Conservative Corner (my brother, Dan)
Naked and Unashamed (my brother, Scott)
Crazy Aunt Purl
(my friend Laurie)
There's Pie In the Lunchroom
(my friend Chuck)
Too Fat For Ponies
(my friend Sam)
Nashville Junk
(a Tennessean insider)
Dec. 7, 2005
I received a forwarded email from my brother Scott recently that addresses the supposed "war on Christmas" being touted by Bill O'Reilly and John Gibson at Fox News, as well as Jerry Falwell and James Dobson -- leaders of their respective Christian organizations.
Let me preface this by saying that Scott is a good and tolerant Christian who is not offended by "Happy Holidays" or "Season's Greetings" because he knows that his faith is stronger than that. So, his forwarding the email to me wasn't so much an endorsement of the war, so much as the sentiment of the author's religious faith.
Here's the email with my comments (in Christmas green).
Subject: Are you mad about the removal of Christmas from everything?
Please read this . . .
I'm on a "Merry Christmas" mission and I'm in full throttle. My little yellow VW Beetle has turned into a Christmas billboard with Merry Christmas written across the back window. Yes, I've decided to trek off to work everyday on the public highways with a message that seems to offend people.
[Who? I'm as progressive as you'll ever want to meet and I'm not offended by "Merry Christmas." She says the message "seems to offend people" but I've seen no evidence of it.]
At stop lights, I even turn my music up a little louder, and to top it off, I sing along with it. Don't I know that stopping at a red light to roll my windows down only to share the joy of Christmas carols on public streets is a No-No? Don't I fear the Christmas Gestapo and those who would have me remove the written message from my car?
[Again, who? Where is this supposed "Christmas Gestapo?" Aside from city noise ordinances which don't allow you to blast your music no matter what's playing, where is this supposed oppression coming from?]
I'm sorry folks, but the only person I'm concerned about "offending" during this Christmas season is the Lord himself. LEAVE THAT MANGER ALONE! We've allowed the Baby Jesus to be kicked out of His lowly manger, and those offended by Christmas are still not happy.
[Who? Who isn't happy? Who kicked baby Jesus out of what manger?]
I refuse to let this happen. I'm going to do my part to make sure "Merry Christmas" doesn't become extinct. Because like it or not, if the believers in Christmas don't take a stand now, it's gone forever.
[Let's take a moment for a little history lesson:
In 1659, the Puritans of the Massachussetts Bay Colony outlawed the celebration of Christmas:
"For preventing disorders, arising in several places within this jurisdiction by reason of some still observing such festivals as were superstitiously kept in other communities, to the great dishonor of God and offense of others: it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof that whosoever shall be found observing any such day as Christmas or the like, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or any other way, upon any such account as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for every such offence five shilling as a fine to the county."
In 1921, Henry Ford wrote in his book The International Jew: The World's Foremost Problem:
And it has become pretty general. Last Christmas most people had a hard time finding Christmas cards that indicated in any way that Christmas commemorated Someone's Birth. Easter they will have the same difficulty in finding Easter cards that contain any suggestion that Easter commemorates a certain event. There will be rabbits and eggs and spring flowers, but a hint of the Resurrection will be hard to find. Now, all this begins with the designers of the cards.
In 1959, the John Birch Society fired their first salvo against the "god-less UN" by declaring that the United Nations was involved in a plot to take Christ out of Christmas and fill our homes with secular, international, UN symbols.
So the battle cry has been going on for centuries and Christmas is still safely tucked away in the hearts of America.]
Listen folks, the Christian community has been underestimated before; we will have to show ourselves again.
I walked into a Wendy's Restaurant the other day and was rather exuberant with my "Merry Christmas" greeting to the manager. He didn't have much of a response and I said, "Where's your Christmas spirit?" He said, "We're not allowed to use the words "Merry Christmas" when greeting customers. We can only say "Happy Holiday."
[Wendy's restaurants are, for the most part franchised. So if the manager of this store got an order not to say "Merry Christmas" then it didn't come from the corporate office. It came from the owner of the store. It's also a free speech violation. I have no idea if this incident happened or not, but I'm skeptical. Either way, it's certainly not part of a conspiracy to ban Christmas.]
