Around the blogsphere

Times Against Humanity continues its top to bottom coverage of the DP (Death Party) Con-vention by the irrepressibly charming Earl Appleby. In related news, The Curt Jester introduces "The Secularizer," whose patented unfilter technology called CorruptPlay^TM injects the profanity, violence, and pornographic content that contemporary Democratic TV viewing audiences have come to expect, should the need arise. Elliot Bougis, taking over Mark Shea's blog under the revised name, "Not quite Catholic but still enjoying it," describes Kerry's DP Convention speech as knocking Nixon's "Checkers Speech" from its pedestal and reaching the "You make me want to puke" point in record time. The Jewish World Review offers an analysis of Arab coverage of the U.S. presidential race in Stephen Stanlinsky's "Arab Guide to the 2004 Election" (thanks to David Mills at Touchstone). It seems the Iranians and others are terrified of Bush, which may explain their all-out support for the Kerry-Edwards ticket. (Let the voter beware!) Jimmy Akin (Defensor Fidei) covers the reception of Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ in Malaysia, which is surprisingly different from that of other Muslim countries in the Middle East (Kuala Lumpur, Reuters). John da Fiesole offers the following apt question for political observers, under the "Personally Opposed to Murder" button (pictured right):

"Okay, I understand everyone says stupid things at times. When we do, we should notice that what we've said was stupid and correct ourselves without compounding the stupidity.

"So, when are the politicians who have said they can't force their morality on their constituents going to correct themselves without compounding their stupidity?"

In other news, Greg Krehbiel, responds to the question, "Pornography never hurt anyone, right?" by taking us from "the fantasy universe of the privacy Nazis -- 'It's nobody's business what I do privately'" -- to a report from the real universe that hotel workers want porn-rated movies banned. Krehbiel, commenting also on the presidential race, quotes Ann Coulter:

"Among the four major candidates for president and vice president this year, who has the smallest net worth? Answer: George Bush."

But most interesting of all is Krehbiel's analysis of Sobran's take on fixing "same sex" marriage. On the question of Kerry's character and military service record, see the astute Catholic Analysis by Oswald Sobrano. Also see his analysis of Kerry's Speech, Like Michael Moore, Undermines Troops. For a detailed analysis of Ron Reagan's duplicitous speech at the DP (Death Party) Convention, see Christopher Blosser's piece in Against the Grain. See also his links to the discussion of George Sim Johnson's recent articles in Crisis magazine on the consequences and implications of the Second Vatican Council. Benjamin Blosser offers a detailed Augustinian analysis of sex and marriage in Ad Limina Apostolorum. In another post, "Fr. Pavone levels the playing field," Benjamin quotes Fr. Frank Pavone as saying:

"If a candidate who supported terrorism asked for your vote, would you say, 'I disagree with you on terrorism, but where do you stand on other issues?'"

"'I stand for adequate and comprehensive health care.' So far, so good. But as soon as you say that a procedure that tears the arms off of little babies is part of 'health care,' then your understanding of the term 'health care' is obviously quite different from the actual meaning of the words."

"'My plan for adequate housing will succeed.' Fine. But what are houses for, if not for people to live in them? If you allow the killing of the children who would otherwise live in those houses, how am I supposed to get excited by your housing project?"

Summary: "It's easy to get confused by all the arguments in an election year. But if you start by asking where candidates stand on abortion, you can eliminate a lot of other questions you needn't even ask."

See also Pavone's original article, entitled "You Wouldn't Even Ask," as well as his organization, Priests for Life.

For a very interesting discussion of the presidential race, read Michael Novak's "Why the Dems Will Lose." Here are a few excerpts:

of the political commentators I admire most for his astuteness said yesterday that the paroxysm of hatred the Democrats have been indulging for the last six months is the worst American political delusion he has seen in his entire life.

What will it be like -- if after all this hatred, all this effort, all those millions upon millions of dollars spent to express disdain, contempt, and hate -- Bush wins again, flashes a victory symbol over his head, grins, strides around shaking hands, glows with exuberance and radiance?

For Democrats, losing is much worse than for Republicans.... Democrats without power suffer much more. Democrats go listless, purposeless."

And, finally, a quote for the day from George Washington:

"Reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."