Except my pals on the right. Again.
They always have to be bunged up about something and this year, it's Christmas. Apparently, Mike Gallagher, Laura Ingraham and many members of the religious right feel that the evil kook liberals and their pals in the ACLU (Asshole Commies Leftly United) are HIJACKING THE HOLIDAYS. And, by gum, they want to put the Christ back in Christmas.
John Gibson, talk show host on Fox News, has even written a book about it entitled, "The War on Christmas: How the Liberal Plot to Ban the Sacred Christian Holiday is Worse than You Thought."
John, Laura, Mike and company want to make sure that, this holiday season, the only celebrating to be done is by Christians. After all, who are more important than Christians? They are the only ones going to heaven, y'know.
How dare the companies and retail operations in these blessed United States meekly wish people a Happy Holidays when they should just come out say Merry Christmas! Thinking of actually acknowledging another person's cultural beliefs is outrageous, egregious and downright un-American.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., wants the "Capitol Holiday Tree" in Washington renamed the "Capitol Christmas Tree." Bishop Phillip Davis is urging his congregation at Nations Ford Community Church in Carolina to boycott stores that leave Christmas out of employee greetings, ads and holiday displays -- or ban Salvation Army bell-ringers. People like these and others have warned us of the coming onslaught of leftist commies that will destroy us all in the end.
They have even gotten to Wal Mart. Wal Mart! The great bastion of conservatism. To our left we see a warrior of Christ trying to defend himself in the face of the Luciferian onslaught."'Happy Holidays' and 'Season's Greetings' are not a substitute for 'Merry Christmas,"' said Manuel Zamorano, head of the Sacramento, California-based Committee to Save Merry Christmas, which organizes store boycotts over holiday advertising."Christmas is the holiday and 'Merry Christmas' is what we want to hear," he said. "It's political correctness gone amok."
That's right, Manuel. And it's all the ACLU's fault. They have gone crazy with that trying to protect all that Bill of Rights baloney. I am shocked, I tell you, SHOCKED that they even exist. All this talk of equality is making me sick. What happened to the good old days of making fun of the Jewish kid because he didn't believe in Santa?
"Every time you say 'Happy Holidays,' an angel gets AIDS," warned Jon Stewart, host of the Daily Show. And it's true. God is angry with all of us for not believing in him anymore. We have even done the unthinkable: held Tom DeLay, Bill Frist and others currently under indictment accountable to the law. How dare us!
So, this year, as you settle in to your favorite chair wearing you red sweater and drinking egg nog, remember that your pals on the right will be there to shove their version of the holidays down your throat and make you believe in Christmas the way Jesus did: spending large quantities of money on material things
16 comments:
I'm so tired of everyone's political correctness! At the end of a League Volleyball Match last week I said "Merry Christmas Everyone" as I was walking to the door. One of my team mates said in a VERY SNOTTY TONE "I'm Jewish!" I replied "So What!? All you should have said was 'Happy Hanukah!' "
I mean what's the big deal!? When I give my religious greeting, fire yours back. I don't care if you say Happy Satan Worship Week! I'll ask for God's blessings on you, and you can bless/curse/hex me back in what ever fashion suits you...that's what our soldiers died for isn't it? The Right to have faith in what ever we believe.
When I say Merry Christmas I am not trying to convert you or poke fun at your heathen religion. I'm merely giving you the most heartfelt wishes for a wonderful holiday...one that I have fond memories of my whole life long. I wish for you the Joy that I have experienced this time of year in years past.