This morning I grabbed a quick breakfast at a Whataburger Restaurant. I noticed there wasn't a single decoration in the store. I asked the manager why they weren't decorated for Christmas. He told me the corporate headquarters decided not to send any decorations to any of their stores, and he didn't know why.
[During my youth, I worked at three different fast food restaurants. Never did the corporate office send Christmas decorations. Individual stores decorated on their own. Again, I can't swear this isn't true of Whataburger, but I do know that no one is required to decorate anything for Christmas. Not in America. That's not evidence of a conspiracy to supress Christmas.]
After I heard about all the Macy's and Federated Stores taking down their Merry Christmas signs
[No. Macy's and Federated stores never put up the signs. They put up Happy Holidays signs. Macy's recently put up Christmas signs as well. The Christmas decorations were up the entire time. This may seem like a picky point, but I'm trying to establish a pattern here.]
the Target stores not allowing the Salvation Army to "Ring the Christmas bells,"
[Okay, this one is true. Target has stopped allowing the Salvation Army to solicit in front of their stores. But according to the corporate office, Target has a long-standing no-soliciation policy and has been making acceptions for the Salvation Army for several years. They discontinued the exception because they felt it opened the door for other groups to demand access.]
and the many incidents of children, choirs, and bands not allowed to play or sing Christmas carols, I realized it was happening right here in my own little Texas town.
[This is part of the right-wing echo chamber at work. The right wing exagerates the the problem by saying the ACLU will sue you if you sing Christmas carols in school. The lawyers for these towns don't want to be sued, so they make recomendations that result in the banning of Christmas programs. But the actual record of the ACLU shows of no incident where they have actually sued to ban Christmas Carols or any other program. In fact, they have always come down on the side of religious liberty. Here's another history lesson:
September 20, 2005: ACLU of New Jersey joins lawsuit supporting second-grader's right to sing "Awesome God" at a talent show.
August 4, 2005: ACLU helps free a New Mexico street preacher from prison.
December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.
November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.
November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.
August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.
July 10, 2004: Indiana Civil Liberties Union defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.
June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.
May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.
March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.
February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.
October 28, 2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church.
July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.
April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.
January 18, 2002: ACLU defends Christian church's right to run "anti-Santa" ads in Boston subways.]
How can this be? Not Texas!
We do, however, have a store, Hobby Lobby, that plays nothing but Christmas carols during the season. On Christmas Day they run a full page ad in our local newspaper. That ad is not to promote the store, but uses the entire page to tell the story of Jesus' birth. Now that's taking a stand. We need to thank them.
[Thank you, Hobby Lobby.]
When I saw a news report the other evening of children being taught new words to a song we've sung for years - "We Wish You a Merry Christmas" - I was saddened to hear "We Wish You a Splendid Holiday."
[My son Max told me several weeks ago about a girl in his class who did not take part in the school's Thanksgiving feast. She told him that if she ate anything during the day, she'd go to Hell.
I explained to him about Ramadan and the Muslim's tradition of fasting during the daylight hours. Is it wrong to wish her a splendid holiday, rather than a merry Christmas? Granted, you can't please everyone and attempts to be all inclusive can sometimes lead to pleasing no one, but "We wish you a Merry Christmas" is a secular carol and even includes a second federal holiday in the lyrics, so why get so bent out of shape?]
I know now that it's just a matter of time that the "Merry Christmas" greetings will be gone. Look around your town. Notice the "Holiday" greetings and not "Christmas." It's happening right before our very eyes.
[Like I've noted before, the claim has been around for a loooong time. "Merry Christmas" isn't going anywhere. But our society is becoming more diverse and there are plenty of non-Christians out there who shop for gifts and the smart merchant is going to want to be inclusive in his or her advertising.]
Start singing the songs; go down the streets of America singing to your heart's content. Get some of those wash-off markers that these kids use to write on their car windows when they're rooting for their hometown football team. It's easy to do, and if a torrential rain washes it off, write it on there again.
[Go ahead. No one is trying to stop you.]
We've got to get this message out. "Go Tell It On the Mountain . . . that Jesus Christ is Born." Sing it, speak it, be a billboard for our Lord.
[Again, no one is trying to stop you.]
