A Sunday Assortment

1. "No Religious Test"

J. P. Travis declaims on a religious imbalance that worries him:

Something is terribly wrong with our nation. Much as I like Romney and plan to vote for him, it worries me that the top level of leadership, in all three branches of government, does not reflect the religious preferences of the majority of Americans.

First of all, some facts: nearly 80% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. 25% are Roman Catholic, and somewhere between 50% and 55% are Protestants of one type or another. 1.7% are Mormon, 1.7% are Jewish, and other religions are each less than 1%.

So this is overwhelmingly a Christian nation, with a majority of us being Protestants. The numbers aren’t surprising given our history. Early immigrants were often people fleeing religious persecution by the Roman Catholic Church or the Church of England. We are mostly Protestant because that’s who we were from the beginning....

So here’s the point – here’s why I’m saying something is terribly wrong: no matter who wins the presidential election in November, we will have no Protestant Christians in leadership positions in Washington, D.C.

It's going to work out that way from time to time. "No religious test" means no religious test, so Catholics, Mormons, Jews, atheists, etc. can't be excluded from federal offices on the basis of their faiths.

25% of Americans profess Catholicism, yet Catholics were radically under-represented in federal office until about 1960. There has yet to be a Taoist, Hindu, or Buddhist in federal office. We have one open Muslim in Congress (and by my lights, that's one too many, but there's that "no religious test" business again).

I'd worry more about the characters and political convictions of our federal officeholders, and less about their religious allegiances. I'd make an exception for the Gaia worshippers, and another for the self-worshippers, but maybe that's just me.

(On a tangential matter: "Roman Catholic" is not a religion; it's a rite. The religion is Catholic Christianity. There are about twenty rites within Catholicism, but those pertain strictly to things such as the specific forms of ceremonies, clerical garb, and other peripheral matters.)

***

2. "Crazy."

John Hinderaker at Power Line asks and answers a cutting question:

Radio host Peter Schiff went to Charlotte, posed as a liberal and interviewed a number of delegates. He floated a proposal to ban all corporate profits. A number of the delegates thought this was a grand idea; the more moderate ones just wanted to cap profits. You have to see it to believe it....

And they aren’t the only crazy ones. The Secret Service is investigating this delegate’s threat to kill Mitt Romney....

These people aren’t just a little slow, or far too liberal. They are, frankly, crazy.

Well, yes, they are. But are they a dismissible fringe, the majority of Democrats, or the majority of all politically engaged Americans? I could make a good case for that third possibility, but as it would include me, I'll take the Fifth.

Libertarians have often spoken of "the right to ignore the State." It's a pretty concept, which carries an even broader implication: in a polity where the activities of government are firmly confined to protecting the lives, liberties, and properties of the law-abiding, if one wished to ignore politics itself, his position would be entirely defensible, and arguably smarter than that of the politically engaged...or at least, less susceptible to neurosis.

That might be the strongest argument anyone could make for a classical-liberal limited government.

***

3. Obama The Deceiver.

Watch the following video, and decide for yourself whether you would trust this man's word on anything:

At Independent Journal Review, Kyle Becker provides the following summation:

This is a stunning thirteen minute video that shows Obama in his own words, with commentary from mostly mainstream media sources. If this video goes viral and reaches moderate and independent voters, it would be a big blow to the Obama re-election bid.

Like I said in the title, if an undecided voter sees this, it’s over for Obama.

I can't help but agree.

4. Tactical Deployment Of Silence.

The worthy Ace of Spades notes a distinct pattern in the topics that flick liberals on their weenies:

You Can Tell If Something Hurts Liberals By Their Shrill Insistence We Not Discuss It

So, four things we're to not talk about:

1. Obama's convention speech. Who cares about speeches? It's results that matter.

2. Obama's results. Who cares about results? We should be talking about Romney's vague statements about Afghanistan.

3. Obama's declining popularity requiring him to shift his speech from a 70,000 seat arena to a 20,000 seat cafetorium. It was the weather, guys. The night was cool and clear but no one could have predicted such a strange weather pattern.

And now, 4: The jobs report.

Note that these subjects aren't just being shouted down by left-liberal mouthpieces on the talking-heads shows; they receive approximately no attention from the Legacy Media. Thus, we lay bare the Mainstream Media's guideline for what it will and will not cover: anything that might impede the re-election of The Won, The Lightworker, The Messiah, the Czar of all Czars: Barack Hussein Obama.

This year, despite my misgivings, I'll be going to the polls. Stay home out of disgust if you wish, but be aware of the stakes: voting might just be the most effective measure you can take toward your personal survival.