired her caddy.  (Whoever was on her bag this week better be making some phone calls to have a new gig lined up - the story makes a cursory reference to it not being known whether Ms. Wie's caddy accompanied her to the scoring tent.  My guess is he'll be gone by Monday evening.)

Wie then had the fiasco involving her agent essentially taking her off the course at a tournament where, had she continued the round, she very likely would have shot an 88 or higher, running afoul of the somewhat obscure "Rule of 88" as it was called at the time, which would have meant she could not have competed in LPGA events for a lengthy period because of her score.  Wie and her agent cited her lingering wrist injuries as the cause for her poor play and reason for withdrawal.  She then showed up early at the next week's LPGA McDonald's tournament, a women's major, to practice.

Perhaps her earliest snafu was her disqualification for having taken an illegal drop, an error that was not caught until a golf journalist questioned it and a subsequent "investigation" and discussion showed that she had indeed taken a drop in violation of the rules.

By almost all accounts, Wie is cited as a bright girl and clearly a very talented golfer.  She must be pretty smart if she was accepted at Stanford.  Granted, she's rich and famous, so it's not exactly a shocker that a big school that wants a prize like that to put in it's publicity material would let her in.  But she can't be a complete blockhead if she's any kind of student at all there.

Yet still she keeps running into these problems.

Very much unlike another young golfer who went to Stanford a few years ago - Tiger Woods.

Wie is still very young and may go on to become the "Female Tiger" that so many expected her to be when she was only 13.  But the more these little things keep happening to cause distraction and derail her efforts to win, you have to wonder whether she'll instead be some kind of serial female Roberto De Vicenzo.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Well, it's not like he kept the beaches open after sharks were spotted or anything

Posted by Ed Lilly on Saturday, July 19, 2008 7:48:34 AM
Apparently the mayor of Belmar, NJ, a beach town that relies on summer tourism to boost its economy, had a blog about goings on in Belmar.  That's right, HAD a blog.  I guess it was going pretty well, and the locals found it pretty entertaining, until...

To the Staten Island girls who may have been taught to fight dirty in Brownies, Ken Pringle is sorry. To the muscle-bound, tanned-as-coconut-shell visitors he referred to as "guidos," employing a term widely considered an ethnic slur, the mayor of Belmar offers his apologies.

And to blondes everywhere, whether they know how to take out the trash or not, the blog-writing mayor is really remorseful.

The comments in his blog for summer renters in this legendary party town on the Jersey shore were meant, Pringle says, as tongue-in-cheek jabs at visitors behaving badly—which Belmar surely has each summer.

 

My hunch is that the folks at the local chamber of commerce just about stroked out when the mayor started peeing in the Cheerios of all the tourists those businesses rely on to have a good year.
Tags: Media   culture  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Olympics preparation update

Posted by Ed Lilly on Wednesday, July 02, 2008 8:58:36 AM
From Bloomberg.com:

Olympic organizers struggling to stem an algae bloom at the sailing venue in Qingdao are turning to another threat: a plague of locusts heading for Beijing.

Uh oh.  But, the Olympics being such a hugely important event, and with the eyes of the world watching, surely the ChiComs will find a way to deal with the algae bloom and locusts using organic, earth-friendly techniques, right?  And if they don’t, the environmentalists will be in an uproar, right?

Well....

The northern Chinese province of Inner Mongolia has mobilized 33,000 people to repel swarms of locusts

Sounds good so far.  Use superior human resources to somehow “repel” the swarms.  But let’s see, the story tells us that the locusts:

have infested an area of 1.3 million hectares (5,000 square miles)

Hmmm.  Each of the 33,000 Chinese will somehow “repel” the locusts from an approximately 6.5 square mile area?  I wonder how they’ll do that.  Oh:

Locusts in full flight may not be so easy to tackle. Inner Mongolia authorities are using 200 tons of pesticides, 100,000 sprayers and four airplanes to kill the pests...

Let’s just hope that’s 200 tons of hemp-based, organic, earth-friendly pesticides sprayed by solar or bio-diesel powered, zero emission airplanes.