The story of this "Baby Jesus" alone has brought about more goodwill at this time of year than any other day we celebrate. How can we sit back and allow Him to be snuffed out of our lives?
[Well, there is Easter, which in many countries is seen as a more imporant holiday than Christmas, but I understand your point. I just don't believe anyone is trying to snuff Jesus out of your lives. You're seeing conspiracies where there are none.]
Is it Jesus, or is it His followers that the "offended" don't like? What kind of revulsion galvanizes one to campaign so vehemently against the mere mention of His name, the mere singing of a carol, or the mere visual of a sign that says "Merry Christmas?"
[Who are the "offended?" Who is campaigning "so vehemently?" I'm not seeing it and believe me, I'm looking. The only ones I'm seeing getting worked up about this are on Fox news trying to sell a book about the "war on Christmas.]
I can listen to my own boss at work use some of the vilest words and follow up with, "Excuse my French." I may cringe inside at his damning of God's name, but I tolerate it.
[Why?]
So if you don't like me wishing you a "Merry Christmas," I'll say, "Excuse my joy." You may cringe that I celebrate the birth of Jesus, but just tolerate it.
[Has this person or anyone else actually been accosted by anyone who was offended by being wished a "Merry Christmas?" I would like to hear from anyone who has encountered any actual example of the intolerance this person claims is out there (but doesn't actually claim to have witnessed herself).]
I cannot be concerned that "Merry Christmas" offends you. If I'm not careful, the day will come when saying I'm a Christian will offend you.
I'm offended that you're offended. How about that?
When we get to a point that we can no longer take part in a tradition we hold dear, we have no choice; we either defend that tradition or we give it up to those who say NO. That's it . . . period. So, which will it be?
[Who? WHO? Who is trying to take away your celebration of Christmas?]
I'm not giving up my "Merry Christmas" joy to anyone. If I know of someone that celebrates another holiday during this time of year, I will be glad to wish them whatever holiday they want. Just tell me what it is and I'll shout it to the world and wish you a grand celebration.
[Then what's wrong with simply wishing everyone "Have a grand celebration!"]
Just give me Christmas. To you merchants: Stop being so hypocritical and "filling your tills" on the back of Jesus!
[Oy]
Who do you think is the symbol of giving at this time of year? It was the wise men bringing gifts to the newborn Christ-child.
You want your coffers full, but have ordered your employees to take down all the Merry Christmas signs.
[Didn't happen.]
If that's the case, I'll buy gifts at a place that understands my joy.
[Which is your right.]
If you're worried about offending someone, you just did. The most recent Newsweek survey shows that 82% of Americans believe that Jesus is the Son of God. So, in trying not to offend a few, you've offended many.
[But what is it exactly that is offending you? That Christmas isn't held above all other religious holidays that coincide around Winter Solstice? You said yourself that 82% of Americans believe in Jesus, so what's the problem? Christmas is safe! Go tell it on the mountain!]
It's okay to jump into the "Merry Christmas" spirit when it fills your cash register, but let's call it something else . . . and don't stop giving . . . and don't stop buying. . . we'll just change the name and you'll never know the difference.
[Or we'll be inclusive and tolerant of those who don't celebrate Christmas by making our advertising and marketing materials neutral with respect to all religions.]
I know the difference and I'm feeling it greatly. It's hard not to be aware that townships across our country have actually banned the singing of Christmas carols because it might offend someone.
[Didn't happen. Townships cannot ban you from singing carols! They can't! It's against the Constitution! You've got a right to practice your religion! Your kids can pray in school! These people who you say are offended don't exist! You cannot point to a single instance where someone came up to you and said you shouldn't sing Christmas carols because it offends them.]
And it's not just the religious songs; it's the secular ones too. No more "Jingle Bells" or "Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer" because they're associated with Christmas. Boy, aren't we getting sensitive?
[Again, where? Where is this happening? It seems like the author is the sensitive one. So senstive she's being offendend by the idea that some unknown and unnamed person out there is offended by her expression of her faith.]
If we're not celebrating Christmas for the hope it gives with the birth of our Savior . . . there is no hope!
I noticed a few years ago that we changed the name of Abraham Lincoln's and George Washington's birthday so as to be all inclusive regarding the Presidents. Hark, if we should recognize anyone as exceptional. Now it's called Presidents' Day.
[Which was done to give federal employees a Monday off. It had nothing to do with Lincoln, Washington or Jesus. Do you celebrate President's Day? Did you celebrate Lincoln or Washington's birthdays before?]
Well, if we're going to be so all inclusive, next month I'll have to refer to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day as Civil Rights Leaders' Day.
[Go for it. It might help take the sting out of the racist hearts that are offended by the federal holiday named after MLK.]
We don't want to exclude great Americans like Rosa Parks or Cesar Chavez, do we? And to think that Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton might be left out.
[Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton aren't dead, so it's unlikely they'll get holidays named after them. This whole section has taken an interesting turn.]
We might need to change Mother's Day, Father's Day, and Grandparents' Day to All Parents' Day. Just lump them all together.
[Everyone has parents and grandparents. Not everyone celebrates Christmas. These are Hallmark holidays and don't actually address religious beliefs.]
It sounds ridiculous, doesn't it? So what's the difference?
[Secular holidays versus religious ones]
My freedom to celebrate Christmas in the tradition of the Christian religion is as much my right as it is your right to be offended by it.
[Who is offended by you celebrating Christmas? You seem to be offended by people not celebrating Christmas the way you think they should. That's pretty offensive. But if you agree that someone has a right to be offended, then why are you offended by the exercise of that right?]
So what are we going to do? Did anyone hear me . . . what are we going to do?
[Uh. . . celebrate Christmas any way you like?]
Do we defend a person's right to go forward with a time tested tradition (how about 2000 years?), or do we defend a person's right to end it all because they're offended? As long as we live in this great land and have the freedom to express ourselves and what we believe in, we will always offend someone.
[I don't want to go into another history lesson, but the celebration of Christmas is hardly 2000 years old. No one is suggesting that you can't celebrate Christmas! Where are you getting this?]
If we try to make everything right for everyone, we won't have anything for anyone.
May you always have Christmas in your heart!
[Right back at you. And I'd add that may you stop seeing enemies where there are none.]
Dec. 6, 2005
This is two days in a row where I had to be in Nashville for an early meeting. Today's was a tour of Schermerhorn Symphony Center -- the new concert hall being built downtown for the Nashville Symphony.
Breakfast was served in the lobby of the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum for the Nashville Advisory Council. Dignitaries made speeches, everyone got a hardhat to keep as a souvenier and small groups toured the facility which is still under construction.
It was a nice event. It allowed people who don't know which end of a hammer is which to wear a big plastic hat with their name on it.
No expense has been spared to make the concert hall fabulous. There's limestone on the outside, marble and exotic woods on the inside.
It has a convertible floor for cabaret-style or raked seating. It has an acoustic isolation joint to keep noise from outside the concert hall itself (even noises within the building) from getting in. It's going to be one of the best music venues in the world.
I walked through with a newspaper photographer, one of the lead acousticians and my boss. He pointed out some interesting technical aspects of the building and I think I may have ruined my suit jacket. All in all, a morning well spent.
I didn't have a lot to do, though. At one point, the boss introduced me as "the man behind the curtain."
"Pay no attention," I replied.
Tom DeLay finally got a judge he liked, sort of. The conspiracy charge has been dismissed, but he must still face the music over his money laundering. Good.
Condoleeza Rice is touring foreign nations assuring the public that America does not torture. So far, not too many are buying the spin. For one thing, much of what American admitedly does (i.e. stress positions, waterboarding, mock executions) is considered torture in other countries. Alberto Gonzales redefined what torture was in an effort to provide us some wiggle room.
So as long as it doesn't cause organ failure, the Justice Department doesn't consider it torture. Which means the U.S. could strap you to a board and hold you underwater until you think you're going to die and that's fine. They can pull out your fingernails. No problem. They can blindfold you and make you believe you're about to be shot. That's okay too.
Bush and his cronies have set America back generations. We supposed to be better than that. That's what I was taught in public school.
And what has it gotten us? John McCain, himself a victim of torture during Vietnam, says torture doesn't work. He proposed legislation which says the the U.S. will not treat it's prisoners to acts that are cruel and inhumane. Bush objects to the language. Cheney says holding the CIA to that standard will tie their hands.
