I got the impression --maybe from Miller's more recent talk show on MSNBC ?(more recent than one you describe as being on Fox) --that he was Jewish and that this concern for Israel and the Palestinian situation inclined him to be supportive of Bush-- that he really did have conservative leanings when it comes to some issues like national defense and security. You stopped short of saying for sure that the baby sitter knows it's all a sham. Is that what she said? I actually think he's much nicer now in his humor than back in his nasty liberal days. I remember him from then, also. Maybe he got converted! and saw the light!
Say, we had a chance to meet Al Franken in Holland area once; he was visiting some tv producer friends of my husband (the tv writer/producers' parents are his patients) --but we had a conflict. Which is fortunate --i can't stand anything political that he says like you can't stand Coulter.
Listen, that guy involved in the scandal with a student --was never considered to be scandalous by the social liberals in his subsequent school district --it was perfectly ok what he did--or at least ignored and not held against him. In fact, he was exalted as a retired teacher. I really DID suspect LD was he at first --REALLY --until he said he had a wife --and I was jabbing at him, after the fact, I admit, because of his outrage over everything said against homosexualtiy. Could he be that guy after all? And yet, he was critical of the Catholic church for harboring their wayward priests --and then on the other hand, chortling to hear that Baptists had some accusations in their ranks,as well. In retrospect, I figured his criticism of the priest cover-ups WAS evidence that he wasn't that other liberal democrat who took up with a guy student as a teacher in Catholic h.s. seminary.
My criticisms of that lifestyle and concern that our kids not get mixed up in it -- are simply legit --even without the religious perspective. I know that's not politically correct to say --but it's hardly the view of a lone ranger. So you need to consider what is being said and refute it with something other than mere outrage and indignation.
The story about Rosie o donnel's conversation with her boy is very telling --Rosie adopted a child who wishes he could know his daddy --have a daddy. But he can't because Rosie told him she was the kind of mommy who wanted a mommy (said on Today -type show, I believe --some talk show --with Diane Sawyer, I think --not sure)
She shouldn't be adopting. There are hetero couples who want babies and can give them both a mom and dad. They should be given preference --any studies show that kids who have both their bio mom and dad (or even adopted mom and dad) do better on all social indicators, on the average, than kids struggling with marital break up and never-married parental situations, step-parents, etc. That's not an indictment or blame --it's a recommendation that we try to have stable hetero marriages for the sake of kids. That we put kids' needs first when it comes to adoption priorities.
Microdot said...."A Barb must protect it's existence and if all else fails, smear the character of the challenger and out and out lie!"
You challenge me often and now you say I didn't smear YOUR character but LD's. And what were the lies?
Your example is not one. the reason you thought I disappeared from the discussion was not for a lack of response; surely you know I am never at a loss for words or retort --I went to a daytime concert on a saturday in Indiana and had church the next morning, a choir practice, Sunday company, a class to teach, etc.--and I just wasn't at the computer that weekend.
No, I don't think of this like a game with fantasy creatures --though it's hard to believe there are such unhappy, exciteable, sensitive, yet vitriolic souls all gathered in one place as here!
I still would take you to dinner --I still would share my chocolate --I am the truly happy soul on here --and marvel that others can't be just as tolerant and friendly as I am!