Saturday, December 03, 2005

Green Christma$

Okay. As you may or may not have heard, a hobby horse that the Fox folk like John Gibson and especially Bill O'Reilly are riding once again this year is, to steal a title from the great Norman Corwin, "The Plot To Overthrow Christmas."

Basically it's just more carrying on designed to convince people-

Whose faith is recognized by the federal goverment in days off school and work
Whose god is mentioned on the money
And whose president keeps trying to strike down the separation of church and state

-that they are an oppressed minority.

The poor dears. A blog called The Y Files has a good entry up about this curious war on phantom Grinches.

The "save Christmas" hysteria this year seems to be worse than ever (though that's what I thought last year, too). I mean, okay, some of the ACLU-type handwringing over creches on public grounds gets ridiculous, but John Gibson carrying on about "the plot to ban the sacred Christian holiday"? Bill O'Reilly urging a boycott of stores that use "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas," and pursuing investigative reports on various stores' Christmas policies with a zeal he normally reserves for criminal-coddling judges? O'Reilly has become truly unhinged on the subject. One of his latest rants is analyzed by Michael Stickings at The Moderate Voice: O'Reilly carries on about a "very secret plan," funded by his bogeyman George Soros, to "diminish Christian philosophy in the U.S.A." by attacking Christmas. (Stickings also picks up on one of O'Reilly's favorite rhetorical tricks: to get around that pesky "establishment of religion" problem, he'll argue that things like Ten Commandment displays in government buildings are not about "religion" but about "Judeo-Christian philosophy.")

They pretend to be worked up over what they frenetically call these attempts to "ban a sacred Christian holiday." Excuse me? Sacred? I'm sorry, but that train left the station a long time ago. Since before I (and mostly likely you) was born, the most Christian philosophy most people in the U.S.A. got out of Christmas was Linus reading from the Bible. (A tasteful, well-played, and altogether inoffensive scene no matter what your religious beliefs, I've always thought.)

The religion was leeched out of Christmas years ago, and the ACLU had nothing to do with it. Madison Avenue did. Stan Freberg, the revered satirist (and himself the son of a Reverend), once made a record that caused quite a bit of controversy in its day (the 1950s). Called "Green Christma$", it was a part-musical, part spoken-word spin on "A Christmas Carol" in which Scrooge was an advertising man looking to profit from Christmas. Bob Cratchet was a lowly employee trying to prod his consience.

Near the finale, the following dialogue takes place:

CRATCHET: The people keep hoping you'll remember. But you never do.
SCROOGE: Remember what?
CRATCHET: Whose birthday we're celebrating.

And in the finale itself, we hear "Jingle Bells" punctuated with the sound of a cash register.

I wonder whether O'Reilly would play it on his radio show? But no, I don't wonder that. Not really. Fox folk have nothing against Madison Avenue-that's where the God to whom they pray lives.

Tonight, I tuned in to The O'Reilly Factor near the end to see an interview with the Rev. Tim Bumgardner, a pastor in Wellington, Florida, who is fighting to have a nativity scene included in his town's holiday display (which currently has a Christmas tree and a menorah)...When O'Reilly gave the Reverend the last word, the following exchange occurred (transcribed by yours truly from the taped rerun):


Rev. Tim Bumgardner: I think they should put a Nativity scene -- be American! Hey, celebrate Christmas -- people spend more money! Jesus makes people want to spend money!

On November 30, Media Matters reported that in apparent defiance of the O'Reilly/Gibson anti-"Happy Holidays" crusade, the Fox News online store was using the phrases "holiday ornaments" and "holiday tree." One day later, the Fox website changed "holiday" to "Christmas."

Honesty is such a lonely word

Update: At Daily Kos, Armando separates the conservatives into two groups, as a shepard separates the sheep from the goats. Honest and dishonest.