Perhaps there’s better news on the algae front:

The locust alert comes as 10,000 workers scoop up blue- green algae along the coast...

Sounds earth-friendly, again using immense man-hours to somehow scoop up the algae.  And they’ve already had some reported success:

About 4,000 troops are helping the Qingdao clean-up, which has removed 150,000 tons of algae since June 25...

Wow.  That's a lot of tonnage to remove in a week's time using environmentally friendly techniques.  But I'm sure the ChiComs have been environmentally responsible.  Best of luck in their continuing cleanup and preparation for the Games.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Leaving Las Vegas - For the Children!

Posted by Ed Lilly on Tuesday, July 01, 2008 8:50:50 AM
I read a short news story yesterday on Sen. Reid's comments on fossil fuels, but it took James Lileks to craft the perfect response.  Here is the relevant section of Reid's statement (via The Bleat):

“The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it’s ruining our world. We’ve got to stop using fossil fuel.”

Taking Reid's words to heart and extending his argument to its logical conclusion, the Bard of Jasperwood opines:

There’s only one sensible response: we have to shut down Las Vegas.

Brilliantly done.  I highly recommend it.  The Vegas section is in the bottom portion of today's Bleat, but it's well worth your time to read the whole, brief piece.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Information that would have been helpful YESTERDAY!

Posted by Ed Lilly on Monday, June 30, 2008 9:13:22 PM
From SI.com:

Indiana University's president told the NCAA infractions committee that the hiring of ousted basketball coach Kelvin Sampson was "a risk that should not have been taken."

Well, gosh, how fortunate for President McRobbie that he assumed his position only after Sampson was hired so that McRobbie does not have to join AD Rick Greenspan on the next Trailways out of Bloomington.

I realize that IU is not solely, or even most importantly, about college basketball.  But the reality is that college hoops is big business.  And it’s been pretty clear since Kelvin Sampson’s hiring and subsequent resignation that the IU administration has screwed up that big business in a huge way.

Hopefully, the removal of Sampson and Greenspan, the hiring of Tom Crean, and possibly sound decision-making by the administration in finding Greenspan’s replacement will mean a big turn around for the business of IU basketball.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Justin Gimelstob tries, fails to create interest in women's tennis? UPDATED

Posted by Ed Lilly on Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:31:37 AM
Professional tennis has had a long, slow decline in popularity over the years, but a link caught my eye the other day in the tennis headlines.  It said something about a U.S. tennis official calling women’s tennis players sexpots and bit¢hes.  I didn’t save the link at the time, but I have found the story again, from the website This is London.

From the link, it appeared that perhaps a women’s tour official was caught making some really outrageous remarks.  Turns out, it’s former men’s tour pro Justin Gimelstob, who is now an ATP (the men’s tour) director, who was shooting off his mouth.

The specifics of Gimelstob’s comments, made during a radio show interview in the U.S. before he departed to cover Wimbledon, are about what you might expect from a former professional athlete being outrageous in a radio interview when talking about female tennis players, and he has of course now apologized to pretty much all women past, present and future for his inartfully expressed comments.  I even saw one link that mentioned Gimelstob apologized to Billie Jean King, which I guess somehow makes her the women’s tennis equivalent of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton as the go-to person for apologies when the relevant minority group is insulted.

But what I really found interesting out of this whole kerfuffle was that the Gimelstob story came out on This is London’s web site on Friday, June 27.  As of this morning, June 29, even with the wave of stories about Gimelstob’s subsequent apologies (a search of Gimelstob and Kournikova, who was mentioned prominently in the article, gave me over 23,000 online hits, and it took me to about the 5th page of links to get back to the original story), the original story from This is London has ZERO comments on the web site.

How can this be?  Granted tennis is not the most popular sport in the world, but the whole point of running this story was to shock and draw attention, right?  So no comments at all in 2 days?!  My guess is they got a lot of comments from men that they didn’t want posted, and they simply haven’t allowed any posts to go up.

UPDATE:  I may have been incorrect in where I saw the original link/story.  Further down the online search results, I found essentially the same piece via the Mail website, where there are now 34 comments.  Most are taking Gimelstob to task, and a few are "supporting" him by saying he just spoke his mind and shouldn't cave into political correctness for exercising free speech.  So perhaps the lack of comments at This is London is because they don't get much traffic?  Don't know about that.  I'm a bit surprised at only 34 comments at the Mail site.