The ACLU acts as if I am forcing upon you my God! HEY! The Protestants have come a long way from "We Are All Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God"
I’m not one of the strong supporters of their cause but I do see where the Christians are coming from. Perhaps someone on here can tell me why, at my own mothers workplace in Illinois, state government workers are now forbidden from saying the words “Merry Christmas” while at work? Other examples are everywhere - one New Jersey school banned even instrumental versions of traditional Christmas carols and Arizona school officials ruled it unconstitutional for a student to make any reference to the religious history of Christmas in a class project despite Hanukkah and Kwanza decorations proliferating public schools everywhere in the month of December. Aren’t those religions? One Michigan family was told they could not display a nativity scene on their own lawn. After being threatened with fines by the city if they did not remove it, they contacted the Thomas More Law Center and basically told the city to shut the hell up. They won their case. Pick up a copy of my co-workers child’s school calendar and you will not find the word “Christmas” anywhere as it has been replaced with “winter recess”. So now it’s the “winter recess” as if people worship winter…and there wouldn't be a winter recess if there wasn't Christmas at that time of year. However, you will find references to Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur in that very same calender. If a Muslim mosque can air their prayers on the streets of Chicago and Detroit (like they already do via a loud speaker) then why can't Christians have a nativity scene on their own lawn? You asked about equality?
The right wing radio hosts wouldn’t have much to talk about if some people would quit giving them ammo like the ACLU lawyer who, on his lunch break earlier this month, inspected a Christmas tree that had been set up in the Pennsylvania state capitol and found, among its thousand ornaments, three that were cross-shaped. He then promptly filed suit against the state. The fact that 90% of Americans would not consider such lawsuits over something so trivial is proves that the left are the ones who are bunged up.
Do I have a problem with the shrill coming from a very small minority of hypersensitive Americans who insist the majority change because some might be "offended"? Not really – just need a few questions answered.
So when a Christian wants to display their beliefs on their own private property in Michigan, even in the smallest way possible, the libtards jump up and down about it. My question is, how are people supposed to respect your beliefs if you don't respect Christians beliefs?
We live in a predominantly Christian nation. We have a federal holiday based on the philosopher Jesus. Deal with it. Nobody is shoving anything down your throat. Nobody is saying that only Christians can celebrate this time of year – it is the “tolerant” left who are telling people what they can and can’t say at their workplace or schools – defenders of freedom of speech my ass. It isn’t about “acknowledging another persons cultural beliefs”, it is about the left telling people how they can or cannot express themselves, like the lawn ornament BS in Michigan. Polls annoy me anyway but have you seen the polls on this issue? Right next to a certain job approval rating going up.
Hallelujah, it's a Christmas miracle! I've seen the light! Up until now I've never believed that there is a higher power....Now I know that I've been mistaken all along. There truly is a force greater than I in this universe - Markadelphia's liberalness. Only he could tie together "the war on Christmas" and Tom DeLay.
Hey, as long as we're expending the energy to strike Christmas from the recordbooks, let's go ahead and do away with:
** 4th of July. We wouldn't want to offend the undocumented immigrants out there.
** Thanksgiving. Clearly offensive to the indigenous people. As a white person, I'm actuely aware of the need for me to atone for the sins of the white devils that came before me. Not sure if there's an expiration date on that atonement, but I suppose that's for a higher power to determine.
** President's Day. After these dark, dark years under GWB, this conservative holiday is clearly offensive to the liberals.
** Mothers Day. Clearly offensive to those children being raised by gay male couples.
** Fathers Day. Ditto (in reverse).
** Easter. This should be a no-brainer after the clear case being made against Christmas. That White House Easter egg hunt needs to stop!
** Veteran's Day. You can't tell me I have to honor the troops. (But I still support the troops! Go USA!)
** Columbus Day. Here's another no-brainer. Clearly a white-oriented holiday that is completely insensitive to the plight of the indigenous people. Not to mention the disgrace of slavery that followed.
** Memorial Day. Don't even get me started on this repression-fest.
I'm assuming that if I call 1-800-IMOFFENDED that I will be connected to an ACLU representative that can address my concerns? I'm not exactly sure which one of my rights is being violated by the celebration of these holidays, but I'm sure the ACLU will scrape up something for me.