Via Think Progress, a little preview of coming attractions:


...[The] Washington Post previews the right-wing’s new counterattack against Alito opponents:

Several conservative groups, meanwhile, plan a major push beginning Monday to portray Alito’s opponents as anti-God. Talking points for the effort, which will involve ads and grass-roots organizations, were laid out in a strategy memo by Grassfire.org…


Here’s an excerpt from the memo:

First, let’s call out the groups that are attacking Judge Alito from behind their “independentcourt.org” moniker. Who do we find when we lift the veil? The ACLU, People for the American Way, NOW, NARAL, AFL-CIO, Human Rights Campaign, MoveOn.org, Americans United, NAACP, NARAL (see link at end for the full list). And what theme unites these groups? An agenda to purge any and all references to religion from our public lives.

Think Progress goes on to point out that the conservatives omitted from this list, I can only assume deliberately, a few religious groups that are also opposing Judge Alito. They might also have noticed that NARAL apparently makes conservatives so spitting mad they listed it twice.

ETA: A good, concise editorial about Judge Alito in the New York Times. Those who wish to defend him are approaching the level of those who wish to defend Bush. In Bush's case, you are left with two choices: Either he is a liar or he is an incompetent. Neither is good for the country.

With Alito, it seems to come down to this: He is a man who has been working most of his adult life to be in a position to repeal Roe V. Wade. Or he is a man willing to voice an opinion, on one of the most controversial issues in recent history, with which he does not agree. In order to get ahead at a job.

Again, neither make him look very good for the country. And what does it tell you about the conservatives that they know...they know...that they cannot just say: I believe abortion should be permitted under no circumstances and a woman does not have the right to choose for herself.

They know they can't say that, because they know most Americans don't believe it. So they lie, which is what you do when niether the facts nor public opinion is on your side but you still want to win anyway.

It's what the conservatives have been doing for five years. Let's see if they get away with it again.

Who said it?

"Staying the course" may make a good sound bite, but it can be disastrous for strategy. Several of Hitler's generals told him that "staying the course" at Stalingrad in 1942 was a strategic mistake, that he should allow the Sixth Army to be withdrawn, saving it to fight defensive actions on reduced frontage against the growing Red Army. He refused, lost the Sixth Army entirely, and left his commanders with fewer forces to defend a wider front. Thus he made the subsequent Soviet offensives westward easier.

To argue, as some do, that we cannot leave Iraq because "we broke it and therefore we own it" is to reason precisely the way Hitler did with his commanders. Of course we broke it! But the Middle East is not a pottery store. It is the site of major military conflict with several different forces that the United States is galvanizing into an alliance against America. To hang on to an untenable position is the height of irresponsibility. Beware of anyone, including the president, who insists that this is "responsible" or "the patriotic" thing to do.

Who said it?

George Bush's place in history

There are some numbers. The History News Network at George Mason University has just polled historians informally on the Bush record. Four hundred and fifteen, about a third of those contacted, answered -- maybe they were all crazed liberals -- making the project as unofficial as it was interesting. These were the results: 338 said they believed Bush was failing, while 77 said he was succeeding. Fifty said they thought he was the worst president ever. Worse than Buchanan.

This is what those historians said -- and it should be noted that some of the criticism about deficit spending and misuse of the military came from self-identified conservatives -- about the Bush record:

# He has taken the country into an unwinnable war and alienated friend and foe alike in the process;

# He is bankrupting the country with a combination of aggressive military spending and reduced taxation of the rich;

# He has deliberately and dangerously attacked separation of church and state;


# He has proved to be incompetent in affairs domestic (New Orleans) and foreign (
Iraq and the battle against al-Qaida);


# He is ignorantly hostile to science and technological progress;

# He has tolerated or ignored one of the republic's oldest problems, corporate cheating in supplying the military in wartime.

The two greatest things anyone has ever said about creationism

"The effort to reconcile science and religion is almost always made, not by theologians, but by scientists unable to shake off altogether the piety absorbed with their mothers' milk. The theologians, with no such dualism addling their wits, are smart enough to see that the two things are implacably and eternally antagonistic, and that any attempt to thrust them into one bag is bound to result in one swallowing the other.

