I say yes, you say no, OR People are Strange

pupmom

"You put your right foot out..."

IllinoisLady

Not to put too fine a point on it, but Ezra Klein is teaching the GOP to fine the 'Non-Existent' President's Sequester Plan on Google. 

Sad to say the finger-pointing just goes on and on......and gets where???? 

 

John Boehner seems to have no idea how the government works. It’s up to his branch – the legislative branch – to pass laws and to make budgets, however he constantly tells the American people that it is President Obama who is failing the country by refusing to do the Speaker’s job. In this case, Boehner and his fellow Republicans repetitively accuse the President of not putting forth a Sequester plan. Obama’s not constitutionally required to put forth any sort of budget plan, but even though it’s not in his job description, he has proposed one. It’s Boehner who is refusing to do his job, all while passing the blame. On Friday’s The Last Word, guest host Ezra Klein and his guest, Chris Hayes, set the record straight.

“I don’t know if this is a failure of reading comprehension or internet searching capabilities or both,” said Klein.

Klein then did a Google search for the White House’s plan, which showed numerous results, including several that showed the President’s actual plan.

Additionally, as Klein pointed out, the sequestration plan is inside the President’s budget (which Republicans also deny exists).

Why do Republicans continue to deny the existence of the plan which is right in front of their faces? It’s simple. They don’t like it. The President’s plan will raise taxes on the wealthy. The American people love that idea. In fact, 68% feel that the President has a “mandate” to do just that. There are fewer political downsides to pretending something doesn’t exist than in voting against the wishes of 2/3rds of the voters.

The other reason they can get away with it is simply because they can. As Speaker of the House, John Boehner is in the position to decide what deserves a vote. Should he decide (which he will) that the President’s plan doesn’t deserve a vote, the plan will be destined for the political trashcan. The plan may literally exist, but figuratively, it’s right up there with unicorns, fairy dust and Dennis Kucinich’s Department of Peace.

Boehner....came  close to the trashcan himself a short time ago and which his curent behaviors.......he just may make it next time around.

 

Jackie

pupmom

Enjoyful

I work closely with an Islamic man who follows Sharia law. A very peaceful, joyful, and hard-working man. He knows just about everyone in our building and they all love him.



What am I missing here?

Enjoyful

Yorkie -



A lot of politicians make policy with their bums, too. I wish it were as orderly and beautiful as a spider's web!

pupmom

E, wouldn't that be nice!

IllinoisLady

For E....just cause I ran across it and thought of you:

Enjoyful

Awwwww pony!! A little horse...hahahaha!

1Athena1

Hee, hee!

Like the humor of my crazy favorite cousin, a.k.a. the man I needed who came over today to put my new piece of furniture together.

Chickadee

Is Sharia law hostile to women's lives and freedom? That's a perception I have but I really don't know and have no idea how to verify that.

CherrylH

Chickadee, I'm not sure. But my guess is that it's no worse than what some Republicans are wanting American women,Christian and otherwise, to endure.

Chickadee

Yeah, not thrilled with those guys for sure. I assumed(yeah I know) that Sharia law had something to do with preventing girls from going to school, generally treating women like chattel, etc. I figure if I try to google it I'll get lost in websites that have an axe to grind and don't want to do that.

Wabbit

I was curious too.  Found this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia  It is heavy reading but interesting.  As with most things the application of it seems to depend on the culture of the community involved.  Not really what I expected to tell the truth. 

GatorGal

Wabbit, Will be reading the Sharia discourse tomorrow. Looked at the outline and decided it was way too long to read tonight. It's been an interesting few days with lots of great quotes, links to some great "fictional" reading, and interesting fashion! I dressed up with a pink duck tape bracelet my grandson made me today! LOL!

1Athena1

I searched out the most right wing source in the US that could be reputable and I came upon.....the CIA World Factbook.