In the meantime, I'm definitely participating in the boycott of stores as called for on FNC. Yeah, yeah....I know they never did actually call for a boycott, but my left-wing rag says they did, and that's reality enough for me. If 90% of the country wants to hear wishes of happiness on a certain day of the year it doesn't mean that I have to have my shopping environment contaminated with such offensive and insenstive cruelness.
God bless....no, wait. Thank the lord for....oh, no. Um, wait. Let's see. Ah, I've got it.
The ACLU rocks!
To Crab's comments....thanks for bringing up the Thomas More Law Center(recently smarting from their intelligent design defeat yesterday in PA). They will be the topic of my first column of 2006 entitled, "The Most Dangerous People in America."
Any private company has the right to do whatever the fuck they want. Conservatives remind me of that all the time. They ban Christmas..it's gone. Sorry. It's their right.
As far as the public thing goes, all religious references should be banned. No Hannukah or Kwansi or anything else. If there are communities that allow that but don't allow Christmas, then it's wrong.
I supsect, however, that your statements are exaggerated and over generalized versions of small pockets of idiocy in this country. Classic right wing thinking again...."They's a comin to get Christmas."
Funnily enough, Jesus wasn't even born on Christmas. Roman leaders decided to change the celebration to coincide with traditional a Roman gods day (Dec 25th) so all could worship on the same day.
As far as GW's rating going "up" to 47 percent or whatever...it went from the basement to low so...whoo-hoo, break out the boiling kettle drum and have a clam bake if you want. And it also helps that the White House's new policy, changed from "I'm right-mistakes and facts, what are those again?" to "We will now humbly eat some shit and let the media grill us because, gosh darn't we did fuck up a couple of times" has done well.
As far as the ACLU diatribe by PL, well, since the organization was created to defend the Bill of Rights, I guess you are against the Bill of Rights.
I am absolutely against the Bill of Rights for which the ACLU often fights. Blind aherence to language written hundreds of years ago doesn't interest me. If that makes me un-American, so be it. (Gee, and I thought I was being progressive. I can never tell the difference....)
The ACLU also defends things like Nazi marches, Communist activists, and anyone else who's leanings may be less than pleasant or even so far in the minority it's silly.
But they are essential. Imagine a country without them and you have Iran or Saudi Arabia. I sometimes think that, in the current political climate, that's what people on the right want. They want to allow the goverment to monitor them, without a warrant, in the interest of national security. Huh?
What happened to the conservatives that I knew and loved? The ones that called the government "jack booted thugs." Where are they now? Lining up to give up their civil liberties and saying it's OK if the Patriot Act has several provisions in it to confiscate guns without cause. What happened to "from my cold dead hands?"
Stop listening to talk radio, drinking the Kool Aid, and believing the lie that the ACLU is forcing gay Muslim transvestites to educate your child.
In the end, the ACLU will be more of a friend to the right than the left. Mark my words....
Regarding the Thomas More Law Center, I had actually never heard of them until I read about the Michigan case. So they lost a case recently, big deal. I'm sure they win some and they lose some, just like a sports team.
I can't find where I talked about any company banning Christmas. I'm talking about people telling other people what they can and cannot say. Remember Freedom?
No, the statements that were exaggerated were the ones stating that "the only celebrating that can be done is by Christians" and conservatives "not acknowledging other people's cultural beliefs". Not sure how the State of Illinois banning government workers from saying Merry Christmas at work can be interpreted as Christians not acknowledging other people's cultural beliefs. Come to think of it - those 2 situations aren't even in the same hemisphere.
I'm not having a clam bake - just pointing out that it is front page news when it is low and when it goes up it conveniently isn't discussed. Could be that the dems opening up their mouths is causeing it to go up with statements like "We can't win the war in Iraq". Way to support the troops there Dean and Kerry.