The scientists who undertake this miscegenation always end by succumbing to religion; after a Millikan has been discoursing five minutes it becomes apparent that he is speaking in the character of a Christian Sunday-school scholar, not of a scientist. The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable. To be sure, theology is always yielding a little to the progress of knowledge, and only a Holy Roller in the mountains of Tennessee would dare to preach today what the popes preached in the Thirteenth Century, but this yielding is always done grudgingly, and thus lingers a good while behind the event. So far as I am aware even the most liberal theologian of today still gags at scientific concepts that were already commonplaces in my schooldays."

--H. L. Mencken


As for science vs. religion I'm issuing a refraining order. Science should stay 500 yards from religion at all times.
-- The Simpsons, "Lisa the Skeptic," written by David S. Cohen

Friday, December 02, 2005

Oh boy.

So, we know about how the Christian Right has been trying to force religion into our classrooms as so-called "science." My stand remains unchanged: When they're willing to let scientists have equal time at the pulpit to discuss evolution during Sunday services, fine. Till then, no, sorry, bar them at the door.

But if ever there was an illustration of "You give some people a inch, and they takes the whole blasted yardstick," it's the Christian Right. An entry in Pacific Views shows the holy rollers will never be satisfied until anything that could possibly be seen as contrary to their views is ruled unacceptable:

Back in August, we blogged about how a group of fundamentalist Christian schools are suing the University of California in order to force the UC system to give credit for high school science courses the embrace the creationist worldview. According to the suit filed by the Association of Christian Schools International, UC's policy of refusing to give credit for classes that use textbooks that challenge the reality of evolution discriminates against 'Christian' schools and attempts to secularize the schools.

The fundamentalists' lawsuit specifically objects to UC's refusal to accept courses that use science books pubished by Bob Jones University Press and A Beka Books.


Since our August post, the suit against UC has gone to trial, and more examples of the texts used by the fundamentalist Christian schools have come to light. It turns out that it's not just the science texts that present their subjects in a manner that's troublesome. Here are some excerpts compiled by Thomas Vinciguerra in the NY Times:


"United States History for Christian Schools," written by Timothy Keesee and Mark Sidwell (Bob Jones University, 2001), says this about Thomas Jefferson.

American believers can appreciate Jefferson's rich contribution to the development of their nation, but they must beware of his view of Christ as a good teacher but not the incarnate son of God. As the Apostle John said, "Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son" (I John 2:22). [...]

"Elements of Literature for Christian Schools," by Ronald Horton, Donalynn Hess and Steven Skeggs (Bob Jones University, 2001), faults Mark Twain for calling God "an irascible, vindictive, fierce and ever fickle and changeful master."

Twain's outlook was both self-centered and ultimately hopeless. Denying that he was created in the image of God, Twain was able to rid himself of feeling any responsibility to his Creator. At the same time, however, he defiantly cut himself off from God's love. Twain's skepticism was clearly not the honest questioning of a seeker of truth but the deliberate defiance of a confessed rebel.

Mark Twain and Thomas Jefferson, people. Two of the greatest writers-to say nothing of their other accomplishments, god knows in the case of Jefferson-this nation has ever produced. A liar. A self-centered, defiant skeptic.

And BTW, Mssrs Horton, Hess and Skeggs: Christ was a deliberately defiant rebel, too.

Just as I suspected...

You scored as Mermaid. Mermaid: Mermaids are also known as Sirens. These creatures were beautiful women who tricked sailors into becoming completely entranced by their haunting voices and found death soon after. Not all stories of Mermaids are about gentle loving sea people. They are mystical, magical, and extremely dangerous. They have a way about them that brings anyone they are around to seem enchanted. They are very mysterious creatures and to meet one... Would mean certain Death. Let the song of the Sea fill your soul, for you are a Mermaid.

