So, should we stop electing Catholics to public office?

One of the great issues of the day when John F. Kennedy was running for President was whether he would be independent of the Vatican. Prior to that, it had been impossible for a Catholic to serve as president because of the fear, stoked by Protestant bigotry, that the Holy See might use its influence and the threat of excommunication to coerce a president to act at their behest.  When JFK was elected, we thought that issue had been laid to rest.

Now, the Catholic Church is resuscitating those fears by leaning on politicians to trim their political beliefs to suit the church. The latest chapter, which had been furiously denied by all sides, has now been reported by an Italian newspaper, Il Giornale (via Il Guardiano):

The Vatican has vetoed three of Barack Obama‘s potential nominees as US ambassador amid a growing dispute between the White House and the Roman Catholic church over the new administration’s support for abortion rights and the lifting of a ban on stem cell research.

Vatican sources told Italy‘s Il Giornale newspaper that among those rejected were Caroline Kennedy and two other Roman Catholics who were unacceptable to the pope because they have publicly stood against church dogma.

The conservative Il Giornale described the vetoes as part of a “trial of strength between Barack Obama and the US church that involves the Holy See”, amid uproar among the church’s hierarchy after America’s principal Catholic university, Notre Dame, invited the president to give an address and receive an honorary degree next month.

Catholic candidates need to be asked whether their first loyalty is to the United States or to Rome.

Governor Goodhair threatens to secede

Jed Lewison at dKos has the story.

Every time I think the Republicans can’t get stupider, they prove me wrong.

Please: tell me in what way has the federal government become more oppressive than it was six months ago.

(via Johnny Wendell of KTLK)

Why Norm’s Chances Were Always Slim At Best

From the Minnesota Independent:

Coleman’s equal protection argument is “not trivial,” writes Guy Charles, a University of Minnesota law professor temporarily teaching at Duke University:

But as judges and legal academics like to say, that argument proves too much … Unfortunately for Coleman, his prospects always depended upon a miracle. He wanted before and wants now more ballots to be counted. But the more ballots that are counted — by election officials, the Canvassing Board and the trial court — the better Al Franken does.

Nate Silver said much the same thing last week:

The Gathering Storm!

Just perfect:

From the fine folks at Shoot the Messenger and Wake Up World.

Dismissed. With. Prejudice.

I was wondering what was taking the Election Contest Court so long to issue their ruling in the wake of the final vote count last Tuesday. Now I know why. They were crafting a 24-karat platinum boot to be sent upside the head of Norm Coleman:

Eat it, Norm.