Rice was in Europe yesterday and offered the typical non-denial denial when asked about whether the U.S. tortures prisoners or sends them out to be tortured:
"I wouldn't comment because whether or not we engage in certain activities is a matter of classification because they're intelligence activities, so it wouldn't matter what the answer is; I wouldn't comment."
Thomas Keane, chairman of the 9/11 Commission said yesterday that the Bush administration and the Republican congress have done virtually nothing to make us safer from terrorist attacks. Of the 41 reforms layed out in the commission's report. The one thing that was accomplished? Bush named a national intelligence czar and he screwed that up to by naming Iran/Contra conspirator John Negroponte.
Billions poured into homeland security and what do we have to show for it?
Wrapping up more than three years of investigations and hearings, the former commission issued what members said was their final assessment of the government's counterterror performance as a report card. It gave failing grades in five areas, and issued only one "A" — actually an A-minus — for the Bush administration's efforts to curb terrorist financing.
The five "F"s were for:
_Failing to provide a radio system to allow first responders from different agencies communicate with each other during emergencies.
_Distributing federal homeland security funding to states on a "pork-barrel" basis instead of risk.
_Failing to consolidate names of suspicious airline travelers on a single terror watch screening list.
_Hindering congressional oversight by retaining intelligence budget information as classified materials.
_Failing to engage in an alliance to develop international standards for the treatment and prosecution of detained terror suspects.
The panel, which has operated as a nonprofit group since disbanding last year, also gave the government 12 "D"s and "B"s, nine "C"s and two incomplete grades.
Bush may think these are pretty good grades, but academics was never his strong suit.
Dec. 5, 2005
Intelligent Design proponents are losing the battle for the hearts and minds of America's academics. According to this article in the New York Times, even evangelical Christian colleges are questioning the scientific validity.
The Templeton Foundation, a major supporter of projects seeking to reconcile science and religion, says that after providing a few grants for conferences and courses to debate intelligent design, they asked proponents to submit proposals for actual research.
"They never came in," said Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, who said that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned.
"From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.
While intelligent design has hit obstacles among scientists, it has also failed to find a warm embrace at many evangelical Christian colleges. Even at conservative schools, scholars and theologians who were initially excited about intelligent design say they have come to find its arguments unconvincing. They, too, have been greatly swayed by the scientists at their own institutions and elsewhere who have examined intelligent design and found it insufficiently substantiated in comparison to evolution.
It was an interesting weekend. On Saturday, I helped Dollie fix lunch for a Habitat for Humanity crew, working in the rain and cold. We made chilli and baked cookies for 20 people. Dolls said they really appreicated the warm meal.
My grandfather auctioned off most of his farmland. It's a little sad to see the homestead divided up and parceled out, but it's not like I was ever going to be a farmer. I understand he got a nice rate of return on it.
Here's a brief exerpt from Bush's most recent speech on the war:
The progress of the Iraqi forces is especially clear when the recent anti-terrorist operations in Tal Afar are compared with last year’s assault in Fallujah. In Fallujah, the assault was led by nine coalition battalions made up primarily of United States Marines and Army - with six Iraqi battalions supporting them... This year in Tal Afar, it was a very different story. The assault was primarily led by Iraqi security forces - 11 Iraqi battalions, backed by five coalition battalions providing support.
Here is a report from a reporter who was embedded with Iraqi troops.
I was in that battle (Tal Afar) from the very beginning to the very end. I was with Iraqi units right there on the front line as they were battling with al Qaeda. They were not leading. They were being led by the U.S. green beret special forces with them. Green berets who were following an American plan of attack who were advancing with these Iraqi units as and when they were told to do so by the American battle planners. The Iraqis led nothing.
So, is the president lying to us again?
I read in the LA Times that the U.S. government is paying Iraqi newspapers to run positive stories about the U.S. government. In the old days, that would be called propaganda. What reeks about this situation is that the current rationale for being in Iraq is to bring freedom and democracy to the region.
Rummy has said over and over again that if you need an example to show that Iraq is free, look at their press. They have a free press.
Turns out they don't. How in the heck are we to encourage democracy by undermining it? We hear all kinds of talk about how calling for a plan for troop withdrawals sends the wrong message, but what kind of message does it send when we subvert the supposedly free Iraqi press?