Mermaid

58%

Faerie

58%

Angel

50%

WereWolf

25%

Dragon

8%

Demon

8%

What Mythological Creature are you? (Cool Pics!)
created with QuizFarm.com

Darling it's better
Down where it's wetter
Take it from me...

Doers and Democrats

Via Daily Kos:
Marshall Wittmann, a former Republican political strategist now with the centrist Democratic Leadership Council, said Pelosi may have resurrected her party's most deadly liability -- voters' lack of trust in the party on national security.

"If Karl Rove was writing the timing of this, he wouldn't have written it any differently, with the president of the United States expressing resolve and the Democratic leader offering surrender," Wittmann said, referring to Bush's top adviser. "For Republicans, this is manna from heaven."

David Sirota, a Democratic strategist in Montana long critical of the party leadership's timidity, fired back: "It is not surprising that a bunch of insulated elitists in the Washington establishment -- most of whom have never served in uniform -- would stab the Democratic Party in the back and attack the courage of people like Vietnam War hero Jack Murtha and Nancy Pelosi for their stand on Iraq."


You see, Sherman, this is what I was talking about when I said that Democrats listen to too much of the Republicans' advice.

Wanna see the most moodily pretentious website you've ever seen in your life?

I give you Michael Mangia: The Official Site. Be sure to click on the picture, you don't want to miss the second photo of Mr. Mangia shilhouetted against the skyline. His album is called The Invisible Wall. No doubt it's the one between he and the ones that love him, poor little lamb.

From there, if you can take it, click on "News" and luxuriate in one or two excerpts from Mr. Mangia's reviews, including:
Each song telling it's own story of death or pain or obsession; the things reality is made of.


Ooh!

This man needs to be locked into a dance club with a couple of ABC records on the sound system.

Okay, the Jack Abramoff thing

I haven't said anything about the Jack Abramoff case, which other blogs are circling like lions before a kill, because I didn't think I knew enough about it to have an opinion. And I couldn't find, on or offline, a concise explaination.

As so often in matters of law, your best bet is firedoglake, a blog run by two women, Jane Hamsher and "Redd" (an attorney). They do a great job in giving their own thoughts and synthesizing those of others.

Case in point, these excerpts from a New York Times article, followed by Hamsher's conclusion:


With a federal corruption case intensifying, prosecutors investigating Jack Abramoff, the Republican lobbyist, are examining whether he brokered lucrative jobs for Congressional aides at powerful lobbying firms in exchange for legislative favors, people involved in the case have said.


The attention paid to how the aides obtained jobs occurs as Mr. Abramoff is under mounting pressure to cooperate with prosecutors as they consider a case against lawmakers.


Many forces are bearing down on Mr. Abramoff. Last week, his closest business partner, Michael Scanlon, pleaded guilty to conspiracy in exchange for cooperating in the inquiry, being run by an interagency group, into whether money and gifts were used in an influence-peddling scandal that involved lawmakers.

Despite charging Indian tribes that were clients tens of millions of dollars in lobbying fees, Mr. Abramoff has told friends that he is running out of money.

...the specter of Abramoff flipping is probably sending more DCers into prickly heat than even TraitorGate. Abramoff knows where the bodies are buried. You know, figuratively speaking and all. Not literally. Okay sort of literally.

Prepare to be utterly creeped out

Via Tapped, we find that John Derbyshire of the conservative National Review's The Corner has been holding forth on just what kind of woman he finds attractive. Mr. Derbyshire?
Conservatives, as I recall, are the ones who believe that "human nature has no history." It follows that we are at ease with the fact that the human female is visually attractive to the human male at, or shortly after, puberty, and for only a few brief years thereafter.


Now, say what you will about Mr. Derbsyshire--and Tapped's Garance Franke-Ruta says,
human puberty in the female of the species begins at around age 9, and continues to roughly age 16, according to the online medical encyclopedia maintained by the National Institutes of Health. Which means the only civilized response to Derbyshire's assertion that pubescent and post-pubescent girls are the "only" attractive female population ought to be a gigantic "Ew."


--but say what you will about him, he is, at least, comitted to his premise. Which is more than you can say for most conservatives. So fixed is his idea that women much past the age of 16 are not fit to be ridden hard or put away wet, he shields his eyes from such godforsaken, bad-looking and offensive examples of their gender as...
Did I buy, or browse, a copy of the November 17 GQ, in order to get a look at Jennifer Aniston's bristols?** No, I didn't. While I have no doubt that Ms. Aniston is a paragon of charm, wit, and intelligence, she is also 36 years old. Even with the strenuous body-hardening exercise routines now compulsory for movie stars, at age 36 the forces of nature have won out over the view-worthiness of the unsupported female bust.

He's right, of course. That's why if Paget Brewster, Teri Polo, or any of the rest of the no-longer-sexy brigade were to do cheerleading routines for me in matching uniforms without their panties, it would have no affect on me. No affect at all. Really. I encourage them to test me.
It is, in fact, a sad truth about human life that beyond our salad days, very few of us are interesting to look at in the buff.

Speak for yourself, John.

Latest on the list of countries to let gays marry: South Africa

That's right, folks. South Africa is now more progressive on civil and human rights than we are. Everybody say I...I...I...ain't gonna play Sun City...oh, wait, I mean, unless they have honeymoon packages...

Say, you know, we haven't wallowed in the poll numbers recently...

From Reuters:

"Those Democratic congressional leaders who try to suggest that we don't have a plan are deeply irresponsible," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan, who reiterated it was possible to bring some troops home next year.

A snap poll by CNN/Gallup/USA Today after Bush's speech said 55 percent of respondents believed Bush did not have a plan to "achieve victory for the United States in Iraq."


Those wild and crazy, carefree Democrats with their representing the belief of a greater majority of the American people than voted for Bush in the last election...

Pat Robertson, expert on "black folks"

This reminds me of the time I saw him cite both the O.J. Simpson case and Othello as proof that mixed marriages never work.
During a November 30 discussion about politics and religion on Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club, which featured Fox News' John Gibson, host Pat Robertson stated: "[I]f you haven't got a Democratic nominee who can be called 'Bubba' [an apparent reference to former President Bill Clinton], you're not going to get him in office. You're not going to get a New England liberal, no way! Black folks aren't going to vote for people like that."


Upon hearing this, the ever-smart Democratic party decided to enlist the services of Bubba Smith, the beloved "Hightower" of the Police Academy movies. Victory in '08 is now assured.

Thursday, December 01, 2005

Havoc

Well, this is just unfortunate. You know what's worse than white, affluent suburban kids trying to front like they're hip-hop to inject some "reality" into their lives? White, affluent suburban actors making believe they're kids trying to front like they're hip-hop to inject some "reality" into their lives. It's basically what I was talking about recently with Rent-the myth of the opressed as "more in tune with life."

The screenplay is by Stephen Gaghan, who has some chops-he wrote Traffic-but this is not his best work. These are some of the most inconsistently written characters I've ever seen. A good character is "inconsistent" at times, as are we all-but a viewer must believe all the actions are coming from the same place. Here it was more like: Wait-is this an evil twin story? Also, the films complete and utter lack of ending should have been dealt with at some point. It's one of those movies where you think you know what's going to happen, but hope you'll be surprised when something else does, but no. Niether happens. Nothing happens. It's as though you can tell when they ran out of money.

I rented it, of course, because I respect Gaghan and wanted to see this latest example of his work. The fact that it contains three separate scenes of My Future Bride Anne Hathaway's naked torso was merely a coincidence.

I have a feeling that getting hung up on Ms. Hathaway is going to lead me to a lot of pain if she doesn't start having better luck in choosing her projects. Even the apparently much-anticipated Brokeback Mountain (the "gay cowboy movie") looked silly to me in the trailer. I do think she has talent as an actress, but I'm biased.

