December, 2005 archive

Throughout the last two millenia, horrible things have been done in the name of Christianity. Horrible things have also been done in the name of Islam. And the Japanese in World War II cloaked their aggression in the name of Shintiism.

Now, I must say, I know a little about Buddhism, Confucianism, and the Tao, and absolutely nothing about Shintiism.

Frankly, off the top of my head, I can’t think of horrible things that have been done in the name of Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, or Judaism (at least not since the days of the stories of the Old Testament).

One of the shames of our country’s history is the use of Christianity to justify slavery; if I climbed upstairs to the attic and dug out my old text books, I could offer many citations, but I’m too lazy to do so. But it was there and it was real.

And those who would pervert Christianity to violence and destruction are still around us; one only needs to read the paper to learn of the destruction done in the name of the Jesus Christ.

There is an internet site–Landover Baptist Church–that satirizes this particular form of perverted Christianity. I visit it from time to time, but, even though I know it’s satirical, it gives me the willies.

My friend Opie posted a link the other day that makes the fictional Landover Baptist seem tame:

The Westboro Baptist Church

It just drips hate. Hate in the name of love.

Yeah.

Right.

Why is it that those who claim to be closest to the God of Love are so full of hate?

I fulminated on Bill O’Reilly’s made-up “War on Christmas” earlier.

Now Steven Colbert has his say, courtesy of the Brad Blog.

Q. What’s the difference between a lawyer and a catfish?

A. One’s a scum-sucking bottom-feeder. The other’s a fish.

It’s easy to joke about lawyers–that is, until you need one. My lawyer is a plain-talking and plain-writing straight shooter.

But not all of them all.

John Grogan, in yesterday’s Philadelphia Inquirer, discusses how lawyers succeed in making their profession and their colleagues the butt of such sarcastic humor in discussing these two cases:

Mr. Grogan’s column is well-worth a read; click the link to see it all.

If lawyers want to know why they are the butt of so many jokes, they might want to listen to the claptrap coming out of some of their mouths.

The raw material is just too good to pass up.

These presumably are smart people, so why is it they so often come off sounding so utterly dumb? Not just dumb, but ridiculously out of touch. In being zealous advocates for their clients, they can end up sounding like they just beamed in from Planet Goof.

When you look at the big picture, it’s really kind of scary:

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.

(click the link to read the list of particulars)

Quite an indictment. It is, of course, too early to evaluate a president. That, historically, takes decades, and views change over times as results and impact become more obvious. Besides, many of the historians note that however bad Bush seems, they have indeed since worse men around the White House. Some say Buchanan. Many say Vice President Dick Cheney.

Courtesy Phillybits

For some reason, this story reminded me of an anecdote I read in one of Bennett Cerf’s books.

A radio station (the story dates from when radio was King) decided to conduct a poll one Saturday night. They called random numbers and asked the persons who answered the phone whether they knew where their kids were.

75% of the calls were answered by kids who didn’t know where their parents were . . . .

On a lighter note, would you surveil your kids with GPS?

It was all made up. It was being made up for years.

The Iraqi National Council? A creation of Americans. Ahmad Chalabi? A creation of Americans. The web of lies? A creation of Americans.

Listen to it here in MP3 format.

Read about it here.

As you may have heard, Bill “I Can Shout Louder than You” O’Reilly is making a big fuss about stores whose employees say “Happy Holidays” instead of “Merry Christmas” and is promoting a boycott of those stores.

What a made-up crock of lard. It’s amazing how some folks (right and left) can find hate where there is no hate.

And who worships in stores? Oh, wait, this is the USA. Most of us do worship in stores. We worship goods. But that’s another story.

Anyhoo, to honor this great American blowhard, I suggest we demand he boycott Fox News. Here’s their invitation to their Holiday party, courtesy of The Majority Report.

“A war — no matter how successful — will be 90 percent American and will be viewed as an American crusade by much of the Arab and Islamic world . . . .”

and

“When the war starts and the dying begins, the American people will have every right to ask, ‘Where are our allies?'”

Who said that?

Senator Sam Nunn in 1991.

Those comments did not come true about the first Gulf War, about which they were spoken. The first Gulf War ended up being pursued by a true, international coalition and accomplished its limited aims spectacularly (whether the aims should have been limited is another discussion). But they certainly seem to have become real today.

Follow the link to read more comments from back then that seem to have become relevant now.

How have the extreme right-wing Republicans, who are so out of the mainstream of American politics on so many issues, managed to consolidate and maintain power so effectively? And how have their tactics changed the landscape of American politics?

The guests on today’s Fresh Air attempt to answer that question. Here’s the description of the show from the website. Click the link to read more and listen to the show (which also includes an interview with Trent Lott):

Fresh Air from WHYY, December 1, 2005 · Political scientists Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson are the authors of the new book Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy.

In the book, Hacker and Pierson examine the tactics of far-right Republicans — and how they’ve changed the system for years to come. They split their subject matter into two topics: “Abandoning the Middle” and “Broken Checks and Balances.”

Hacker is an associate professor of political science at Yale University. Pierson is a professor of political science at the University of California at Berkeley.

Well worth a listen.