Where are all the conservatives? Well last year around this time they were busy winning elections. Feel free to talk about how uneducated our country is, how the GOP has a good marketing strategy, how they play on fear, and so on. Focus on everything except the message coming out of the Democratic party and lefties in general.
The reasons rest on everything else but the message.
Speaking of the government monitering people, I was listening to Garage Logic on the way to the gym on Tuesday and a 3rd generation military man called in. He said his father was a WWII veteran who was stationed in Panama for a while because ships were being sabatoged by our enemies during the war. He sent a letter home to his wife and it arrived with several sections blacked out. FDR's government had obviously been reading the mail and had blacked out his writings that gave away troop positions and the like. He also talked about how the government secretly listened and monitored an entire apartment complex in New York/New Jersey near the ocean shore because they knew people were communicating with the Germans from there as German subs had sank several ship off of the shore there.
Now declare your hatred of FDR because he did the same thing. I have no problem with people monitoring suspected terrorists in any way they deem fit. If the powers are misused then put it on the front page of every newspaper out there.
Complain about not being able to prevent 9/11, then complain about the tools that are in place to prevent another 9/11. Kind of hard to follow sometimes.
Not sure if my last posting saved....if so, then please disregard this duplication. I had 17 windows open, and apparently my machine didn't like that. Not that what I have to say is even important....still, I hope you'll entertain me. Alas, I can't dazzle anybody with witty cliches such as "drinking the Kool Aid". Too bad, because I know how well those cliches play in cyberspace and over the airwaves.
Since I'm mired in this gruesome real world of ours, I'll just focus on facts. Any organziation that dedicates itself to winning $$$ while pursuing such noble causes as:
** suing to prevent pat-downs while entering a sports stadium
** suing to have the Boy Scouts declared a religious organization
** suing to have a memorial to war veterans removed from public grounds because it had a cross image
** suing to prevent porn blockers from being installed on library computers
** suing a school district after it allowed a coach to hold a voluntary prayer session before a game
** need I go on?
is an organization I don't want as my friend. The fact that they do pursue and win rights for some truly worthy causes doesn't excuse the extraordinary time and money that they waste on bogus causes.
A favorite quote of the lefties currently in circulation with respect to us "giving up our liberties" is from Benjamin Franklin:
Those willing to give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither security nor liberty.
Truly a chilling rebuke of somebody like me who is not the least bit concerned about the prospect of somebody potentially eavesdropping on a conversation of mine if they suspect that I might be about to blow up a building.
But maybe I can take solace in the words of another early leader of this country:
A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means. When, in the battle of Germantown, General Washington's army was annoyed from Chew's house, he did not hesitate to plant his cannon against it, although the property of a citizen. When he besieged Yorktown, he leveled the suburbs, feeling that the laws of property must be postponed to the safety of the nation. While the army was before York, the Governor of Virginia took horses, carriages, provisions and even men by force, to enable that army to stay together till it could master the public enemy; and he was justified.
Thomas Jefferson
Crab, all of the media has been reporting Bush's bump in approval ratings. CNN, MSNBC, Fox, NY Times, Stib, CSM have talked about it all day today and yesterday.
Regarding your WWII reference, if the man was in the service, then of course his letters would be blacked out. They still are today. We are talking about ordinary citizens being spied on without a warrant in the name of freedom. I don't know if that scares me more that or people just going along with it. Where's all your talk of freedom here?
PL,
**The pat downs in question were only being done on "foreign" looking people.
**I used to be a Boy Scout. They are a Christian religious organization. I don't ever recall any troops being of any other faith in WI. Since they are a private organization, the ACLU doesn't have much to say.
**Religous symbols have no place on public grounds. Put them in church where they belong.
**Don't know about the porn thing. I know that porn is blocked on all Hopkins librarys and public computers.
**How many times do I have to tell you? No prayer in school. Voluntary or otherwise. What if you are the Muslim kid who doesn't show up? Do you think he will feel as welcome as the Christian boys that prayed? Have the prayer session in a CHURCH WHERE IT BELONGS!!
