Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts

Friday, October 5, 2012

DID MITT HAVE A CHEAT SHEET?



"No props, notes, charts, diagrams or other writings can be used by the candidates; however, they can take notes on the type of paper of their choosing.The candidates cannot ask each other direct questions, but can ask rhetorical questions.The candidates cannot address each other with proposed pledges.Each candidate can use his own makeup artist.No candidate is allowed to use risers or any other device to make them look taller.The Coin Toss: At least 72 hours before the first debate, there will be a coin toss on the order of questioning and closing arguments."
But we all know that rules don't apply to Mitt.  If Bush can get away with a little radio receiver on his back, what's a little cheat sheet in comparison?

Link to video from CBS Chicago.

UPDATE: The Romney campaign says the object was a handkerchief, and another video shows that may indeed be true.   Below is a screenshot from the video.


I offer my apology.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

ODDS AND ENDS FROM THE PRESS ON THE WOMEN BISHOPS DEBATE IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND


From 'When is a bishop not a bishop?' by Nelson Jones in the New Statesman:
The big decision won't be taken until July: this week, the Synod has been debating proposals aimed to protect male clergy who oppose women's ordination from finding themselves under the authority of a female bishop. Rowan Williams, introducing this quintessentially half-baked compromise, spoke today of seeking to respect the "theological integrity" and ensure the "pastoral continuity" of opponents. But his proposal hasn't gone down well with many in the church, who argue that it would make women bishops inferior to their male counterparts; and in any case it doesn't go far enough to satisfy diehard opponents.
So. Defenseless male clergy in the Church of England need protection from the invasion of women bishops into the heretofore all-male, pure line of bishops who watch over them, and Rowan wants the clergy protected.

From 'Fratricidal tensions at the Church of England Synod' by Michael White in the Guardian:
If you think David Cameron frets about his uppity Lib Dem coalition partners and loses sleep over eurosceptic Tory hooligans at Westminster, trot across Parliament Square to Church House this week and weep for a leader with serious problems and conflicting thinktank advice that goes back 2,000 years.
....

In fairness to the Synodistas, both sides were studiously civil and constantly invoked the importance of mutual tolerance and their cherished Anglican heritage, which is strong on inclusivity and diversity. Wishy-washy C of E, as the more authoritarian papal model might put it. The Vatican would have handed this lot over to the Inquisition via rendition the moment it heard a bishop saying "bishops do not dissent lightly from the views of their archbishops".
In her article in the Guardian, titled 'Church of England reaches compromise on women bishops', Riazat Butt summarizes the proceedings at General Synod and makes the most sense for me, although I'm still not entirely clear on the substance of the agreement reached today.
The archbishops of Canterbury and York has avoided humiliation in the Church of England's law-making body, the General Synod, by putting off a split over the ordination of women bishops.

The synod voted against measures that would have given traditionalists the legal right to ignore the leadership of women bishops. The proposal by the Manchester diocesan synod would have accepted that parishes opposed to female diocesan bishops could be ministered by male bishops.

But the synod also rejected an attempt by the Southwark diocese in London to ensure bishops press on with legislation to introduce women bishops.
H/T to Peter Owen at Thinking Anglicans for the links to the press reports.

Thursday, November 10, 2011

WANT HIM FOR YOUR PRESNIT?



Or Herman Cain who says about himself:
“For every one person that comes forward with a false accusation, there are probably thousands who will say that none of that sort of activity ever came from Herman Cain.”
Alas, 'tis true. Folks in the audience at the debate booed the questioner who asked about 'that sort of activity'.

H/T for the two entries above to Adrastos at First Draft here and here.

The folks at FD are on a roll today.