Tags: Media   tennis  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Maybe Kelvin Sampson can find him a job...

Posted by Ed Lilly on Thursday, June 26, 2008 5:28:06 PM
Sometimes, the right thing happens, even if it takes a little longer than you might expect.  News came over the wires this afternoon that Indiana University Athletic Director Rick Greenspan is resigning is resigning as part of the probe into the mess created by Greenspan's hire, Kelvin Sampson, in continuing his violations of NCAA rules in contacting potential recruits.

Sampson's resignation came just before the end of the Big Te(leve)n season, and it would have been better had Greenspan done the right thing at that time and fallen on his sword.  He was the one who backed Sampson for the IU position despite Sampson's previous NCAA rule-breaking.

Unfortunately, this resignation will probably result in rumors of Isiah Thomas going back to Bloomington to be Tom Crean's new boss.  But if they didn't bring back Zeke to coach, I don't think they'll want him as AD.  Breathe easy, for now, Hoosier fans.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

You mean, actual lawmakers are going to keep making and enforcing laws?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Thursday, June 26, 2008 7:52:50 AM
Instead of just letting the self-appointed legislators on the judicial bench try to take over everything instead?  Maybe:

Unbowed, politicians vow to execute child rapists

Well, I should hope so.
Tags: law   courts  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

We had a PACT!!

Posted by Ed Lilly on Tuesday, June 24, 2008 9:32:23 PM
There have been numerous stories over the past few days about an apparent "pact" made by a group of high school girls in Massachusetts.  The girls were thought to have made an agreement to all get pregnant and have babies.  The latest link at Refdesk.com reads as follows:

Pregnant Mass. teen says there was no pact

I am reminded of this long-running dispute between Jerry and George in "Seinfeld."  At one point, George and Jerry decided they needed to grow up and make some changes in their lives.  Which led to George asking Susan to marry  him, and resulted in this exchange (h/t to the indispensable Seinfeldscripts.com):

George:  Oh, she's got the hue. So, what's going on with you and Melanie? I mean, I know you're not getting married, but uh, things are happening?

Jerry:  Well...actually, we kind of broke up.

George:  You what?

Jerry:  Well, you know, we were having dinner the other night, and she's got this strangest habit.  She eats her peas one at a time.  You've never seen anything like it.  It takes her an hour to finish them.  I mean, we've had dinner other times.  I've seen her eat Corn Niblets.  But she scooped them.

George: . . . she scooped her niblets?

Jerry:  Yes.  That's what was so vexing.

George:  Uh-huh.  Uh-huh.  What about the pact?

Jerry:  What?

George:  What happened to the pact?  We were both gonna change.  We shook hands on a pact.  Did you not shake my hand on it uh?

Jerry:  You stuck your hand out, so I shook it.  I don't know about a pact.  Anyway, you should be happy you're engaged.  You're getting married.

I always thought Jerry had the weaker position here.  It seemed pretty clear from the interaction that George's take on what happened was more accurate.  Still, it would have been nice if one of the girls at Gloucester High had had the decency to throw in a sly reference to never having shaken hands on anything.

Tags: Media   culture  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Thoughts of OJ...

Posted by Ed Lilly on Saturday, June 14, 2008 9:14:27 AM
OJ?  You mean, OJ Simpson?  Yes, indeed.  I see from the headlines this morning that singer (?) R. Kelly has been acquitted of having sex with a thirteen year old girl.  Despite the videotaped sex sessions.

So, I guess all those people who said that even if they had a videotape of OJ killing Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, they wouldn't convict him, really meant it.

My lovely wife's take is a bit different.  She just saw the start of this post, learning of the acquittal, and has concluded that the court system's mandate to seat a jury of 12 reasonable people has to be viewed as an unachievable failure.  No word from her on what comes next should we abandon the jury system.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

If only life were like the movies...

