A couple of comments from the comments section of
this Politico article... An interesting article, by the way. Reminds me of how people try to boil down a baseball game into stats and box scores. Of course, over time, the stats that are considered relevant tend to change as well. Can we perform a calculus to determine how this change is changing? Of course we can. And then we can make forecasts and strategies ad nauseum. But the mind tends to lose sight of the metaphors at work fairly quickly. Like xeroxes of zeroxes. Soon whole communities are engaging in whimsical rituals of error, from which I quote but a few:
"Of course I under[stand] the constutional law. I learned last night some new info from MoneyRocks with Eric Bolling about this community center/mosque. FIrst this Iman has been forwardly honet with the 9/11 families. He throws up a legal barrior to hide his investors. Which makes him more dubious and questionable. Second this so called community center is closer too ground zero than just two blocks. Also the imam has been dodging the press on interviews on this vary subject. Two things the American people want to know is this: why this location and where the funding is coming from. Now just who are his investors? Why are they hiding behind the law? Now I understand the Vatican Bank not revealing there funds but this one is completely different. Now this Imam who wishes to show goodwill,now who and what is he hiding?"
I love the exciting usages of "now" in this one. Keeps you attentive, sounds conversational. Very engaging. This next one's a little more caustic:
"The cabal of Islamic Muslim nations is trying to invade the US and other countries, that have religious tolerence.This is something nobody seems to realize. Our country was founded to seperate religion and state, Muslim nations were founded to combine religion and state. Our shiria, socialist president says he has been looking for a church. Maybe we could build him a mosque down the street from the Whitehouse."
...Almost workman-like. Efficient, but rough. Still, it hits its dramatic marks pretty well. And it keeps you moving, like a lawyer or a pastor. Ends with one hell of a one-two punch! So if you weren't completely sure, that final, awkward show of cleverness should push you one way or the other. I wouldn't be surprised if the author made a few dollars on this one, although it'd be less surprising if the guy he copied it from was actually the one getting paid. Sometimes it's a payment enough to be heard.
It can be lonely out there. But there is hope:
