# War on traditional American values?



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Fellow Americans, particularly people of faith, I am curious. What are *your* values?

Recently some Western governments, including the US, have begun diplomatic efforts to push African governments to decriminalize homosexuality:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16068010
http://www.news24.com/Africa/News/Nigeria-gay-rights-crackdown-worries-US-20111202

A recently prominent U.S. politician views this as this is just the most recent example of an administration at war with people of faith in this country:
http://www.rickperry.org/news/statement-by-gov-rick-perry-on-obama-administrations-use-of-gay-rights-to-make-foreign-aid-decisions/

My view is, bigoted repression and persecution is bigoted repression and persecution. I see no significant distinction between repression and persecution based on sexual orientation and repression and persecution based on race, gender, or religion. I like to think that the defining American values is that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. So I vehemently disagree with anyone that suggests that what consenting adults to with themselves behind closed doors somehow makes them ineligible for all the rights and privileges that I enjoy.


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

One apparent threat (not sure whether it was stated or implied) was the US might reduce or eliminate aid to countries that don't go along. That might appeal to your fiscal side (lower govt spending).


----------



## Howie (May 25, 2010)

_*Sounds like it's the guy with the most weapons or biggest hammer. Just like always*_

Cr..that was what Roosevelt intended when he said "Walk softly and carry a big stick". Which is why the US thinks it has to stick it's nose into everyone elses business. I don't think it's necessary in this day and age. It's time to take care of the American people, on our shores.

Greg, I agree.

Would we be in a recession if we weren't p*&^&* away 10 billion a month in Pakistan,Afganistan or Iraq?


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

I'm 100% with you, Greg, on the human rights aspect. What adults do in their bedrooms is their business. And I just don't believe anyone chooses to be homosexual any more than they choose their gender or skin color.

On the other side of the coin, it's a very thin line between standing up for human rights, and meddling in other countries' affairs. My biggest concern is that, in general, it seems like the U.S. is a lot more likely to take a stand for human rights abroad when we have a financial stake in the region in question.


----------



## Sawkerf (Dec 31, 2009)

I've always wondered just what "basic human rights" really are? Who defined them? Are they written down somewhere? Does everyone agree on them?


----------



## IrreverentJack (Aug 13, 2010)

Sawkerf, Here is a good definition/description/history of  *basic human rights* . -Jack


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

what Charlie said


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

Merry Christmas


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Charlie +10


----------



## IrreverentJack (Aug 13, 2010)

Greg, The people decrying this as *'a war on people of faith'* are the same homophobic bigots that lobbied African governments to execute their people for being gay. It could be said this new 'diplomatic effort' is only undoing some of the damage caused privately by extremist American religious groups. -Jack


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

I would guess that most people running for POTUS wouldn't put stuff on their web site unless they thought it would appeal to a constituency that was in some way more important than the constituency it might offend. Ron Paul is a notable exception it seems. At any rate, I am definitely a member of the offended constituency in this particular case, and I'm curious to hear a bit from those on the other side of the issue.

It seems to me that different people have different ideas about the meaning of "basic human rights". In some cases it seems that people agree on the general notion but not on all the details. Personally, I think we are still in a process of figuring out some of the details. In other cases it seems that someone has completely perverted the general idea for the specific purpose of supporting their own agenda.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

every single evil little person on this planet, has their own agenda and make no mistake about it

the more a person is educated, the greater the faith they have in mankind. Science removes doubt, opens doors, has proven again and again that the earth isnt flat, its actually a very round ball, very small and as per Carl Sagan, a very pale blue dot.

Tolerance is "faith"………..in something bigger then us.


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Hey Jack,

It seems to me that the people decrying this as a war on people of faith are slandering an awful lot of people of faith. What little I remember of my upbringing as a Catholic was that while a great many things were sinful, not many were of a nature such that there was a desire to make them illegal also. I suspect most people who value religious freedom can understand that it can only be preserved if the standard for determining behavior that should be illegal is very different from the standards that distinguish behavior that is pious from that which is sinful. I suspect most people of faith can accept this also.

The next bit is deciding when private behavior of consenting adults comes anywhere close to the standard for behavior that should be illegal.


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Hey Moron - indeed I do have my own agenda. but at the moment it says, "go get some sleep"! And tomorrow I'm makin' some box joints…


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

tomorrow, after a good nights sleep

the earth will not be "flat" when I open "my" eyes.

whats next, a pic of the "arc" with the koala bear on it, munching down on eucalyptus leaves ?

jesus has always taught, as his disciples have taught, that the enemy is the man who looks back at you, when you look in the mirror.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)




----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

thank you liddle buddy

i wonder if the Shepard knows the koala is gay ?

or if the kid knows his parents are gay ?

and I dare ask…………"who gets a Christmas card " ?……..the queer koala bear or the dog ?

who would ever start such a stupid tea time subject ?

Stop wasting my time……………..please


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

nip it in the bud liddle buddy

the world no longer has room for racism of any kind……….end of story

if history hasn't embedded that into your mind

then history is doomed to repeat itself .


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

This is all I can add
























































































































































































































. We all are a Family . We all have Value .Many traditions


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Don't forget this one:


----------



## bluekingfisher (Mar 30, 2010)

So now the west is righteous and gracious, educating the poor Africans Iraq's Afghans et al. All those poor poor countries who know nothing about nothing. Ah bless!

We in the west have the greatest record of human oppression (perhaps the former USSR can lay claim to that title) - perhaps this is our way of extinguising the guilt from our acts of the past.

Let them live their lives their way, we are so busy pushing people around we often overlook our own failings.

One day we will push and the worm will push back, we may even get our backsides kicked!


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

I'd love to spread fuzzies here but my Capitalist Pig mentality wont' let me. I'm definitely not proud of it; not embarrassed either; but I genuinely don't care about much. Gay, Straight, Black, White, Catholic, Jewish, I honestly couldn't give less of a rat's ass. I could care less what my neighbors are up to unless it directly threatens me, either physically or in the wallet. There are very few causes I'm eager to "fund". It takes a pretty awful foreign atrocity to really get my attention. I work hard, pay my taxes, and want to be left alone.

That being said, I have a soft spot for hunger. I've spent a lot of money feeding people, but I do it exclusively locally. In my experience, no matter how good your intentions, if you fund a remote cause, you have no control over how it's managed.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

I was always taugt that you could pick out what is truly a RIGHT, by taking any claim and answering the question "At whose expense"

e.g.
someone says we have a right to an education through grade 12 - - - AT whose expense?
That is not against education but getting an education is a priveledge and something we have decided as a society is extremely important to our survival as a society/family and culture. BUT it is not a RIGHT.

Freedom of Speech IS a right. My ability to excercise free speech is not at the expense of society or others.