I've now seen fully half of her films to date, and not a one of them can I talk about without starting with "Anne Hathaway is The Most Beautiful Girl In The World, but..."

...but she really is...

In the town...where I was born...don't like the look of this old town, what goes up, must come down

Courtesy of JeopardyGirl's blog.

The Town Where You Were Born:




The Town Where You Live Now:


Your Name:

(Dig that clock in the background...it has a name, y'all.)

Your grandmother's name:



(Just the second part.)

Your Favourite Food:

(I'm a simple man in many ways.)

Your favorite drink:

Your favorite smell:

(And:)

Now there's something you don't see every day

I knew I should have gone to college...read this blog post when you need a laugh.

Republicans get overwhelming support from our military



"Midshipmen catch naps as they wait for more than an hour for U.S. President George W. Bush to deliver an address on the war in Iraq at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, Maryland November 30, 2005."


Via Tennessee Guerilla Women.

And I won't work for nobody but you

Like Mark, I was sorry to see last night that the actress Wendie Jo Sperber had died. Like most people, it seems, I remember her best as a supporting player on "Bosom Buddies"-certainly it's the work most often mentioned in the headlines of her various obituaries. I thought that series was underrated, and remembered only for giving Tom Hanks a breakthrough (Hanks gave an appropriately tasteful quote on her death). But it seems there are more than a few of us who remember it fondly.

She was also Michael J. Fox's sister in the "Back To The Future" films, and other films of, shall we say, varying success (two words: "Stewadress School") in the '80s. I remember feeling bad for her in those that seemed to use her only as a fat-girl punchline. From Bosom Buddies, I knew she had greater gifts.

And in the category of short-lived, seemingly forgotten TV series, I remember a sitcom she did on FOX in the late '80s. It had the unpromising title of "Women In Prison," but I remember it as being really quite funny. Who knows if it would hold up, but I'd kinda like to see it again.

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

This weeks badgering post...

...to try to get you to recognize "Veronica Mars". If you've been reading this blog and/or my old one for any amount of time, you know I think this is one of the best-acted, best written TV shows around. And I'm determined that if it doesn't go at least five years, it won't be because I didn't try.

Now, the last time I did this, my pal Corey, who I hooked on VM last year, suggested that some episodes are not particularly accessible to newbies. And I should encourage people to watch the first season on DVD before settling down with Season 2.

My feelings are divided. On the one hand, it seems to me that you're more likely to tune in an episode of some show I'm always going on about on TV. Rather than spend the $12 (or whatever) to rent the entire first season, just on my say-so.

But on the other, to a degree Corey's right, "Veronica Mars" is less accessible to newbies, arguably more than most TV series. I was lucky enough to be watching from the very beginning last season; in the words of Monty Python, I'm not only proud of that, I'm quite smug about it.

So I'm putting it out there and leaving it up to you. I can't offer you your money back if you rent the DVDs and don't like the show, but if you call or email Corey, he'll be glad to make arrangements to reimburse you day or night. His contact information is:

...I'm kidding, of course. But anyway, tonight's episode was everything I've been saying the show is, with one or two bonuses. One-time "Buffy" viewers had to be kvelling to see Alyson Hannigan and Charisma Carpenter trying to out-bitch each other.

Speaking of, Hannigan's performance provides more evidence, if any were needed, that most actors are only as good as their writing. I watched another episode of her sitcom, "How I Met Your Mother" this week. Not only did I still not find it very funny, but her work seemed to have lost some of its characteristic sparkle. Now here she is back on "Veronica Mars," and all's right with the world again. I was also impressed with the way she-a good actress-plays a very bad actress...

In an interesting bit of cross-promotion, an alternate ending to the episode's already jaw-dropping conclusion is avalible online and viewers can vote on which they prefer. I went with the original. The alternate seemed a bit too "24-esque," but it certainly would have been fertile ground for future storylines.

And it's always nice to see Mac, but I don't believe for one minute that girl is straight...