Liberty and Justice for All!

According to Bayou Buzz, LAGOP Executive Director Matt Parker (Jindal’s homeschooled homeboy’s  brother in law) stated this about Mary Landrieu and her failure to respond to Nagin’s endorsement of Barack Obama:

Today’s endorsement raises more questions than answers.  In a press release announcing today’s endorsement, Nagin cited ‘Obama’s advocacy for the people of

Louisianaand working men and women across the county’ and specifically his work to address the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.   Does Mary Landrieu disagree with Nagin?  Why won’t Landrieu stand up and let Louisianans know why she won’t endorse Obama?”

Say what?!?!?! Mabye Landrieu doesn’t want to take sides. Maybe Landrieu would be happy voting for either of the two Democrats against John 100 years in Iraq McCain. Maybe Landrieu figures that she can be silent in a race where the presumptive Republican nominee didn’t get the most votes in the Republican primary. Maybe Mary Landrieu didn’t feel that she needed to make an anouncement over an endorsement by someone else. Or maybe, just maybe, Mary Landrieu doesn’t feel the need to answer to the head of the party who is trying to unseat her. I would at least go with the last one, though others may be valid as well.

This is just a silly question raised by Matt Parker. Now, is he the voice of Cartman? Or is that Trey Stone? See, I got the names mixed up and even those are better questions than the brainchild of Homeschool’s brother in law.

The idea that Nagin’s endorsement raises more questions than it answers is absurd. I guess the Republicans set the bar low when they chose their executive director.

Last night CBS news presented the results of a survey done showing that 84% of adults “claim a religious affiliation”. Beacuse of this, they claim that:

“In the developed world, this is really the most religious country,” said Fr. Thomas Williams, CBS News faith & religion analyst.

Why are they paying this man? Just because 84% of people claim to be of a certain faith, it does not make them “religious”. Merriam Webster defines “religious” as “scrupulously and conscientiously faithful”. I doubt that 84% of this country follows their religion of choice is a “scrupulous” and “conscientiously faithful” way. One would think (or at least hope) that an analyst on faith and religion would understand this fact.

I would argue that many people who claim to be part of a religion would also say that they do not follow it as well as they should. I would also argue that many people who claim to follow their religion in a scrupulous and faithful way are likely to be wrong. And yes, there are probably people who do claim to follow their faith and do so in a manner that is scrupulous and faithful, however to claim that number is anywhere close to 84% would be 100% wrong.