My right to keep and bear arms… same thing, it doesn't require society to buy me a gun for me to have that right and I can CHOOSE whether or not to excercise it.

Freedom to worship as and TO whom I choose…same thing it is my RIGHT.

Now if we say Free healthcare is a right…. that is incorrect - because your "Right" must be funded by others to have such a system.
Again not arguing that single payer is good or bad but it is NOT a Right.

Nor is there a RIGHT to be free of hunger…that is something we make laws about and provide for civil society.

We always go to persecution but I think people have a RIGHT to feel however they want about other groups…there are CONSEQUENCES to that, but you have a right to be a racist bigot. That is why the klan ralleys are permitted, just like the wackos from the Westboro baptist church has a RIGHT to show up at soldiers funerals. Nobody SANE would do that crap but they are within their rights.

If you have a house with a basement rental unit, and two muslim college students (middle eastern decent but German passports) want to rent it out, cash up front. are you a Bigot if you say NO? What are your RIGHTS to decide who lives in your basement?
Sure the enforcment arm of the government only kicks in for commercial properties….but if you decide you don't want to have a Black, Gay Muslim, Vegan student living in your house with you - - - because you feel uncomfortable, are you supposed to just SUCK IT UP and be a good global citizen? Or is it OK that you behave as a bigot and be selective?


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

DrDirt: You had me thinking you had the perfect criterion to decide what is a right and not a right. Then I got to the last paragraph and said "uh-oh". That one seems to be a bit of a gray area for me.

I can go along with the Klan march being a right, because it only involves an expression of opinion. But if I advertise my basement for rent, then refuse to rent it to a Muslim student, would I not be exercising my "right" at someone else's expense?


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

I agree entirely that there should be a much higher priority for us working on our own failings than pushing our preferences on other countries. I'm proud of my country, but it isn't perfectly wonderful in every possible way. I am most proud when we keep trying to get better.

If the extent of "pushing preferences" is little more than diplomatic posturing, which it seems to be in this particular case at least so far, then I'm OK with that I think. Talk is cheap, and it's OK if the response is "go stuff it". Even then it might have some value in some situations. At least it can be a reminder to ourselves that we want to not be that way.

I try to take a live-and-let-live approach, significantly motivated by the self interest that I want to be left alone to do what I want. I see I'm not the only one. But when I see party A egregiously abusing party B, I get pretty motivated to impose my view of what ain't right on party A. For me, the idea of human rights helps to differentiate between the "life ain't fair" kinda situations that are best left to the parties involved to resolve, and the "hell no, that ain't right" kinda situations where it is time for me to choose what sort of world I want to live in.

But my agenda is not, as Cr1 fears, an effort to steal his property. It is pretty common for politicians to make stupid and divisive statements in a cynical, self-serving effort to get elected. To the extent that we allow them to get away with this behavior, we deserve what we get. This is my pathetic little attempt to encourage ya'll to help make your favorite candidate a better candidate by calling them out whenever they cross the line separating meaningful debate from male bovine generated fecal material (MBGFM). Advice from allies is often more effective than push-back from adversaries. At a minimum, can we at least keep them from inventing divisions and playing us against each other so that they can, in the confusion, have things their way? Not likely that outcome is going to be best for us.


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

+1 on what DrDirt said.

Somewhere we need to draw the line between my right to be the way I want to be and your right to find me repugnant. It seems to me that it should probably be somewhere in the area described by DrDirt's last paragraph. And that looks to be well within sight of a compromise acceptable to most everyone (even though we haven't worked out all the details), no? Not at all the war with people of faith that my esteemed governor claimed it to be.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

cr!: The problem is that in our form of government, Joe himself has helped elect the members of Harry's committee to steal his property.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

cr1 - that's easy, it's a Social Contract, and the basis for most modern governments. I'm certainly not happy with a whole lot of things about our current government, but the idea that any taxation is thievery is more than a bit far fetched. We all benefit from living in a society, and we all have to contribute to that society. That contribution should be made in a number of ways, including paying taxes. The society determines what is in 'the best interest' and raise funds to pay for that 'fairly.'

Within that simple framework there is plenty to argue about, and lots of room for disagreement about what is in the best interest and what is fair. But sealing, really?


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

IDK about Harry, but what Greg wants in this specific case doesn't cost any money. He is just looking for a little air time to ask people to reject the devisiveness that is often spewed by political candidates. The fact that money has already been stolen from Joe to pay Hillary Clinton's salary and travel expenses so that she can fly to Africa and tell government officials there that the US might reconsider the terms of the money the US gives them if they continue to do things the US considers bad is kinda tangential to the current point and happened without any facilitation or advocacy from Greg, AFAIK.

But yes, indeed, I have other agendas that fit perfectly the Harry/Joe scenario. Still, the Harry/Joe scenario in the general case is far more interesting and important. Theft by Government. Taxes aren't the only mechanism - eminent domian comes to mind. You probably know more than I. But it might be best to stick with taxes first, and only later move on to other mechanisms. How about a new thread?

That would be a *fantastic* topic for a presidential debate.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Cr1, face it, Muslims are moving into your basement whether you like it or not, lol.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

The pictures of U.S. citizens were posted as a thought about " traditional family values " . These tend to vary depending on whom one is speaking to ,or about . " Rights" are well defined by the laws that we,the people, institute. We are free to be as preferential as we wish within the boundaries of those laws. I just posted the picture of the dali because he's cute . : )


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*We are free to be as preferential as we wish within the boundaries of those laws.*
Preach it, brother. And you're right, the Dali looked really content in that picture, almost festive


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

*They might as well have added "SO THERE" to the end.*

Actually they did make the statement "Elections have consequences" Pelosi -
or Obama scolding McCain durin the healthcare 'Summit' about the promise of transparency to the process being told "the election is over John"

*Now all we have is the tyranny of the majority. One party gets control and everyone else is royally screwed.*
I hear that - - - that is exactly why the founding fathers did not Set up a democracy, because it always becomes Mob rule…Segregation and voting rights were all a result of bipartisan decisions of what the constitutional republic really meant to citizens. If it were just up to the "Majority" in each southern state you would still see flagrant discrimination - whites only water fountains and rosa parks would have been lynched


----------



## Viktor (Jan 15, 2009)

"I didn't help elect a single person who rammed death care down the throats of the nation. And they did it in secret and in total absence of even a tiny effort at by partisanship. It was tyranny. The statement from the left was : "I have ideas about how you should live your life and I'm going to use the police power of the state to force you and take your property to pay to make you do it too."

That simply means they are better than you at pushing ideas. You had an equal chance and you lost. Whose fault is this? If the left is so smart to mount such an overwhelming global liberal conspiracy, coerce world governments, media, scientists, Hollywood, elves, and fairies, than they simply deserve to be your powerful overlords.
But I do agree with you that taxes are theft and we should push anarchy as a societal model down everyone's throat. If that doesn't work we'll just move to Somalia.


----------



## Viktor (Jan 15, 2009)

Did they put gun to your head at the voting booth? Did they stop you from speaking or convincing people around you? Really? Take some responsibility, will you?

PS. No, I was actually advocating anarchy today.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

*You will notice that their majority was short lived.*

Yeah so was Pearl Harbor, but there sure is a lot of damage done - and took a while to get the right outcome.


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

How is it a war on traditional American values, wouldnt it be a war on traditional African values?


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

*Fellow Americans, particularly people of faith, I am curious. What are your values?*

Well mine are *NOT* supportive of the Crusades, Inquisition, KKK, etc. mentality that many of the "people of faith" in this country seem to drool over in their desire to control the actions of others.


----------



## Neville (Aug 17, 2011)

Moment - just wanted to say thanks for the effort in posting all the pics…it truly demonstrates how diverse we are, and whether we like the way that other people do things is or not is often a matter of opinion only. The pictures say a thousand words.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

*Neville *- Thanks , and i agree .


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Mike - I know a lot of "people of faith" that also aren't supportive of the items in your list. Most of my siblings, inlaws, aunts, uncles and cousins for starters. So it is very important to me to be accurate when referencing the entire group or a subset thereof. I thought it was quite safe to expect that your values were not ones Rick Perry was defending.

Patcollins - the "war" characterization was from someone I suspect has no concern whatsoever about African values. I also suspect his only concern about American values is how to use these code words to win votes.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

*GREG: I thought it was quite safe to expect that your values were not ones Rick Perry was defending.*

You have to forgive me, here in Texas I have had to endure living under Governor Rick Perry cronyism for the past 21 years PLUS under Governor George "W" Bushwacked-in-the-Head for another 5 years before THAT. I sure missed Ann Richards departure…

Don't EVEN get me started on "W"s 8 years in the WH…

And frankly IMO, Pat is CORRECT in that you mis-titled your thread's purpose to match that of Perry's false accusation. Sounds too much like a FauxNews Headliner. Just sayin'...


----------



## patcollins (Jul 22, 2010)

I never understood what the organized religions had against gays. I mean of course to them its a lifestyle of sin, but they don't treat other sinners like that. What about the guy that swears alot, what about the promiscous people, etc. How is this sin worse than others? Are they afraid it will spread and make them gay? I just don't get it.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

patcollins: Yes, it's contagious. Didn't you know? 

Of course, I was raised as a Catholic. They say it's okay to be gay, as long as you don't have gay sex. Go figure.


----------



## IrreverentJack (Aug 13, 2010)

*be accurate when referencing the entire group or a subset thereof*

GregD, This new "diplomatic effort" in Africa is in answer to a group of American "people of faith" promoting/financing/lobbying for a "kill the gays bill" in Uganda (and possibly other countries). The law made being gay punishable by death. The news media didn't seem to cover this much. That might be the reason I didn't see many other "people of faith" condemning it. I don't group all religious people together, but it seems "people of faith" do provide a lot of cover for each other. If American "people of faith" don't share the same values as the American group that is trying to "save families" in Africa by exterminating gays, it should be much easier to tell. -Jack


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Yes, shifting focus closer to home I never understood the assertion that gay marriage was somehow a threat to "traditional" families. Been married for nearly 30 years and raised 3 kids and never felt the least bit threatened. While the Catholic Church requires the possibility of procreation a prerequisite to being married in the church, or so I thought, civil marriages don't have that requirement. If two otherwise unrelated adults want to declare each other next-of-kin, seems like a good thing to me. Frankly, the nature of their relationship is of no concern to anyone but them as far as I can see. A Libertarian acquaintance pointed out that this logic also applied to groups of otherwise unrelated adults, so maybe there shouldn't be a problem with polygamy either. Maybe the GLBT should form a coalition with the old-school Mormons.

Mike, I'll stand by my choice of title because my intent was to focus on Perry's false accusation. I don't know much of anything of African values, traditional or otherwise. I have one niece and her husband is from Benin but I don't see them much and that time is usually filled with talk of real family values like how the kids are doing. Makes me a little touchy towards snotty insinuations about Muslims because now yer talking about my family.

BTW, Rick is my governor too. At least Tom Delay is gone; I was really embarrassed that my neighbors would re-elect him every two years. But I think Rick has eclipsed Tom. Then there is the Texas SBOE. Boy do I hear about that from my sister in Michigan who is in education. How can we get you elected to that?


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

Hey Jack,

I'm not trying to ignore you. I just don't know how to respond. You are not the only source I've seen suggesting that non-Africans influenced the current anti-gay phenomena in Africa:
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/01/world/africa/nigeria-anti-gay-bill/index.html?hpt=op_bn5

The anti-gay phenomena is, IMHO, reprehensible, regardless of where it came from.

Ridiculing gays - or guys that seemed gay - was socially tolerated when I was in high school. An anti-sodomy law was on the books in Texas as recently as ten or twenty years ago. Pretty much everybody, I think, has the potential for nasty behavior, especially if we are not fully aware of all of the consequences of what we are doing. When we help each other realize exactly what is going on, most of us choose - eventually - to stop the nastiness.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Ridiculing gays - or guys that seemed gay - was socially tolerated*
Still is in WV, despite my nonparticipation. If I were gay, and I very well may be, I'd use it as an opportunity to fortify my self esteem. I just can't imagine caring; I really can't. If one touches me, will I start finding Tom Selleck attractive? lol. I've got bigger problems than catching gay.










Now that I think about it, that is a handsome man


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

Al, Al, Al…...


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Come on Al, you KNOW they make an "Anti-Gay Vaccine" for ALL people of faith don't you?... And I hear West Virginians get a double dose…

(Sarcasm intended to point out the existing bias of folks) *;-)*


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

LOL, Mike. I never followed up on my booster. Must explain my Magnum thing, lol.
That's the downside of being a scientist; the social stuff all seems a bit absurd.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

LOL, Al . He's cuter than the Dali by a long shot . Must be the dimples . funny comments , bro .

You are on a social networking site , so you are either a 'socialist ' or a social scientist , or both ! ; )


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

cr1: I pulled that same thing on an anti-gay coworker one day. This guy was like 65 years old, and the thought had never crossed his mind that he didn't choose* his *orientation.

He was pretty much struck speechless.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Geez guys,... just take 2-Bibles and call me in the morning.

*;-)*


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

".. is there a chance that those stupid people will realize that he is secretly working for us ? "

"... I don't think so , ..but I told him not to use our secret 'Blogosphere' symbol as his buddy icon ! '


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)




----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^uncomfortable smile take one.