Posted by Ed Lilly on Friday, June 13, 2008 7:21:19 AM
I think it was Steve Martin's character in "Grand Canyon" who tells Kevin Kline that he doesn't watch enough movies, because all of life's questions are answered in the movies.  I was reminded of this in light of yesterday's ridiculous ruling by 5 members of the Supreme Court that foreign, illegal, enemy combatants somehow have habeas corpus rights.

Someone needs to get the folks in the White House to sit down today and watch "National Treasure."  They just might learn something in how to respond to yesterday's ruling:

So... Here's to the men who did what was considered wrong, in order to do what they knew was right... [nodding] what they knew was right.

I know I'd have a heck of a lot more respect for an executive branch that came out and simply told the Supreme Court to shove it on this ruling.  Heck, presidential precedent is on the government's side, and the side of common sense:  "John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it."

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Could George Costanza make it on the Supreme Court?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Thursday, June 12, 2008 6:33:30 AM
I only ask because that's who I was reminded of when I read this post at Hot Air:

The chief justice of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals[,] ...  Alex Kozinski[,] stored sexually explicit photos and videos on his personal web site, stating later that he thought no one could access the materials.

As George asked when caught when confronted with his own inappropriate sexual behavior, "Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices and I tell you people do that all the time."

At the risk of improperly mixing pop culture references, I think this could really put the Marv Albert phenomenon to the test.  Many people thought Albert was done as a broadcaster after his hotel assault on a woman while wearing ladies’ underwear and having his wig pulled off in the tussle.  Seems like a pretty difficult thing to live down.

But, Albert had the benefit of being a public figure in the age of Bill Clinton.  I predicted at the time of Albert’s fall that he would be back in broadcasting after a short time to let things simmer down.  Guys I worked with thought I was nuts and that Albert’s career was so clearly over it was laughable to think otherwise.

Turned out, Albert was gone from network tv for about 2 years, then was hired back as NBC’s prime NBA announcer, and is now doing Nets play-by-play on the Yes Network.  Who’s laughing now?

If Kozinski were one of the 9th Circuit liberals who are continually getting overruled by the Supreme Court, my guess is he would have a decent shot at still getting the call for a Supreme Court seat in an Obama administration.  But as a Reagan appointee, even if McCain wins in November, no chance in the world the media would let him survive a nomination for the Supreme Court.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How is the media playing the conviction of Obama's BFF Tony Rezko?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Wednesday, June 04, 2008 10:22:59 PM
While the big news out of Chicago is still the Cubs and their performance to this point in the season, there has also been a verdict announced in the trial of political fundraiser Tony Rezko.  Rezko sounds like a pretty typical political operative, in that he has been found guilty of fraud, money laundering and a host of other charges.  What makes Rezko noteworthy for most people is his very close connection with Sen. Barack Obama, as well as current Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.

This may be a big deal in early June, but my guess is that by Labor Day and the real start of the presidential campaign, this will all be forgotten by those who intend to drink deeply from the Kool-Aid and pull a lever for Sen. Obama.

Still, I was curious how the various media outlets would promote the story, if at all, in their online coverage of this breaking news.  What peaked my curiosity was the link at Refdesk.com, which noted simply in its "In the News" headlines:

Political fundraiser convicted in corruption trial - Jun 04 9:09 PM US/Eastern

Pretty bland stuff.  Why in the world would anyone even have an interest in reading the story on some anonymous political fundraiser?  Oh, you mean he has close personal and political ties to the now apparent Democrat presidential candidate?  Huh.  What a shock that somehow that angle didn't show up in the link to drive a little more traffic.  That's what the tubes of the internets are all about, right?  Driving traffic and getting clicks and eyeballs?  I guess when you only have 10 "In the News" items listed, there's no need to make all of them attention grabbers.

So how did other news/media outlets do in providing headlines or links?  Let's take a quick tour, moving alphabetically through the online news outlet sites linked at Refdesk.  First, here's ABC News:

Fixer With Obama Ties Found Guilty

Ok, they at least noticed the connection to Obama.  How about CBS News?

