Just finished my blog reading and found this over at AMERICAblog News:

NBC just did a piece about today’s gay rights march in Washington. For the political context of the gay community’s ire, NBC went to Chief Washington Correspondent John Harwood. Harwood was asked if the White House was worried about “the left as a whole,” and concerns they have that the White House isn’t doing things that “the left” expected them to do. Harwood said the following:

   Barack Obama is doing well with 90% or more of Democrats so the White House views this opposition as really part of the Internet left fringe.

Harwood then went on to say:

   For a sign of how seriously the White House does or doesn’t take this opposition, one adviser told me those bloggers need to take off the pajamas, get dressed, and realize that governing a closely divided country is complicated and difficult.

So the gay community, and its concerns about President Obama’s inaction, and backtracking, on DADT and DOMA, are now, according to President Obama’s White House, part of a larger “fringe” that acts like small children who play in their pajamas and need to grow up. (And a note to our readers: The White House just included all of you in that loony “left fringe.“)

Now, I’m not one to cry wolf.  The actual quote came from NBC’s Chief White House Correspondent, John Harwood.  However, note that Harwood cites that he spoke with a WH advisor who slammed us “internet people”.

So, let’s start there…

who could have predicted this… really?  That the very websites set up to expose government inefficiency, to crash the gates, that seek to hold people accountable, have simply become talking points for whoever.

In order to bring down the gates, you simply must BECOME part of the gate?  Since when?

Follow me along…

Digby over at Hullabaloo is considered one of the better bloggers.  So, imagine my surprise when I read this article about Independents.  There are quite a few quotes I am going to deconstruct out of it, so, no teasers.  

Seriously, go read the article first, then continue on with me…

I turned 42 years-old this year.  I was in Saudi Arabia for Desert Shield in 1990 and inside of Iraq in 1991.  After I left the military in 1996, I spent six years in law enforcement.  Like other military members, and other law enforcement officers, I did a dangerous job fraught with personal health perils in order to serve other Americans.

As many who know me, or, who remember my DK diaries, you know that my health hasn’t been the best these past few years, and, because of it, neither has our financial situation been the best.  

So, for my essay tonight, I’m going to follow Keith Olbermann’s special comment with one of my own…

You knew it was coming when the response to the GOP became, “What would Jesus do?”

It’s well known that Jesus was a liberal socialist, wanting to help and feed the poor, taking away from the “tax collectors” of the church, and sympathizing with a prostitute.

Well, the Conservative Bible Project believes that the Bible is too “liberal”.

Liberal bias has become the single biggest distortion in modern Bible translations. There are three sources of errors in conveying biblical meaning:

   * lack of precision in the original language, such as terms underdeveloped to convey new concepts of Christianity

   * lack of precision in modern language

   * translation bias in converting the original language to the modern one.

Of these three sources of errors, the last introduces the largest error, and the biggest component of that error is liberal bias. Large reductions in this error can be attained simply by retranslating the KJV into modern English.[1]

Here we go… through the fog…