----------



## roman (Sep 28, 2007)

http://watching-tv.ew.com/2011/12/09/rick-perry-ad-obama-war-on-religion/


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

(NOT)


----------



## derosa (Aug 21, 2010)

I don't know that there is a war on traditional American values as defined by either the secular or religious sides. I think people have just become more self focused and concerned with their personal here and now rather then with their family and local community. It isn't a war so much as a lack of caring and a lack of compassion and empathy; making it less of a war and more of an abandonment.

I also find that those who will scream the loudest that there is an attack on American values or that church values are being oppressed are the least Christian of people. Sure they show up to church, they say all the right prayers, and they do a good job of acting the part focusing on their future salvation but they often lose sight of their real purpose. They will quote Paul out of context to oppress something or someone, gays included, while leaving Christ's views out of the picture. They will speak of the need to do good works and help the poor while decrying the social systems that assist the poor. Not calling for reforms of the systems but their outright destruction because of all those poor leeches that suck off their taxes. They will speak of hatred and oppression under the guise of morality while stomping Christ's teachings into the dirt. It is made worse by those who believe this is a Christian nation rather then the pluralistic society that is the core of the country.

There is a war on Christian values and it is being launched by every politician that believes it will give them advantage to serve as a mouthpiece for the fundamentalists. By every Christian who could care less about social justice if it will cost them taxes or inconvenience them and by every person who uses their religion to oppress, persecute or practice intolerance in the name of a creator that espoused justice, mercy, love, and compassion. It isn't about having creches removed from town squares, although they should stay, just add in a menorah to balance things if there is a Jewish population or allow other religions to place objects during their own special holidays without the Christians complaining.

Sorry if it seems this is a rant but the claim of American values to push a church agenda only makes the Church as a whole look bad and fails to further the teachings of Christ and it pisses me off.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

Nice post, Rev. Russ. There is a lot of truth in what you said.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Very nice post, Rev. This quote is a keeper!
*fails to further the teachings of Christ and it pisses me off.*
I'm not a Christian but I respond very well to this style of speak. I'm very envious (and proud) of those who manage to walk the walk. There's too much talk. I really like your use of the word "abandonment". I think that's a much more accurate way to describe the current trend. Thanks for this fine post.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Russ, 
I agree with you and your statement, even though I am agnostic.

I would only add that this "War on Christian values" is being waged by the very Hypochristians (pronounced "hippo-krist-ianz") them selves and is damning to that entire religious sect, IMO.

As Al says, I also have no problems with those who actually walk the walk. It is only through charity, tolorance, and acceptance that things will EVER get better.


----------



## IrreverentJack (Aug 13, 2010)

Greg, Thank you for this post. 
Russ, You made my day. Thank you. -Jack


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

A Republican here, agreeing with Mike:
*It is only through charity, tolorance, and acceptance that things will EVER get better.*


----------



## MBeck (Jan 13, 2011)

I'm confused, I thought this was a woodworking forum.
I don't mean to be rude or to overlook the hot-topic social issues, but conversations like this need a different medium. 
Why are you so curious? Is this question for research, or are you just trying to raise hairs, GregD?
Find another place for these issues, LJ's is not for this kind of discussion.


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

MBeck: Have you not noticed that the site management has gone to great lengths to keep folks from "accidentally" viewing off-topic discussions?

Didn't you have to either click on the "Non-Shop Talk" forum link, or a link that said "Off-topic content" to even see this thread?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^Bertha nods to Charlie.


----------



## MBeck (Jan 13, 2011)

Thanks Charlie, I'll take that into consideration next time. Perhaps we shouldn't give the kid the remote if we know he will never change the channel. Pehaps, though, since this is a wood working site, we can at least make an attempt to discern what is appropriate for a site like this. There are definitely plenty of other forums that could entertain this topic better. That's all. I'll bow out of this thread.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^no harm, MBeck. Not surprisingly, it's a pretty common complaint. You're right, of course, but I suppose it is what it is.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Do you guys still see the "Off Topic Thread" disclaimer when looking at the list of forum topics? A couple of day ago it stopped doing that for me and I just see the topic heading like all the other threads. I just thought it was an experiment that ended.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^John, I've also noticed that it's been finicky. I've made a few failed attempts to avoid the off-topic threads. I'm like a moth drawn to flame


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^Spoken like a true Cr1, Cr1. I wouldn't have it any other way
I'm only 5'8", so I'll be watching your plan closely


----------



## CharlieM1958 (Nov 7, 2006)

Al, I'm not sure what kind of law cr1 practices, but I have a feeling he wins a lot of cases just because his opponents can't stand to be in the same room with him any longer.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^my guess would be some kind of Constitutional law. If he's a plantiff's attorney, I'd definitely hire him


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Watch out AL!

RIGHT OUT OF CR1's PLAYBOOK:


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Where I'm from, you need a good lawyer. You never know when you're going to get pulled over by some nosy cop (or forest ranger, lol)


----------



## Dwain (Nov 1, 2007)

CR1 and Charlie make fantastic points. I agree wholeheartedly. I am a faithful Christian who see a lot of value in Christ. I am not sure I totally agree with derosa however, We are a nation founded on Christian values, by Christians. The problem is that our founders set up a system that expands beyond Christian values…Maybe I could call it TRUE VALUES OF CHRIST. That a lot of Christians today have problems following because they are to comfortable telling everyone else they are wrong.

Here is the deal folks, Perry is becoming less and less relevant by the day. He has proven himself to be…well let's say…less than bright. He may be smart, but he isn't showing well, so he needs to find a firestorm topic that will energize his southern psedo-Christian base. Attacks on Chrismas and Christianity are it.

I think, based on the quality of posts here, that all of use can see though that. Listen, a Christmas tree is a Christmas tree, a manorah is a manorah. I will not call it a Holiday tree, or a holiday candle. These PC terms are rediculous. Lets just put them next to eachother and accect them as they are, without changing them. It seems that our cultural views of religion have the hardest time coming together in our melting pot.

We all ok with that?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Lets just put them next to eachother and accect them as they are, without changing them.

We all ok with that?*

I am. It is what it is. Each to their own.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Dwain - with all due respect, what does a decorated evergreen tree have to do with the birth of Jesus? The Christmas tree is a pagan symbol carried over from pre-christian times when there was a big solstice festival. I know of no biblical scholar that will argue the Jesus was actually born on December 25th. The early Christians knew they needed to keep some of the popular festivals to get pagans to convert. Much the same with the symbolism around Easter (Bunnies and eggs; fertility, not Jesus.) Christians getting all worked up over calling it a holiday tree seems a bit silly since they co-opted if themselves. Now, if you started taking Jesus out of the nativity, I could see some reason for indignation.

Given that, I'm not Christian and I call it a Christmas tree. I do agree people in general need to lighten up a bit.

Another note about your Founding Fathers point; the religious right seems to forget that one of the main things the founding fathers were trying to accomplish was to keep the State from entangling governing and religion like they did in England. It's not good for religion or for government. Even if the RR is successful in getting religion into government, whose version of Christianity would have precedence? They are certainly not all in agreement on many issues.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Absolutely John. The coop of others' festivals by the hypochristians (hippo-krist-yun) stands is stark contrast to the unfounded claims of the Republican Far Right that the US was founded as a "hypochristian" country (I figure if DWAIN can misspell Menorah then I can take my liberties as well).

BTW, here is a little history for the hypochristians:

*"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law."*
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Dr. Thomas Cooper, February 10, 1814

*"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes."*
-Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813.

*"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity."*
-Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782

*"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State."*
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802

*"If we did a good act merely from love of God and a belief that it is pleasing to Him, whence arises the morality of the Atheist? ...Their virtue, then, must have had some other foundation than the love of God."*
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to Thomas Law, June 13, 1814


----------



## GregD (Oct 24, 2009)

I've seen in the posts above a lot of reasons to think that American values are alive and well.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^I would tend to agree, Greg; on both sides of the aisle.


----------



## pommy (Apr 17, 2008)

now a haven't read every one what the guys have said but i think the general feeling is that Americans want to keep their views to your selfs so why do the us government not lesson to your voice's and keep telling other countries what they should be doing i see in the news abama in Europe telling them how to solve the euro crises when you won't say anything to the likes of Mugabe in Zimbabwe when he go's round killing innocent white farmers so they have nothing to grow anymore and the country is on its knees

sorry my rant

Andy


----------



## Dwain (Nov 1, 2007)

John,

Good points on all. I am certainly not arguing your point on the "holiday" tree, but it's been call a Christmas tree for so long, seems odd to argue about it now. As far as December 25th goes, the same is true. It's a date that was selected long ago. I guess I get tired of hearing things get politicized to as to not offend. I certainly don't feel as smart as most in this thread, but I just want to practice my religion, and I want all others to practice theirs. It's a Christmas Tree.

Mike,

I knew I got that wrong! Don't hold it against me, I meant no harm. I hope no interpretation was made that I misspelled a word from the Jewish culture. No offence intended! Great quotes from TJ. I agree, that one of the worst forms of government is a theocracy. I hate the idea of someone telling me how the country is going to be run based on what God is telling him. Actually, it terrifies me. I don't believe men have the ability to rule based on religion.

Pommy,

I hate to say it, like it or not, the US leads the world, at least until China works things out, so our leaders will continue to do this so the US is "a shining example to the world" whatever the hell that means…

Here is the deal, *it's a Christmas Tree*, plain and simple. We've been calling it that for a long time. If you want, lets get together and vote to call it something else…until then, it's a Christmas Tree. Besides, there aren't enough Druids around now a days to complain about it.

Some countries' views on a lot of things are backward. *Period* Making Homosexuality illegal is a good example of that.

I'm pretty sure we, as a nation, shouldn't be fighting to pull these countries out of their (for lack of a better word) Backwardness. We don't have to do business with them, but this doesn't have to be the reason.

I apologize for the poor representation of my views, I'm just not that smart. I thank all of you for participating in this thread. It's really interesting.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

The first holy day to be expunged from the Christian calendar, the first law of prayer to die, was All Holy Eve now known as Halloween. The man who murdered it? Martin Luther. In 1517, he chose All Holy Eve, the vigil of All Saint's Day, to attack the idea that those who had died deserved any respect or care from those who lived. According to Luther, prayer afforded no one grace. [...]

How many people remember Candlemas? It is the Mass celebrating the Presentation of the Child Jesus in the Temple and the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Offered forty days after Christmas, Candlemas marks the end of the Christmas season… By the late 1800's, Americans had transformed this most ancient feast in honor of the Virgin Mary into Groundhog Day - a signal accomplishment in the continuing Protestant attempt to separate Catholic Church and state.

Michaelmas, the Mass offered on September 29th in celebration of St. Michael's victory over Satan, became the day to settle rents and collect accounts. By the late 1800's, it too had been stripped of all the celebratory hospitality that had marked it as a major feast of the Catholic Middle Ages.

Childermas, the December 28th Mass commemorating the Feast of the Holy Innocents slaughtered by Herod, was not replaced by another event so much as it was simply overcome by the commercialization of the holiday. It slipped into oblivion. America had won the war against nearly every major Mass in the liturgical calendar.

Candlemas, Michaelmas, and Childermas have all basically been eliminated as religious or public holidays in America. The Mass part of Christmas has also been eliminated, so why are Protestants upset if the secularization of the day continues down the path which they started out on centuries ago?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Americans had transformed this most ancient feast in honor of the Virgin Mary into Groundhog Day*
You know you've got it bad when your special day morphs into GroundHog day.


----------



## DS (Oct 10, 2011)

What about Groundhog Corporations… are they "People"?

Ooops… did I just post that?

I told myself I'd never post on one of these political threads, but cr1 just reminded me of something Mitt said recently-"Corporations are People"

Dangit!-Pretend I wasn't here.


----------



## mrtoasty (Jan 13, 2011)

You know, I worked with a man once that had a sign in his office, " right is right until it's personal", that always struck as right. Freedom and such is fine for the ACLU, but don't let anyone say " Merry Christmas" out loud. I have it figured out, if I can't have the cross, the pledge of allegiance, the 10 commandments, and such on government property, then since the city, county, and state are tied in with the government we need to get rid of all the churches and such. If a church offends me why won't the ACLU take up my cause and get rid of them? You are right now thinking, how stupid is this guy, that is how stupid we are acting right now.

I saw that we are outraged that we beheaded a witch in Saudi lately, Did we mention that we hanged several in our day??? One of the convicted was a Grandmother of mine, 13 generations back, she was late in the frenzy, and was lucky enough to only serve time in prison.

Thanks for listening to my rant, it helps sometimes.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Without lawyers, no one would EVER need an explanation!


----------



## derosa (Aug 21, 2010)

Mike, the protestants in my ton do keep the mass in Christmas. The Baptist, Methodist and both Presbyterian churches will be assembling in the one Presbyterian church at 7pm for a council of churches worship service. This year my wife will be the pastor leading and the Baptists will be supplying the music director. The collection all goes to the council's food pantry which will be supplying 385 Christmas baskets that include gifts. It really is a wonderful celebration of the life of the church here in town.

Cr1, well put on corporations.


----------



## TopamaxSurvivor (May 2, 2008)

*Les* I have them in my past too ;-)) One of the rarest documents in Colonial history resides in a museum in CT is 76 of my GGG…........G-grandmother Elizabeth Clausen's friends and neighbors signing a petition attesting to her good character. This was unheard of as taking the side of an accused witch would surely bring prosecution upon one's self. Her ordeal lasted over 2 years. One of my GGGG….g-aunts is presumed hanged as that was the prefered form of punishment in the 1650s. Her husband was acquitted.

Religious bickering was the most prominent reason for settlements springing up all over New England. My ancestors Richard Law and Andrew Ward were among the founders of Stamford who split from New Haven. A few years later, dissatisfied members of that group left to establish Greenwich. Too bad we are out of new land to settle ;-((


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

*YO' Saturnalia!* The ORIGINAL winter festival. Something to consider:


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

Mike , I know exactly what you mean . Thanks for sharing this info on Saturnalia and other Co-Opted Myths . Everyone should be informed on how things we celebrate have deep roots in other stuff . If we we had 720 days per year , we wouldn't have such a problem , maybe . Being from the lower climes, like me , I'm sure you know how some of our favorite Holidays have MORPHED into something totally new and strange .









All my Mayan friends and I used to celebrate the birth of Quetzacoatl , the feathered serpent God. It was always celebrated on Friday in November . Fond memories of this festive time from childhood remain with me still . Now I can't believe that this fun holiday has been largely overshadow by another holiday that happens to fall on the same day, yeah, that's right…..they named it….BLACK FRIDAY :









After a fun Quetzalcoatl day ,the festival continued on for 3 more days , culminating on monday with the much anticipated celebration of the Moon Goddess IXCHEL. What fun times !


__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content








Sadly, this was replaced by another upstart religious Holiday ; yeah you guessed it…...CYBER MONDAY ….the 'sacred screen' day .










One so called 'pagan' observance replaced by another . Cyber monday , even with all it's demonic robots and surfing could hardly compare to the utter charm of IXCHEL's party-ness . I miss it .

Why do these sort of things fall out of fashion so quickly ? After exhaustive research , I think I have found a few clues on how things are replaced with other things and stuff .













































































































As you can see , I have just begun my research into this fascinating topic ,and I hope to get back to you soon with more insights into all these interconnected correlations …and stuff .


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Condoned:









Not condoned:


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

Those people were so kind in helping the store owners in doing inventory and relocation and such . 
Even some policemen helped out by relocating a Cadillac dealership . Acupuncture may be one solution for curbing those mega shopping urges . You just may be on to something with that idea , Al ! Interesting,










~Bill Nye


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^huge lol, Moment. I'll try anything at this point; needles and all, lol.


----------



## S4S (Jan 22, 2011)

Don't get crazy , just keep spending , it'll be OK . : )


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Anybody see the UNICEF commercial "Santa doesn't do Poor Countries" 
Talk about poor taste!


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Guilting a man into a cause? Nothing new there, I suppose.
I resent the ASPCA advertisements showing neglected dogs.
I used to donate agressively but don't because of the guilt strategy.
I don't want to see that crap; that's why I'm donating.
I told them as much, too.
And they tried to guilt me into coming back.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

In before the outrage, lol


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Actually the UNICEF commercial is a nice link to the OP about the "Values"the United Natiions (UNICEF) views african culture


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Dr. Dirt, I couldn't see the link from my computer so I took liberties based upon prior experience, lol
Don't you hate it when people don't click your links, then comment upon them.
My bad, lol


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

This is just more right wing propaganda. Consider this article with regards to the Gabby Giffords shooting. The Arizona Sheriff sums this kind of crap up rather succinctly, IMO:

Original Source
Reaction to the horrific Arizona shootings, where six people were slaughtered including a 9-year-old girl, quickly congealed along clear-cut lines:

a) The left blamed the right, pointing to violent imagery and language from Sarah Palin to the Tea Party.
b) The right furiously denied blame, with some trying to pin the shooting on the left.
c) Among public officials, pundits and press, the common impulse was to draw the typical false equivalence between rhetoric on the right and left.

At least one person was not buying it:
* "When you look at unbalanced people, how they respond to the vitriol that comes out of certain mouths about tearing down the government. The anger, the hatred, the bigotry that goes on in this country is getting to be outrageous. And, unfortunately, Arizona I think has become sort of the capital. We have become the Mecca for prejudice and bigotry."* - Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik

Dupnik added:
*"We need to do some soul searching … It's the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people in the TV business. People tend to pooh-pooh this business about the vitriol that inflames American public opinion by the people who make a living off of that. That may be free speech but it's not without consequences."*

We do not yet know whether the Arizona massacre was directly fueled by rightwing rhetoric. But we do know this: *one of the most dangerous myths promulgated by the media and political establishment is that there is a comparable level of extremism among conservatives and liberals, that left and right are mirror images.*

Even the most cursory perusal of rightwing radio, television, blogs and assorted punditry illustrates a profound distinction: in large measure, the right's overarching purpose is to stoke hatred of the left, of liberalism. The right's messaging infrastructure, meticulously constructed and refined over decades, promotes an image of liberals as traitors and America-haters, unworthy of their country and bent on destroying it. There is simply no comparable propaganda effort on the left.

*The imbalance is stark: Democrats and liberals rail against the right's ideas; the right rails against the left's very existence.*


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*Democrats and liberals rail against the right's ideas; the right rails against the left's very existence.*

One side against ideas; the other against people? Seriously, though, I don't think that represents the bulk of the right accurately. Maybe I'm living an illusion, but I don't watch much TV. If I do, it's usually some cop show about roughing up criminals; or some Discovery show about Kro Magnons. Maybe a rare episode of Will and Grace…but not much!!!!

*The right's messaging infrastructure, meticulously constructed and refined over decades, promotes an image of liberals as traitors and America-haters, unworthy of their country and bent on destroying it.*

I don't feel that way at all about liberals. At all. Most of the liberals in my inner circle are veterans; the rest are my fiance. One side wants to share; the other doesn't. If you have the means and desire to help out, help out. It's not cool to beat the willingness to share out of someone.


----------



## jmos (Nov 30, 2011)

Against my better judgement, here's my 2 cents -up on soap box-

I think both parties have become masters of divisiveness, and want it that way. The keep everyone focused on relatively trivial matters (abortion, gay marriage, prayer in school…) while they suck the country dry to keep themselves in power and enrich themselves.

One flaw in democracy is that the people can vote themselves more than they can afford. We've been letting politician of both parties tell us we can have our cake and eat it too for decades now. We've finally started to see a problem, but like true addicts, we can't stop. Poll after poll shows that people, of all parties, including the Tea Party, do not want serious cuts in Medicare and Social Security (which they 'earned', which is a joke, since promised benefit are more than they ever put into the system.) Of course we have our entire national identity wrapped up in being the biggest bad a** on the planet, so we won't cut defense spending. And everyone knows we have to pay interest on the debt. Those 4 items exceed ALL Federal taxes collected. We can cut EVERYTHING else and still be in the hole year after year. Add to that the projected explosion in Medicare costs as the nation ages, and we're looking at a huge hole.

Getting the economy growing will certainly help, but it is not enough. The 30 year experiment has shown low taxes on the rich are not sufficient to spur economic activity; supply side economics ignores the demand side. If people can not afford to buy the products, suppliers won't make them. Increasing middle class incomes, as occurred in the 50's and 60's, leads to greater consumption and larger economic growth. The rich and companies would get a smaller piece of a larger pie and still make more. I'm not in favor of government redistribution of wealth, but companies need to share productivity increases with workers to keep them in a position to buy their goods.

The People need to wake up, realize they can not continue to get more out of the government than they put in, and start getting significantly fewer benefits as well as paying higher taxes. Taxes across the board are historically low, particularly for the rich. The poor and elderly don't want to give up benefits, and the rich and working class don't want to 'share,' by paying taxes. Unsustainable. I'd like to see pretty much all the cost saving ideas from both parties enacted; cut benefits, slash military spending, and increase taxes. Now, doing this during a period of slow economic growth is also suicidal and pretty much guarantees a depression. We could at least legislate a timetable for these changes which I think would have a huge positive effect on the economy. But neither party will do it, and the people won't allow it.

Sigh….

-off soap box-


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

John - you are sadly correct.
Neither side represents the people at all. only their own interests.
With all of the political clout through donations bu Unions to Democrats, why are there ZERO bills addressing outsourcing? Obama just signed a new free trade agreement with Korea and Columbia, as though we have a problem importing Samsung phones and TV's or KIA and Hyundai autos right now

Mike the left wants to paint Repulicans as babykillers and Democrats as some PC Superhero like 'Captain Planet'









I must have missed the equivalent calls for direct violence BY RIGHT WING MEDIA HEADS, not some wacko sign at a protest.
Like these:
■ Dick Cheney Eats Babies: "Cheney, by the way, looks very ruddy. I couldn't get over that. Like, he must have feasted on a Jewish baby, or a Muslim baby. He must have sent his people out to get one and bring it back so he could drink its blood." (Mike Malloy)

You won't hear any Condemnation of this kind of rhetoric.

■ Dick Cheney Should Die: "He is an enemy of the country, in my opinion. Dick Cheney is an enemy of the country….Lord, take him to the Promised Land, will you? See, I don't even wish the guy goes to Hell, I just want to get him the hell out of here." (Ed Schultz MSNBC)

■ Rush Limbaugh Should Die: "I'm waiting for the day when I pick up the newspaper or click on the Internet and find that he's choked to death on his own throat fat, or a great big wad of saliva or something, whatever. Go away, Limbaugh, you make me sick." (Mike Malloy)

■ Michele Bachmann Should Die: "So, Michele, slit your wrist! Go ahead! I mean, you know, why not? I mean, if you want to - or, you know, do us all a better thing. Move that knife up about two feet. I mean, start right at the collarbone." (Montel Williams)

Has Rush asked Nancy Pelosi to slit her own throat starting at the collarbone?

Yet folks WANT to claim that Repubs are ANTI PEOPLE and the LEFT is *ONLY* Anti ideology


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

*DIRT SAID: Mike the left wants to paint Repulicans as babykillers and Democrats as some PC Superhero like 'Captain Planet'*

But Dirt, it is the RIGHT WING media that is creatively creating fraudulent "news" reports to make it LOOK that way. Case in point:

Fox Doctors Hoffa Speech To Fabricate Call For Violence
Right-wing bloggers misled by dishonest Fox News video editing are attacking Teamsters President James Hoffa for supposedly urging violence against Tea Party activists during a Labor Day speech. Conservatives are also attacking President Obama, who appeared at the event, for "sanctioning violence against fellow Americans" by failing to denounce Hoffa. But fuller context included in other Fox segments makes clear that Hoffa wasn't calling for violence but was actually urging the crowd to vote out Republican members of Congress.

During the segment that the bloggers have latched onto, Fox edited out the bolded portion of Hoffa's comments:

HOFFA: *Everybody here's got to vote. If we go back and keep the eye on the prize,* let's take these son of a bitches out and give America back to America where we belong! Thank you very much!

In an initial report on Hoffa's speech at 1 p.m. on Fox News, Ed Henry reported that Hoffa said that "we'll remember in November who's with the working people" and "said of the Tea Party and of Republicans, 'let's take these sons of bitches out.'"

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/flash/pl55.swf

Henry made clear during that segment that Hoffa's comments were references to voting out Republican members of Congress, not to violence. And roughly 20 minutes later, he explained on Twitter that the "full quote" of the "take these son of a bitches out" comment is "Everybody here's got to vote. If we go back & keep the eye on the prize, let's take these sons of bitches out"

Ed Henry tweet

HEY DIRT, AREN'T THESE YOUR FAVORITE SOURCES FOR RIGHT WING NEWS?
*But in a second segment that ran at roughly the same time as Henry's tweet, Fox News dishonestly edited the speech in the manner seen above. Andrew Breitbart's Big sites, Real Clear Politics, The Daily Caller, the Media Research Center, and the Drudge Report have all highlighted that footage, using it to condemn "the violence emanating from union thug bosses" and demand that Obama "denounce" the comments.*

In the Fox News segment that included the dishonestly cropped video, Republican consultant Brad Blakeman decried the comments as "thuggery at its best" and "the kind of remarks you'd expect out of Tony Soprano," and commented that "when a union president says 'let's take these sons of bitches out,' that usually means someone's legs are going to get broken, somebody's going to disappear." Meanwhile, anchor Megyn Kelly somehow did not mention Henry's previous explanation that the comments were references to voting Republicans out of office.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Well mike see I knew even calls that Repubs are drinking the blood of jewish infants harvested by Halliburton…
You would be A-OK with it.

This is the problem - anybody can go pick from their favorite sites and find any statement they want to fit or PROVE their own ideology.

This is the correct point John Made - - - only you seem to think the problem exists only on one side of the aisle.
people can go back and forth and back and forth with these "documented" evidence pieces that the other side is evil or unamerican or whatever - and we still end up right where we are.

Do people edit…yep. so did DAN Rather for CBS News.
people can go back and forth and back and forth with these "documented" evidence - and we still end up right where we are.

