I hope it is no secret that I am under-political. Maybe that is why I always find it so curious that American religionists are also highly likely to be just as politically and ideologically minded as they are theologically persuaded. That Constantinian association makes me wonder for hours on end. After all, why aren’t religionists known for their views on sign language? The Bible makes reference to deafness, so why no immediate religious association with one side or another on this one? The last time I was on the campus of Gallaudet the hands were a-flyin’ over whether American Sign Language was the right school of communication or, some other one, I don’t know, I was paying as much attention to the in-house fight as I do to that of Constantinians and evangelicals. Plus, I understand sign language as well as I do culture wars.
But I digress. I point out my being an under-realized ideologue so that this post isn’t read to be a political comment. Don’t get me wrong, I surely have my politics and views. But I just found Slate Magazine’s Top 25 Bushisms really funny. I have always loved Bushisms. Granted, he has been doing it since 1999, so he should probably be afforded some bona fides. But I am not sure I agree with Weisburg’s ranking. For example, number three, “Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?” should probably be higher for the, ahem, embedded irony (you remember the word “embedded,” don’t you? It was all the journalistic rage in 2003-04).