Bupkis.  Nothing on their homepage, under the breaking news at the top of the page, or further down in their links to stories on politics.  But of course, in true keeping with the traditions of Walter Cronkite and Dan Rather in providing the world with all the (mis)information it can, CBS did manage to link to the breaking story that Chicago made the short list of possible hosts for the 2016 Olympics.  Well done.

CNN?

Developer linked to Obama guilty in fraud case

Pretty similar to ABC.  Good for them.

How about Fox News?

Rezko Convicted on 16 Counts in Corruption Trial

So no mention of Sen. Obama and his ties to the story from the famously biased, right wing zealots of Rupert Murdoch's empire.  I suppose the counter to that would be that "everyone" who goes to Fox News' website or watches Fox News has been trained to know who Rezko is, so it's superfluous to mention Sen. Obama.  Whatever.

NBC?  Actually, this is from the MSNBC site, as that's apparently the online presence for NBC News:

Fundraiser Rezko found guilty in corruption case
And this was provided under a banner on Sen. Obama, so that gets some credit.  Though detracting from full points is the fact that the Obama banner under which the tiny Rezko link is located makes sure to highlight the Obama campaign's latest talking point:

Obama: GOP will attack on patriotism

So the "big" news for MSNBC is the charge of upcoming nefarious tactics by the Republicans, while actual criminal wrongdoing involving Sen. Obama's close friend, financier, mentor and next door neighbor gets buried further down.  But at least they reported the story, unlike CBS.

Moving to other media outlets, how about PBS?

Again, nothing.  Plenty of stories on the groundbreaking historical achievement of Sen. Obama "claiming" the nomination.   But no time to notice the unpleasantness from the Chicago courtrooms.

NPR?  Also nothing.

Let's check out Reuters.  Never been to their site before.  Here we go:

One-time Obama fundraiser guilty in corruption trial

Clever.  Makes it look a little like it's some fundraiser who, at one time, raised some money for Sen. Obama.  That's a little like describing Rev. Wright as a minister who, one time, spoke at Sen. Obama's church.

So kind of a mixed bag overall, but something tells me that when news broke involving Jack Abramoff, who had ties to various Republican politicans, all these news outlets who have ignored the Rezko verdict were trumpeting the Abramoff story, and his ties to Republicans, every chance they got.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

So who joined Trinity United Church first? And will it matter?

Posted by Ed Lilly on Sunday, June 01, 2008 8:50:56 AM
The big news from last night appears to be Sen. Obama's decision to leave his radical Chicago church.  Moreover, the news reports indicate that both Sen. Obama and his wife are leaving the controversial church.

I have been unable to find the answer online, but I am mildly curious whether Sen. Obama or his wife joined their church first.  I thought I had read something a while back that indicated Mrs. Obama was either the first of the couple to join the church, or it could have been that she was the prime reason they stayed in that particular church.

My interest in this question was prompted by several comments I have seen on the web about how Sen. Obama's willingness to cast aside anyone who creates problems for his political ambition, as now shown by his defenestration of his entire church congregation, may cause those close to Sen. Obama to become a bit nervous at wondering when their time will come to be sacrificed for his career.

Which made me think of Mrs. Obama, and how I really do not want a replay of the Clinton years with questions of what the "real" nature of the President and First Lady's marriage happens to be.

How could the church resignation bring up such a thought?  Well, as I queried at the outset, I was wondering if Sen. Obama or his wife joined the church first.  If Mrs. Obama became a member of the church before her husband, or if she was the primary reason the family stayed in that church, then it raises the possibility that Sen. Obama's political necessity of resigning from the church could create a division in his marriage.  By forcing his wife to leave her chosen church, he may have partially dealt with one problem, yet created another in the form of speculation about whether Mrs. Obama will leave over church/religious and other disagreements.  After 8 years of hearing about how the Clintons had a "sham" marriage that was really just a business arrangement, I have no real desire for a replay with the Obamas, with Mrs. Obama in the role of the wronged spouse, forced to leave the church she loved, who simply has to take whatever grief her more powerful husband gives her so that she can maintain her proximity to power.

I hope that all this speculation is needless.  But if anyone has a clue on the answer to which of the Obamas joined their church first, I'd love to check out the citation.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (2) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous12345678910…1516Next »