Killian Documents
Rather and CBS initially defended the story, *insisting that the documents had been authenticated by experts.[*22] CBS was contradicted by some of the experts it originally cited,[23] and later reported that its source for the documents - former Texas Army National Guard officer Lt. Col. Bill Burkett - had misled the network about how he had obtained them.[24]

On September 20, CBS retracted the story. Rather stated, "If I knew then what I know now, I would not have gone ahead with the story as it was aired, and I certainly would not have used the documents in question."[25] The controversy has been referred to by some as "Memogate" and "Rathergate."[26]

Following an investigation commissioned by CBS,[27][28][29] CBS fired story producer Mary Mapes and asked three other producers connected with the story to resign. Many believe Rather's retirement was hastened by this incident.[30] On Thursday, September 20, 2007, Rather was interviewed on Larry King Live commenting "Nobody has proved that they were fraudulent, much less a forgery. ... The truth of this story stands up to this day."[31]

In a 2010 issue of TV Guide, Rather's report was ranked #3 on a list of TV's ten biggest "blunders".[32]


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

*his own throat fat*
That's friggin awesome


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

*DIRT: This is the correct point John Made - - - only you seem to think the problem exists only on one side of the aisle.*

Why lie so blatantly Dirt? I have NEVER denied, nor stated that, "...the problem exists only on one side side of the aisle." When you put words in my mouth then YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

So call me on this. WHERE did I EVER say such a thing? Show where any of MY posts are that says that. Or is this where you ignore this post AGAIN?


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

In fairness, Mike's posts are definitely anti-Republican but not necessarily dripping in pro-Democratic stuff. I have my fiance for that; sometimes I think I'm going to put my fist through my own face. She says stuff (with sincerity) like "If you make more than X amount of money, you should have to give the rest to the poor". And, "please don't take that assault rifle on the lawn tractor". Geez. 
.
They all disgust me so on both sides of the aisle that I literally can't stand it. They've managed to manufacture a little kingdom to reign over. I don't believe that a single one in the entire lot has one shred of principle.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Here ya go mike your post 120

Even the most cursory perusal of rightwing radio, television, blogs and assorted punditry illustrates a profound distinction: in large measure, the right's overarching purpose is to stoke hatred of the left, of liberalism. The right's messaging infrastructure, meticulously constructed and refined over decades, promotes an image of liberals as traitors and America-haters, unworthy of their country and bent on destroying it. *There is simply no comparable propaganda effort on the left*.

OR

*one of the most dangerous myths promulgated by the media and political establishment is that there is a comparable level of extremism among conservatives and liberals, that left and right are mirror images.*

So if you will argue that it is a myth that 'the left and right are mirror images' You are defacto saying that it must be one sided…e.g. *THERE IS SIMPLY NO COMPARABLE PROPAGANDA EFFORT ON THE LEFT*
That isn't putting words in your mouth! dont try to hide now and say "oh I was quoting someone else" you used this particular argument to make YOUR point - not just an infomercial

Or your post 124
But Dirt, it is the RIGHT WING media that is creatively creating fraudulent "news" reports to make it LOOK that way. Case in point:

MSNBC and MoveOn.org are just trying to right the wrongs of Fox News?


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Uh…Dirt… THOSE are quotes from an ARTICLE that I quoted and even linked the source to (something you don't seem to understand nor do yourself).

Here is the ENTIRE article. Read it. I may support it, but those are NOT my words.

*Gabrielle Giffords and the rightwing hate machine (on the bogus equivalence between right/left extremism)*

And your second post #124-Where is "ONLY" anywhere to be found? In your mind?


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Editing on Assault Rifles _
MSNBC Contessa Brewer reported on the folks protesting Obama speaking in Phoenix in 2009, as Racist protestestor with a Machine gun 









However there was some selective cropping going on










Gee that Racist - Anti Obama guy with the AR15 was actually black

Following MSNBC coverage of ObamaCare protesters legally carrying guns, on Thursday, the Second Amendment Foundation condemned the liberal network for "using deceptively-edited video from a Phoenix, Arizona anti-tax rally on Monday to invent a racial stereotype in its on-going effort to demonize and marginalize American firearms owners as 'racists.'"

As NewsBusters reported on Tuesday, MSNBC correspondent Contessa Brewer, along with Morning Meeting host Dylan Ratigan and pop culture analyst Toure, depicted all gun-carrying protesters as being "white," "racist," and even a threat to President Obama's life. Brewer cited one such gun-toting protester, but used highly edited video footage that did not reveal the man was actually African-American.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kyle-drennen/2009/08/20/gun-rights-group-calls-out-msnbc-claiming-gun-carrying-protesters-raci#ixzz1hCNRiZyL

But that didn't fit the MSNBC Narrative so it was cropped.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

Yeah sure Dirt, and Michael Steele means that the entire GOP is ALL INCLUSIVE and NOT racist… Oh wait!...They even threw in a pizza guy at the last moment for effect!


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Mike

*I may support it, but those are NOT my words.*

That is truly pathetic - you post these rants, claim to support them, then Hide and say "I" never said that I just posted a quote that I support.

So:
on your planet you post a quote and saying this is the truth out there go read it.

People respond stating the "one -sided picture" you present is inaccurate….and now you say it wasn't ME!

Nice way to play duck and cover, you must be related to Dick Cheney - you throw out crap and when challenged - disown it when it suits you.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

So Mike did MSNBC Selectively Crop the guys head off in their footage and claim that the BLACK guy with the AR15 was a WHITE Extremist ?

pssst (The Answer is YES)
EDIT
If you cannot *admit this happened *- you really are part of the misinformation problem in this country.


----------



## HorizontalMike (Jun 3, 2010)

If the selective editing took place then selective editing took place, be it FoxNews, MSNBC, Ed Schultz, etc

http://media.mtvnservices.com/mgid:cms:video:thedailyshow.com:394894

*The Daily Show with Jon Stewart*
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

Really enjoy Jon Stewart - even though he tries hard to distance himself from being "serious" he is actually honest, and I really enjoy when He and O'reilly visit eachothers shows.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

^I love John Stewart too. His delivery is just absolutely perfect. Even though it's usually at my expense, it's impossible not to laugh along with him. The other side really has no comedian at his level.


----------



## DrDirt (Feb 26, 2008)

I think a good description of Jon is that he is Liberal but not Partisan.
I don't think he would ever vote Repub, but he does call out both sides - like mikes video where he called out Ed Shultz.

Just to note my apology to Greg for the hijack - 
This is the only thread both sides can post with all the blocking in place.


----------



## derosa (Aug 21, 2010)

not to segway things too far but I like the hot chick posted above with the pasties.

Also, John Stewert I trust, the rest of the news stations lie which is why it is better to read foreign papers that don't have an American political agenda.


----------



## Bertha (Jan 10, 2011)

Huge lol, Rev. Russ!


----------

