Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Its more about jump editing..
One thing we can say about wingnuts: They are reliably entertaining.
Foam in your coffee? It's called a cappokeeno. And wait'll you see what it costs!
This never gets old,
what Moose said.
Just once, I'd love to hear that a judge said, "What? Get out of here, you morons! What are you, a bunch of damn Communists?".
TPM has been really pissed off at Fox ever since Soledad O'Brien was seen reading a prinout during an interview and had to walk it back.http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2012/08/14/cameras-catch-cnn-anchor-soledad-obrien-reading-liberal-blog-during-debate-with/
Bat shit crazy wingnuts on parade.One would think the regulars here would even be embarrassed.But this is what it's ALL about...right Althouse Gang?P.S. President Obama won...and this kind of insanity played a big role.
Funny, I'm never offended by the rigorously secular displays, wonder why the inverse seems to not apply?-XC
Being offended is part of being a Lefty.
I tend to avoid both TPM and Fox News.
Every once in a while I wish some of my fellow atheists would stop trying to proselytize.Or perhaps they should all go to Arab and North African countries and go to court because the adhan called out five times a day by the muezzins are intrusive displays of religion.
While the "War on Christmas" is a big Fox meme much beloved by O'Reilly & others, at some level the secular left really needs to ask itself "Is this the best use of our time & political capital?"And those of you reading this from the secular left know the answer: for a sizable fraction of your membership, the answer is "Yes". Because a war to the death against Christianity has been in the DNA of the Left since the French Revolution.If the Left would like Fox News to stop flogging this meme, maybe it should work on stopping the anti-Christian tail from wagging the Lefty Dog.
A big part of me wishes that Fox would never allow itself to be in the position of being such an object of ridicule. Get rid of the "War on Christmas" silliness and all of the other light fluff.But of course, there is a reason why the Fox News Channel is a cable ratings powerhouse, and the New York Times is scrambling to figure out how it might still be in existence in ten years.Personally, I wish that Fox was less like Fox and more like the Wall Street Journal editorial page; like the National Review, and the Weekly Standard. I'd like to be able to tune into a conservative (or even a balanced) PBS/NPR. But since my experience in cable news programming = 0, and since a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g is better than the propaganda emanating from the rest of television news, I won't complain too much.
Not all of the scare stories were in fact about the attack on christianity. Others happened to be scary stories that were commented upon during christmas seasons.For example, the one about getting MRSA on a plane. Why is that somehow a story that shouldnt' be done, and why is it linked in with stories about assaults on Christmas?Sometimes scary shit happens during the christmas season and so, stories are done about those scary things.
One would think the regulars here would even be embarrassed.Not so. I'll answer why but it'll go by you, you're certain to reject it. You see, they took awhile to aggregate the similar sayings and put them all together into one thing that makes a point being driven over a series of programs by similar thinking individuals in agreement and over time appear as obsession and to an extent that is right, it is a correct observation of obsession.An obsession that occur once a year because they acknowledge atheist never stop and are making great headway so they're not stopping either. We notice you're not mentioning sensing a need for the atheists to feel any embarrassment for making this a perennial issue. But mostly, TPM is pointing out Fox's obsession with their made up War on Christmas without having the self-consciousness to feel even a ping of ridicule to their own obsession which is much greater, FOX. It's really quite incredible. I've not seen anything like it. I'll be reading along in comments and there's a remark referencing FOX where it has absolutely no reasonable place at all. Like an obsession. And this is everywhere. Actually, no thread is really complete without at least one. And the double-y incredible thing is the presumption that FOX viewers derive their opinions from viewing FOX rather than finding their opinions reflected there. Comments imply FOX provides the views and if FOX were gone then the views would be gone too. And that tells us they're projecting again, that they actually do get their views from MSNBC type anchors and have them do their thinking for them and it explains why the vocabulary is so impressively uniform that we get phrases such as millionairesandbillionaires and justpaytheirfairshare, dogwhistleforracism and yourehomophobic appear overnight. One would think regulars who keep calling regulars regulars would be embarrassed by 16,200,000,000,000 national debt and one would be right, I am.
I'll wait for a similar production regarding....say, CNN for example, regarding....climate change.this is more of a critique of our media, left or right than of a particular subject or network.But I should acknowledge that the folks at TPM are smart, insight folks.
Roberto wrote:Bat shit crazy wingnuts on parade.One would think the regulars here would even be embarrassed.I've never been part of any nativity scene, but nor do I care if others have them setup. Who cares?Radical atheists do. If they hadn't made challenges to counties and communities setting up nativity scenes, then Fox News wouldnt have to do stories about it.See how it's actually the atheists that are directing the News? I suppose you, as an atheist think that your position is totally non extreme and mainstream even, but many in the country woudl find your telling them that such displays can't be done to be the exreme position.And thus, I don't actually have a problem with Fox News, or any news division pointing out the fact that atheists keep trying to deprive people of the ability to put up nativity scenes in their communities.It also speaks to the fact that many people have a difference of opinion of atheists as to what separation of church and state (which is not actually in the constitution by the way) means, when it comes to nativity scenes. Atheists seem to think that means no religion can be displayed anywhere in the public square. Yet, that's not historically what that means, and atheists in many peoples opinions are taking an extreme position on this. Again, what is the problem if Fox News, or any other News division has a news cast about the extremist atheists yet again, displaying their intolerance.
Again, this is not from a position of someone who goes to the town to look at the nativity scene every year. I don't care if people put them up or dont put them up. In either case, it's no skin off my nose. I would similarly have no problem if a town also put up a menorah, or didn't put up a menorah. No skin off my nose in either case.Why is it such an issue for these extremist atheists? It's fucking christmas. Let people put up a fricking nativity scened without getting your panties in a bunch or acting like extremist jackoffs.
Of course any religious display should be banned from a public place on the basis of the 1A.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. . . .
Congress...LawCity Council..Nativity SceneSlippery Slope?
Nativity scenes have been allowed prior to latest rulings siding with atheists to not allow nativity scenes. Which gets to the interpretation of the 1st amendment and who the judge is making that interpretation.
Ahoy! What the Chip said.Regards — Cliff
Wonderful. Everyone from fundamentalists to average church goers to agnostics to just folks who like Christmas traditions get jolted a bit by such stories. That's why they are on. Nobody likes being treated like a dolt by some atheist just so he can score points on some stupid website with equally antisocial types.What comes to mind whenever some atheist chortles over our stupidity is, "Yeah, man, I guess you've really shown us what life's all about, you asshole. Merry friggin' Christmas."
Freedom to practice religion does not mean FREEDOM FROM RELIGION.And that is the problem facing people. Some feel any display of religion somehow offends them (yea try that in Iran) but our country has displayed religious symbols since the day it was founded. All the founding fathers wanted was to make sure the state could not FORCE people to join any state sponsored religion.Hiding religious beliefs was never on their minds.
Paul - read up on the 1A establishment clause.
Some of those right-wing Christian chicks on Fox News are so smokin' hot, what they need is some good lovin' to loosen them up.
It'd be interesting to see a compilation of the phrase 'War on Women' from an equal length of days form a month ago. Even on Fox you'd be able to assemble an lengthy clip. I'd imagine.
Alex,It says 'respecting' relgion. I.E. no state church. Government must be neutral. They don't ban religious scenes nor push them. If you want to put a cross on the court house lawn, then ok. If you don't, then don't.And that is the whole crux of the matter.
....or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.How come everyone forgets this part?
@ampersand:Because it undermines their argument.
Post a Comment