Of course, Pat Buchanan recently said that the real crime here is that someone reported what we're doing. Sheesh.
Here's what the Washington Post said in an editorial:
"In hindsight, maybe it shouldn't be surprising that the Pentagon has been secretly paying Iraqi journalists and news organizations to write and run positive stories about the war. ... But saying it was predictable makes it no less loathsome and damaging to find that the Bush administration has treated the Iraqi press, the Iraqi people and the very idea of Iraqi democracy with even greater contempt."
On Friday, Louisiana Gov. Kathleen Babineaux Blanco released more than 100,000 pages of notes, emails, letters and documents asking for help from the federal government ahead of hurricaine Katrina.
These documents show that the government's line about the state being slow to ask for help is horse puckey. It's called transparency in government and it's something the fed might want to take a look at.
We went to Sonic last night to get everyone a beverage before we went grocery shopping. As always, Max's choice of beverage was a bit unusual.
"What does everyone want?"
"I want a Spwite," said Rozzy.
"I want a sour PowerAde slush," said Max. Now this involves taking a PowerAde (which is some Gatorade knockoff) making a slushie out of it and then adding some sour flavor. For some reason, Max thinks this is great. The chick on the speaker had to get me to repeat it three times.
I tasted it. Blech.
Last week, I took Max with me to the comic book shop for a tourney and let him pick out a beverage from the case. He picked something called "Vault."
"I'm usually cool with whatever you want to do, but I've got to step in here and say no," said Grant, the store owner.
I took a look at this seemingly innocent-looking beverage.
Vault is a Coca-Cola product being test marketed in our area. It should go nationwide in February. They're calling it a "hybrid citrus beverage." It is a combination of hyper-caffienated soda and an energy drink. I read the label and told Max there is no way I'm subjecting the people in this store to his hypermonkey metabolism hopped up on Vault.
The others thanked me.
According to Erowid, Vault has 70 mg of caffiene per 12 oz serving. That's compared to 55 mg in Mountain Dew and 36 mg in Coca-Cola. Red Bull, by the way, has the highest concentration at 115.5 mg. Scary.
Still trying to decide on a new design for the site. I'm also working on getting the archives online and automating as much of this process as possible without just moving the who magilla to Blogger. Be patient.
Dec. 2, 2005
Steve Clemmens writes over at the Washington Note that Babs Bush is royally ticked at Dubyah's staff for betraying him. Rumor has it that she's figuring out a plan to get them all kicked out of the White House.
Good luck with that Bar.
Whenever I talk about Barbara Bush, I'm reminded of my friend Badger who makes the same joke every time.
"Don't talk like that about the father of our country."
Heh.
I read in InSight Magazine (owned by the Moonies at the Washington Times) that Bush has cut Cheney out of the loop on security matters.
I guess the training wheels are off for the Bush presidency.
It's coming -- the next big scandal. Jack Abramhoff is about to flip and when he does, bada bing, bada boom. Justice is looking into Abramhoff's role in brokering jobs at the Capitol. One wonders how a lobbyist gets so much power.
Well not really. It's money. Abramhoff was handing out cash and trips like Bob Barker during a showcase showdown.
"Would you like to keep the golf trip to Scotland, the fur coat, the convertible and the new dinette set or would you like to pass it over to Mr. DeLay?"
That's why we see so many right-wing pundits twisting themselves into knots to describe the "culture of corruption" in Washington as a bipartisan problem. Here's a hint for you. The GOP own Washington right now. The Dems don't have any influence to peddle. That's the sad, sad truth about the current state of affairs.
Maybe that will change next year.
Man, the TiVobligations are piling up. I can't keep up with all the television my TiVo wants me to watch. Add to that the pile of NetFlix DVDs sitting there and I'm facing an entertainment glut.
That being said, I'm still pissed they canceled "Threshold."
Where am I going to get my Carla Gugino fix now? I mean they canceled "Karen Sisko," she probably won't be in the "Sin City" sequel.
[sigh]
Remember that who Texas redistricting thing a few years back? You know, the one where the Dems fled the state in order to deprive the body of a quorum? It turns out the Justice Department believed the whole scheme violated the Voter Rights Act, but senior administration official overrode the decision and allowed it to take place anyhow.
