Wow, is CNN’s Rick Sanchez ticked at Fox News! Fox took out a big add saying that CNN (and other news organizations) didn’t cover the Tea Party march in Washington. He tears apart that claim. Interestingly, the photo Fox used in their ad apparently came from CNN’s own live feed of the event.
Sanchez says, “We covered the event. We didn’t promote the event. That’s not what real news organizations do. We covered the event.”
Watch this video. It’s worth it.
Sarah Palin went to communist China and, while America is at war, criticized the US president and our government. I will expect condemnations from Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, and Bill O’Reilly. And from millions of other right-wing conservatives.
Unless they are hypocrites. In which case, they’ll find reason to praise her.
As a Christian, I’m tired of seeing people break laws, both moral and legal, and apologizing with lame statements like:
>Last night, on Jay Leno’s premiere (good start, BTW), I watched Kanye West apologize for his outrageous behavior toward Taylor Swift at that awards show. Perspective alert: this was an AWARDS show. But it was rude, and I wish there could be some penalty beyond gaining more bad-boy cred.
I watched Serena Williams’s terrible behavior toward that line judge in the US Open. It cost her the match, plus $10,000 in pocket change. She ALSO gave a sincere public apology. But hurray that there were actual penalties for her behavior.
Today, Congress votes on a public reprimand for Joe Wilson, the lowest form of censure. I’m sure the right-wing pundit opinion-leaders will decry this, calling it purely partisan. That he said, “I’m sorry,” and that should be enough. I’m sure they would agree that an apology from Serena Williams should have sufficed, too. No additional penalty needed. In fact, let’s play the point over.
Wilson demonstrated outrageous before millions of people. He broke House rules which he had agreed to follow, and dishonored Congress and the President. Yet plenty of Republicans will say “I’m sorry,” is enough, that there should be no additional penalty. If it was a Democrat dissing a Republican president, they would be in favor of censure. But not in this case.
Because their views are not based on principle, but on partisanship.
Perhaps you can guess how I feel about it.
Today, President Obama will spend 15-20 minutes–more than enough time–brainwashing the nation’s schoolchildren. From his perch as the world’s most powerful and influential person, he will tell them to take personal responsibility and stay in school. We should all be outraged, just like our infallible pundit heroes drill into us over and over, day after day, hour after hour, on and on and on as we listen zombie-like, craving flesh. Some minority students who especially look up to Obama may be especially vulnerable to his dangerous message.
Nothing in the Constitution specifically says the President can talk to schoolchildren, just as nothing in the Constitution specifically says a black man can be President, an idea which would have been unimaginable to Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings. If the Constitution doesn’t say it, we shouldn’t allow it. We should be against it, just as Democrats opposed George H. W. Bush’s speech in 1991 to schoolchildren who still bear those mental scars.
But that is only Phase 1 of this insidious indoctrination regimen concocted by the secret Brainwashing Czar. Phase 2 kicks in Wednesday night, when Obama delivers a speech to the nation.
I object to the President giving a prime time speech. It will occur before kids’ bedtime, which means there may be children in the room. And thus, they risk being brainwashed again. Fifteen minutes here, 30 minutes there–before long, we’ll have a Manchurianesque children’s crusade on our hands, with youngsters wearing Mao suits storming Wall Street and redistributing wealth.
All presidential speeches from now on, including the State of the Union, should occur after 11 pm. We cannot risk exposing minors to the President of the United States.
Okay, I really like this excerpt from a column by Jake Negovan called “For the People: Herr Obama and the Socialist States of America.”
I wonder how many people that have bandied about the word socialist at town hall meetings or at the dinner table or on Facebook in relation to their disapproval of our President have ever driven on a road, walked on a sidewalk, visited a public park, checked a book out from the library, had a relative on Social Security, called the police, learned something at a public school, left trash at the curb for pick-up, been thankful to have a fire department, cheered for a sports team at a publicly-funded arena, or supported our troops. Those services and benefits have all been as socialist as a national health care plan could be….
Grow up. If you have a disagreement, discuss it like an adult. Name-calling has no place in civilized debate. It just makes it appear that you don’t know your facts because your ideas were spoon-fed to you in the first place.
What do you think?
Michael Steele and the Republican National Committee sent out a “Health Care Survey” which included this question, which is a ludicrous piece of fear-mongering:
“It has been suggested that the government could use voter registration
to determine a person’s political affiliation, prompting fears that GOP
voters might be discriminated against for medical treatment in a
Democrat-imposed health care rationing system. Does this possibility
concern you?”
Does Michael Steele really think something like that would happen in America? Would this apply only to registered Republicans? What would happen to independents? What about registered Republicans who pull the lever for a Democrat? Or Democrats who cross over? What about people who split their ballot? And would the courts, despite all the voting rights laws, remain silent? How exactly would Michael Steele’s dark conspiracy/fantasy work? Or is he just trying to scare gullible people?
I’m okay with bias. I’m okay with opposing something you don’t believe in. I’m okay with stating your opinion. It’s untruthfulness that gets my goat.
This morning, I took Pam’s car to Tire Barn for balancing and alignment. While waiting, I walked across the street to McDonald’s to get some breakfast. I’m a McGriddle fan. Was also impressed, deeply, with their carmel latte.
