dagblog - Comments for "Political Paralysis: what would Jesus do?"

The danger in going much

David Seaton — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 05:28:00 +0000

In reply to PS: I did really like the

The danger in going much further would have been in being unnecessarily offensive to many people's religious feelings.

PS: I did really like the

CVille Dem — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:54:37 +0000

In reply to I hoped that this would be

PS: I did really like the Birth Certificate thing, though

I hoped that this would be

CVille Dem — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 23:52:50 +0000

In reply to Political Paralysis: what would Jesus do?

I hoped that this would be more interesting; maybe deeper. It's not your fault, David, that it devolved into a posting seminar. It is your fault that this blog was really simplistic. There were so many places you could have gone with this. Too bad.

Gonna make me stay after

we are stardust — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:01:06 +0000

In reply to What I am interested in is

Gonna make me stay after class and clean the blackboards, Dave?

What I am interested in is

David Seaton — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:29:40 +0000

In reply to What, Huffingtonpost

What I am interested in is NOT, how well he scores with DC's political groupies, but why he doesn't write any good speeches anymore.

What, Huffingtonpost

we are stardust — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:06:54 +0000

In reply to He is actually famous for

What, Huffingtonpost decided? I thought it was Peter Orzag who had that honor...

But then all the supposed hotties that get on Kimmel kinda make me wonder why...

I just went and looked at pix of the dude; naaaaaaah. Must have a great personality.

He is actually famous for

Obey — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:56:36 +0000

In reply to You really remembered his

He is actually famous for being the hottest guy in DC.

Which, when you see him, is kinda sad. But anyhow...

You really remembered his

we are stardust — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:51:34 +0000

In reply to He's been with Obama since

You really remembered his name??

Actually he wasn't that bad

David Seaton — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:40:57 +0000

In reply to No...I just said he great at

Actually he wasn't that bad an actor. You have to remember that he was working steadily as an actor in Hollywood's golden age, nobody who was a bad actor could rack up that many movies in those times. This doesn't keep him from being a crappy president, but fair is fair.

No...I just said he great at

cmaukonen — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 13:44:30 +0000

In reply to No, of course not; but one of

No...I just said he great at giving speeches. Most actors are. But Reagan was a lousy actor both in Hollywood and DC.