Being Righter than Right

Crooks and Liars looks at Mitt Romney's bid to be more conservative and close minded than the rest of the pack.

''One of the great things about this land is that we have people of different faiths and different religions, but we need to have a person of faith lead the country,'' he said, as the audience gave him a standing ovation.

Hi. GW here. How am I doin'.

Atrios rightly points out that there's a double-standard here. If someone made the statement, "I think we need a Protestant to lead the country," Catholics would (rightly) be up in arms. And if someone said, "I think we need an atheist to lead the country," well, I swannee: it'd be a regular riot. Yet apparently we can just shrug off the opposite case.

I'll leave it to legal scholars to dope out out the ramifications of a candidate apparently disregarding the constitutional requirement that there be "no religious test" for office. I think Romney's just stating an opinion, but what do I know?

Atheists have a legitimate beef with this kind of talk. It only serves to underscore how they are pushed to the margins of political discourse, if not excluded outright.

But John McCain isn't one to be outdone here, even it means flipping over in a maneuver that would make a skilled gymnast blush in jealousy.

"I do not support Roe versus Wade. It should be overturned," the Arizona senator told about 800 people in South Carolina, one of the early voting states.

McCain also vowed that if elected, he would appoint judges who "strictly interpret the Constitution of the United States and do not legislate from the bench."

Legislating from the bench AND end to women's reproductive rights. Wow! That's a twofer.

But he, being the slick dog he is doesn't stop there. Then you have his meeting with creationists to pat them on the back, the abstinence only folks to give them a firm platonic handshake, and on down the line. There is not an area of science, medicine, or freedom he won't slink passed to get to a pandering opportunity. What a guy!