As I sat there reading in one of their comfy chairs, with FoxNews playing on an LCD TV hanging on the wall (this is not the McD of my childhood), a black guy sat down beside me with a newspaper. He was on break from JiffyLube.
A stat on the TV said according to a poll, only 7% of people think Congressmen have an “excellent” understanding of the health care bill.
“Somehow that doesn’t surprise me,” he said. “Democrats and Republicans are all saying different things. Even the Democrats don’t agree with each other about what’s in the bill.”
“I know,” I said.
“You would think the Democrats would come out with something, and lay it all out plainly so everyone can understand it,” he continued. “And then they need to be of one mind and voice. That’s leadership.”
“You’re right,” I said. “They don’t have their act together.”
“I mean,” he said, “I don’t have a PHd in Management, but this is just common sense.”
I suggested, “The President should say, ‘I’m pulling the whole plan off the table. We’ll come back in nine months when we’ve got things figured out.'”
“And I would respect that,” the JiffyLube guy said.
People like John McCain restore my faith in sanity and civility.
He would have made a great president in 2001, and a pretty good one in 2009.
I’ve never understood the case of Mohammed Jawad. On August 4, he was released from Guantanamo Bay after 7 years of imprisonment. He returned to Afghanistan.
His crime? He threw a grenade at an American Jeep.
I’m not advocating throwing grenades at American soldiers. But hey–we invaded his country. He was a teenager (maybe as young as 14) who decided to do something. It was war, and he threw a grenade. They threw grenades at Russian jeeps, too.
It wasn’t a hate crime or a terrorist act. It was a kid taking up arms to defend his country against an invader–which we were. A totally justified invader, but an invader nonetheless.
As a result, we kept Jawad at Gitmo for 7 years. I don’t get it. Am I missing something here?
Actually, Jawad may have never even thrown a grenade. He confessed to it only after being tortured by Afghan troops, who then turned him over to Americans. Jawad is illiterate, and his confession was written in a dialect he doesn’t speak. US courts ruled out the confession long ago, but the Bush Administration still wouldn’t release him.
In October 1983, Senator Ted Kennedy gave a speech at Liberty University, the college founded by Jerry Falwell. This was in the heydey of the Moral Majority. Falwell had been invited to give a speech at Harvard, and had been booed, something Kennedy said was not Harvard’s greatest hour. Kennedy received a more respectful reception at Liberty.
Soon after that event, I read Kennedy’s speech, called “Truth and Tolerance in America,” in the magazine Liberty. A couple months ago, I read it again. The speech refers to issues specific to a different period of history, like the nuclear freeze and Equal Rights Amendment. But the principles Kennedy states apply today.
Kennedy made four points:
1. We must respect the integrity of religion itself.
2. We must respect the independent judgments of conscience.
3. In applying religious values, we must respect the integrity of public debate.
4. We must respect the motives of those who exercise their right to disagree.
Here are some quotes:
I love my country and treasure my faith. But I do not assume that my conception of patriotism or policy is invariably correct, or that my convictions about religion should command any greater respect than any other faith in this pluralistic society. I believe there surely is such a thing as truth, but who among us can claim a monopoly on it?
The separation of church and state can sometimes be frustrating for women and men of religious faith. They may be tempted to misuse government in order to impose a value which they cannot persuade others to accept. But once we succumb to that temptation, we step onto a slippery slope where everyone’s freedom is at risk….Let us never forget: Today’s Moral Majority could become tomorrow’s persecuted minority.
Today there are hundreds — and perhaps even thousands of faiths — and millions of Americans who are outside any fold. Pluralism obviously does not and cannot mean that all of them are right; but it does mean that there are areas where government cannot and should not decide what it is wrong to believe, to think, to read, and to do.
People of conscience should be careful how they deal in the word of their Lord. In our own history, religion has been falsely invoked to sanction prejudice — even slavery — to condemn labor unions and public spending for the poor.
Religious values cannot be excluded from every public issue; but not every public issue involves religious values.
Those who proclaim moral and religious values can offer counsel, but they should not casually treat a position on a public issue as a test of fealty to faith.
Where it is right to apply moral values to public life, let all of us avoid the temptation to be self-righteous and absolutely certain of ourselves.
We sorely test our ability to live together if we readily question each other’s integrity. It may be harder to restrain our feelings when moral principles are at stake, for they go to the deepest wellsprings of our being. But the more our feelings diverge, the more deeply felt they are, the greater is our obligation to grant the sincerity and essential decency of our fellow citizens on the other side.
Those who favor E.R.A [Equal Rights Amendment] are not “antifamily” or “blasphemers.” …For my part, I think of the amendment’s opponents as wrong on the issue, but not as lacking in moral character
I hope for an America where neither “fundamentalist” nor “humanist” will be a dirty word, but a fair description of the different ways in which people of goodwill look at life and into their own souls.
I hope for an America where the power of faith will always burn brightly, but where no modern Inquisition of any kind will ever light the fires of fear, coercion, or angry division.
I hope for an America where we can all contend freely and vigorously, but where we will treasure and guard those standards of civility which alone make this nation safe for both democracy and diversity.
 |
Copyright © 2013 Steve Dennie | All rights reserved