Sharia law is described thus (my italics):

Islamic Law - The most widespread type of religious law, it is the legal system enforced in over 30 countries, particularly in the Near East, but also in Central and South Asia, Africa, and Indonesia. In many countries Islamic law operates in tandem with a civil law system. Islamic law is embodied in the sharia, an Arabic word meaning "the right path." Sharia covers all aspects of public and private life and organizes them into five categories: obligatory, recommended, permitted, disliked, and forbidden. The primary sources of sharia law are the Qur'an, believed by Muslims to be the word of God revealed to the Prophet Muhammad by the angel Gabriel, and the Sunnah, the teachings of the Prophet and his works. In addition to these two primary sources, traditional Sunni Muslims recognize the consensus of Muhammad's companions and Islamic jurists on certain issues, called ijmas, and various forms of reasoning, including analogy by legal scholars, referred to as qiyas. Shia Muslims reject ijmas and qiyas as sources of sharia law.

More here:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2100.html

****************

Here is what those useless commie pinkos from the Center for American Progress (sarcasm oozing) have to say about sharia, and in response to the report initialy making allegations that were misleading:

Most academics studying Islam and Muslim societies give a broad definition of Sharia. This reflects Muslim scholars struggling for centuries over how best to understand and practice their faith.

But these specialists do agree on the following:

• Sharia is not static. Its interpretations and applications have changed and continue to change over time.
• There is no one thing called Sharia. A variety of Muslim communities exist, and each understands Sharia in its own way. No official document, such as the Ten Commandments, encapsulates Sharia. It is the ideal law of God as interpreted by Muslim scholars over centuries aimed toward justice, fairness, and mercy.
• Sharia is overwhelmingly concerned with personal religious observance such as prayer and fasting, and not with national laws.

Any observant Muslim would consider him or herself a Sharia adherent. It is impossible to find a Muslim who practices any ritual and does not believe himself or herself to be complying with Sharia. Defining Sharia as a threat, therefore, is the same thing as saying that all observant Muslims are a threat.

The CSP report authors—none of whom has any credentials in the study of Islam— concede this point in several places. In the introduction they say, “Shariah is a reference point for a Muslim’s personal conduct, not a corpus to be imposed on the life of a pluralistic society.” Yet the rest of the report contradicts this point.

.....

The “Sharia threat” argument is based on an extreme type of scripturalism where one pulls out verses from a sacred text and argues that believers will behave according to that text. But this argument ignores how believers themselves understand and interpret that text over time.

The [my bold] equivalent would be saying that Jews stone disobedient sons to death (Deut. 21:18- 21) or that Christians slay all non-Christians (Luke 19:27). In a more secular context it is similar to arguing that the use of printed money in America is unconstitutional— ignoring the interpretative process of the Supreme Court.

More here: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/religion/report/2011/03/31/9175/understanding-sharia-law/

Momine

Chickadee, I would not want to be a woman and live under Sharia. It has to be said though that many kick-ass women do just that and seem none the worse for wear. At the time of Muhammed, Islam was progressive in its treatment of women, by the standards of the time and place (must have been a pretty scary place).

Sharia-based daily living is similar to other kinds of fundies, and none of those is appealing to me, as a woman.

As for not sending girls to school, female circing and all kinds of other bad practices, they are usually local traditions and not based in Sharia or the Quran. However, the people doing these things will insist that it is part of Islam, so in that sense, one can say it is. But there is absolutely nothing in the Sharia that would prevent women from being educated. There is also a large movement in the Middle East of women who are educating themselves and each other in ... Sharia. This is not an area where simple conclusions can be drawn, and it is interesting how, in the West, left and right meet in their denouncement of islam, based on "progressive" arguments.

Momine

This site has some very informative and interesting clips about neo-religious women in the Levant.

http://www.veiledvoices.com/content/sneak-peek

bluedahlia

There is a major blackout in them thar parts!

bluedahlia

Most of my neighbours are from the east and middle east and the average household income here is $250,000 per annum.  The houses range from $600,000 to $2,000,000.  Very Peaceful neighbourhood!  And when the lights are on someone is always home!

P.S.  Our household income brought that average down substantially!  hahahahahha!

1Athena1

Blue, you are too funny!

Momine, excellent post - and I saw that story - thanks! Wish the exhibit would come to DC.

lassie11

I just had a thought. What if those who fear the implementation of a fictitious form of Sharia law in the US are on the wrong track completely?

Maybe instead of fearing  a group who primarily live far away, they should fear the nearest big neighbour - Canada. What if some of our laws were imposed? There would be gun laws, bilingualism, no capital punishment, abortions and universal health care to name a few. Even with our conservative Prime Minister, we have been able to keep those features of our country. Our Federal goverment sometimes trumps provincial rights. We have Federal and Provincial elections with standard forms, criteria, voting days and no room for gerrymandering (except a few tricks the Conservatives learned from Republicans). It might be a frightening possiblity.

Momine

Athena, I am thinking of flying in for that exhibition, lol. You at least can just pick up the train. I love the DC-NY train line. I am pretty sure the Met has one day a week where it is open late. You could take an early train from DC, have lunch in NY, see the  exhibit and take a late train back.

1Athena1

I am seriously considering it.

Momine

I hope you go for it. Life is too short to miss the good stuff. I meant to go to Paris to see it when it was there, but then just didn't have the window of time for it. If my husband has to go to the US anyway before May, I will go along so I can see it.

1Athena1

Milan Fashion Week is still here. Very interesting collection from Dolce & Gabbana. The two co-creative directors (Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana) are Italian to their very soul, often featuring aspects of Sicilian and other southern Italian life, with a high fashion twist and superb tailoring. This collection, with its stunning fresco-like fabrics, is timely given what is going on in the Vatican. It is a fest of sex and religion, and you also can appreciate their incredible skill with lace:

The disturbing part to me is how often they play with the whore-Madonna complex, but they are also parlaying a strong cultural current in doing so:

There is always some Milanese sophistication (one of them is Sicilian, the other is Milanese - I forget which is which):

Boy, those head accessories. They really know how to make a show.

To me, the Dolce and Gabbana woman is always playing a familial role - either mother or daughter. Sometimes, just the lengths of the skirt and the movement of fabric can tell you who is who:

Versus:

Just when I think I have these two figured out, they amaze with their range. I think the show was today - looking forward to reading the reviews. I'd love to see the literature (in the show program the designers will have a piece explaining the inspiration and intent).

1Athena1

ETA: Gabbana and Dolce take a well deserved bow:

IllinoisLady

Blue...that is too funny.  As always I'm relying on those of you here who can find the right information ( trusted sources ) so I can learn.  I have and had little awareness of Islam.  I always started though ( as simplistic as it may seem ) from the premise that if you are sane to begin with, most people actually ( allowing for cultural customs ) want nearly the same thing. 

Lassie...you have a very good point.

I think in the main, the people who want 'less' government are going to see bogeymen, point fingers and otherwise give into hysteria on very little evidence.  That a shame.  Some bright, intelligent people, but as long as you focus on everything that looks threatening, that is all you will get. 

Jackie

IllinoisLady

Loved the fashion show today.  First ones were a bit too "busy" for me, but the ones towards the end ( longer styles )  were really just about right.  The last ones for tall, think -- oh, yeah, maybe young too were excellent. 

Jackie

Momine

Athena, those look like the Ravenna mosaics, and the tiaras and jewelry are clearly sourced from Byzantine prototypes as well. Not sure my poor husband would approve of Jesus being splattered on a dress.

The plain tweed things remind me so much of things my mother wore in the 50s and 60s.

Checked Ravenna, but on second thought, it is probably Palermo that is the inspiration here:

1Athena1

Yikes - your DH would have a turn if he saw these, yes!

There are just so many iconic illusions. The lengths are very fifties and sixties, yes. They span several decades and continents in this collection. It's amazing. I wouldn't wear many of the looks, but they are a treat to behold.