You do need to go on. If you think the government is ONLY spying on people who might blow up a building, well, you are not the PL that I know and you have been replaced by an evil doppleganger from the lizard dimension.
I could be an evil doppleganger. I have been feeling out of sorts lately. Of course, it could just be the 17 beers I had last night at the bar before I drove home. Good thing my friends in the ACLU are there to fight against the random sobriety checks.
"As far as the public thing goes, all religious references should be banned. No Hannukah or Kwansi or anything else. If there are communities that allow that but don't allow Christmas, then it's wrong."
Then why not start a thread about that? Instead you chose to start a thread on the REACTION of some conservatives to the problem instead of the problem itself. Ramadan references are tolerated these days but crosses are not...I see where the conservatives are coming from.
Good deal - noone could explain to me the connection between Illinois state government workers not being able to wish each other "Merry Christmas" while at work and seperation of church and state.
Lordy Lordy, all it takes is a few days to get the real truth out...
"CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS -- WITHOUT COURT ORDER
CARTER EXECUTIVE ORDER: 'ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE' WITHOUT COURT ORDER
Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval
Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order"
WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order."
Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes."
Secret searches and wiretaps of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant.
Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order." "
First they frame this as a situation where Bush is spying on "Americans", they try to get us to believe that Bush himself is picking through their garbage and eavesdropping on their conversations.
Meanwhile, earlier this year, Democrat staffers steal the Social Security Number of people like the Lieutenant Governor of Maryland (a black man) so they can pull his credit report on some screwed up smear campaign. The very same snoops who work for the very people that Voted Against the Patriot Act. Logic being, it is ok to snoop on your Political Opponent but it is wrong to snoop on suspected terror suspects when it is an issue of National Defense.
God Bless GWB and Dick Cheney!
Crab,
I suppose it is how you define the problem. To me the problem is ANY religious reference in any public place. I wouldn't tolerate Ramadan at all.
People can still do whatever they want in the privacy of their own home so who cares? Why the incessant need for public displays of religon? To me, that's the real problem. If conservative Christians minded their own business then this wouldn't be an issue.
At my daughter's school, they talk about all the various celebrations at this time of year but do not display religious items.
The Illinois thing....if you are a state employee and you say Merry Christmas to another state employee who is Jewish, Musilm, Hindu then it is their right to not like that. Why not say Happy Holidays and leave it at that? It is a government situation and that's why the separation of church and state applys here.
Your comment earlier about this being a pre-dominantly Christian country is mostly true but changing rapidly. As keepers of the freedom flame, we need to be aware of this at all times when it comes to other people's cultures. And speaking of freedom...
Presidents Clinton and Carter were both wrong as well. You know that the conservative in me distrusts big government power and snooping. It's wrong then and it's wrong now.
As far as the smear thing at the end, well that's just downright funny. Any conservative accusing anyone of smearing should really shut the fuck up.
Besides, I highy doubt that anyone in the Democratic Pary has the balls to run a smear campaign.
I find your incessant need to be free from any religious expression to be the real mystery here. I myself see no problem whatsoever with anyone expressing their faith anywhere as I don't think that constitutes a state sponsored endorsement of their religion.
Stuff I found with regards to the State of the law with regards to spying...
In Fleming v. Page, 9 How. 603, 615 (1850), the Supreme Court wrote that the President has the Constitutional power to "employ [the Nation's armed forces] in the manner he may deem most effectual to harass and conquer and subdue the enemy."
In 1974, the Third Circuit decided United States v. Butenko, 494 F.2d 593 (3rd Cir. 1974), where the defendant was convicted of espionage. The court wrote: “In sum, we hold that, in the circumstances of this case, prior judicial authorization was not required since the district court found that the surveillances of Ivanov were “conducted and maintained solely for the purpose of gathering foreign intelligence information.””