Your government at work.
"The State of Texas has not met its burden in showing that the proposed congressional redistricting plan does not have a discriminatory effect," the memo concluded.
The memo also found that Republican lawmakers and state officials who helped craft the proposal were aware it posed a high risk of being ruled discriminatory compared with other options.
But the Texas legislature proceeded with the new map anyway because it would maximize the number of Republican federal lawmakers in the state, the memo said. The redistricting was approved in 2003, and Texas Republicans gained five seats in the U.S. House in the 2004 elections, solidifying GOP control of Congress.
Bush lit the Christmas tree at the White House yesterday, but as the wingnuts at World Net Daily pointed out, he never invoked Jesus.
"Each year, we gather here to celebrate the season of hope and joy – and to remember the story of one humble life that lifted the sights of humanity. Santa, thanks for coming. Glad you made it. I know you've got a lot of commitments this time of year. By the way, we have a lot of chimneys at the White House if you're looking for something to do."
People are getting oversensitive about the whole Christmas v. other holidays thing. Why would you want to enter that particular fray? I mean complaining about a store using "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas" is so far down my list of things to get worked up about that you can't even see it from No. 146 (they canceled "Threshold").
Yet, you've got that pompous ass Bill O'Reilly trying to stir people up about this nonsense, saying that every business in America should be down on its knees thanking Jesus for being born.
I'll tell that to my friends over at Murdoch Mendelsohn.
I say "Merry Christmas" to people, but I celebrate Christmas. If you don't or you'd rather include those who don't, then bring it on. "Season's Greetings," "Happy Holidays," "Don't Get Run Over," it's all good. The point is that this time of years in one for reflection, peace and for being thankfull for what you've got. Picking fights and claiming victimhood may be all O'Reilly has to do this season, but some of us have to earn some extra scatch so we can buy a kid a Roboraptor.
I'm out. Have a good weekend.
|
Dec. 1, 2005
I'm back at the old homestead and it's good to be home. I've included a comments section at the bottom, so use it or lose it, people.
I'll be shuffling things around as I get my archives back online, so mind the dust and thanks for reading.
President Bush gave what was hyped by the White House as a major new address on the war in Iraq and a strategy for victory. I didn't hear very much in the speech that was new.
One thing I did hear was his admission that the majority of the insurgency aren't terrorists, but are Iraqis that want us out of their country. That, while not a major revelation, is still a giant step forward in the president's rhetoric.
One thing he said that struck me as . . . well. . . let's say unintentionally truthful was that our soldiers deserve a strategy. Well, yeah. They deserved a strategy three years ago. It's a little late to be coming to the table with a strategy, don't you think?
Also, Bush made some assertions which aren't backed up by facts. For example, when he spoke about the different groups in the insurgency, he said they don't have popular support in the country. That's not true. They do have popular support. They've also got the support of the Iraqi government who, at the recent meeting of the League of Arab Nations, said that the actions of insurgents against our troops was justified because we're an occupying power.
Bush pointed out that there were 120 Iraqi battalions ready to fight. But just last September, military leaders told the senate that there was only one battalion ready to fight. That's quite an amazing leap forward in just six weeks. It leads me to believe that he's just making numbers up.
Christmas is coming and I have to say I'm not feeling this whole "war on Christmas" thing that Bill O'Reilly's got everyone so hot and bothered about. Maybe I'm just not overly sensitive to it.
Media Matters points out that, until very recently, the Fox News web site store were selling O'Reilly Factor Holiday Ornaments. The site has been changed to read "Christmas" ornaments now.
Wallgreens put four pharmacists on unpaid leave in St. Louis, Ill. because they refused to distribute emergency contraception to someone with a prescription. The governor established a rule last April requiring pharmacists who stock contraceptives to distribute them.
Good for Wallgreens. These pharmacists need to decide if they want to continue being pharmacists. If I need moral guidance, I'll look to a minister (you can't swing a dead cat in my family without hitting one). If I'm looking for medicine, I'll see a pharmacist. And never the twain shall meet.
If we draw the line here, where will it end? I don't want to go off on a slippery slope rant here, but why is this even an issue?
|