Three years later, the Ninth Circuit decided United States v. Buck, 548 F.2d 871 (9th Cir. 1977), a firearms prosecution. The court said: “Foreign security wiretaps are a recognized exception to the general warrant requirement...”
In 1980, the Fourth Circuit decided United States v. Truong, another criminal prosecution that arose out of the defendant’s spying on behalf of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The case squarely presented the issue of the executive branch’s inherent power to conduct warrantless surveillance for national security purposes: “The defendants raise a substantial challenge to their convictions by arguing that the surveillance conducted by the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment and that all the evidence uncovered through that surveillance must consequently be suppressed. As has been stated, the government did not seek a warrant for the eavesdropping on Truong’s phone conversations or the bugging of his apartment. Instead, it relied upon a “foreign intelligence” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. In the area of foreign intelligence, the government contends, the President may authorize surveillance without seeking a judicial warrant because of his constitutional prerogatives in the area of foreign affairs.” The court also said ”attempts to counter foreign threats to the national security require the utmost stealth, speed and secrecy. A warrant requirement would add a procedural hurdle that would reduce the flexibility of executive foreign intelligence activities, in some cases delay executive response to foreign intelligence threats, and increase the chance of leaks regarding sensitive executive operations.”
Here’s another opinion by the Second Circuit in United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (1984), a terrorism case in which the court, among other rulings, upheld the constitutionality of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which was adopted in 1981. The court wrote: “Prior to the enactment of FISA, virtually every court that had addressed the issue had concluded that the President had the inherent power to conduct warrantless electronic surveillance to collect foreign intelligence information, and that such surveillances constituted an exception to the warrant requirement of the Fourth Amendment.”
That is the current state of the law. The federal appellate courts have unanimously held that the President has the inherent constitutional authority to order warrantless searches for purposes of gathering foreign intelligence information, which includes information about terrorist threats. So if we must engage in a debate on half-measures…I say that after 9/11, any president who was not spying on people calling phone numbers associated with terrorists should be impeached for being an inept commander in chief.
I agree with you that war is a bad thing. But once a war starts, it is going to be finished one way or another, and I have a preference for it coming out one way rather than the other.
I don't really care one way or the other about this Christmas vs Holliday debate. It is a non-issue in my mind. I say let people celebrate and express how they wish. I don't take it personnaly if people wish me a Merry Christmas or a Happy Hanukah or Jolly Solstice or whatever. I take it in the spirit that it was intended and enjoy the fact that the person who offered it is feeling good at this time of year. There is nothing that anyone can do to change the things I believe in, but at the same time, I don't want to repel those whose intentions are to "convert" me. Unfortunately, Christianity has a bad reputation about its followers trying to convert people (on occaision, in the past, at the point of a sword, and some would argue today at the receiving end of a daisy cutter bomb). Once again, it comes down to what has become a mantra of sorts for me which is...why can't people mind their own business? On both sides of the isle? We are arguing about this inane topic when there are people in this country who are illiterate and starving to death. Right now, there are people dying in Iraq because of poor planning and shear stupidity on the part of this administration in OUR name. I would like to see more focus on that and less on whether Christmas will survive the newly realized (apparently) commercialization of Christmas (when did they start adverstising for Christmas this year, September?)and efforts to remove religion from public eyes.
I do find it ironic that Christians seem to think they have the corner on the date. In typical short sighted and egocentric fashion, they seem to believe that it began and ended with Jesus on that day. Never mind the histories of other peoples (some in the very same region) and that fact that one of the predominant symbols of Christmas (the tree) has nothing to do with the Lord or anything even remotely Christian. Like the Romans, the Christians borrowed (plagerized in most cases) from other contemporary and ancient peoples, claimed it for themselves, then conveniently re-wrote history to favor their interpretation and/or their creation of said practice or event. I find it very ironic that the figure of Jesus is the core of much of Christian belief when his life, his example and his reported beliefs are so different from what Christianity became and how it has continued to be practiced.
How a conversation on Christmas led to wire taps is interesting though. I like Crabs research, very impressive. I think that most people are not aware of this history and would have taken steps to prevent it in the past had they known. I detest Bush because of the blatant lies that he tells such as the one in the April 2004 press conference where he says that nothing has changed and that there is judicial oversight on wire tapping, while all the while he was signing off on the CIA and FBI wiretaping citizens of the US. Clearly, that is a lie. A supporter of his policies might argue that it was done to protect us and to gather information efficiently. He is still a liar and once a person tells lies (for whatever reason) there is no reason to believe anything else they say. There is the old axiom that the means do not justify the ends...Kant, I belive demonstrated that in the proof of the moral imperative, but PL might want to ring in on that one. I feel like I need protection from Bush and those that think like him.
Furthermore, I don't want Bush's sort of protection. I think he has done a miserable job of protecting this country and has done a great job of reducing the credibility of the USA along with putting us and the rest of the democratic world in jeopardy by helping to create a growing legion of terrorists. I think his approach was ill-founded on outdated cold war tactics and by boiling the conflict in the region down to Christians vs. Muslims we will live with the legacy of his bungling for many decades to come. He has admitted some mistakes, but so what? They were mistakes that EASILY could have been avoided if he and Wolfowicz and Cheney and Rumsfeld had bothered to listen to anyone else, including the people they hired to do the dirty work. I have no sympathy for him or how history judges him. Like all of his ventures before being president, he has succeeded in becoming a failure and embarassement. If some people in this country want to forgive him because he has come clean on .001% of what he has tried to push through, so be it. They are more tolerant than I. All I can say is that it will be a good day for me when he leaves office. I am sure that he will seal his archives like he did for his father and Reagon so that the truth of his actions can not be evaluated by others.
So lets worry about the gays, the state of Christian holidays. In my mind it is like worrying about splinters on the deck of the Titanic while the iceberg tears a hole in the side of the ship.
MERRY CHRISTMAS, HAPPY NEW YEAR, etc. 2006 is just around the corner, another year of this administration being in charge is almost over.
Wow. I don't think I could have put it better myself. I will chime in on one point, however.
Crab's research is indeed impressive. I don't have a problem with the government spying on potential terrorists. Good intel is how we prevent attacks but remember that most of that should be human intel...guys on the inside. Bush Sr. said that.
I think that Crab is incredibly naive if he thinks that is the ONLY reason the government is authorizing wiretaps without warrants. There is more to this story...don't know quite what yet...but we will see.
Oh, oh. Markadelphia's Spidey-sense is tingling. He knows something is amiss...he just can't put a finger on what that something is. That's the kind of protection I'm looking for!
John - In the classroom and in think tanks, the ends do not justify the means. In the real world, the ends absolutely justify the means...when common morality deems those ends to be for the common good. What's common morality? It's what we say it is. And if your not willing to make that decision, I am.
...once a person tells lies (for whatever reason) there is no reason to believe anything else they say is far too pessimistic a path for me to take through this decidedly imperfect world of ours. I'm sure I'd crap my pants if I knew of the thousands of scenarios that have played out in my life where somebody either told me something to protect me or didn't tell me something (is that a lie?) for the same reason. That doesn't mean I'm going to shut down my sensibilities and distrust all who surround me.
It's a nice thought that we'd all be walking around with a morality calculator in our heads. Never acting except with the noblest of intentions, with the most judicious and productive outcome in mind. While I'd like to think that my actions are largely guided by such concerns, I know that I'm imperfect. (Boy, howdy.) Fighting to instill such morality in everybody else is not something on which I'm willing to waste (in my opinion) my remaining years here on Earth. I'd rather fight the battles I have a chance of winning. Like whooping up on Markadelphia on the volleyball court.....
Post a Comment