War on Christmas Fraud Exposed: The Silent Night “Rewrite” That Wasn’t
War on Christmas Fraud Exposed: The Silent Night “Rewrite” That Wasn’t
On Friday, Bill O’Reilly took to the airwaves to share the latest “War on Christmas” outrage:
In Dodgeville, Wisconsin, the Ridgewood Elementary School has changed the song Silent Night to Cold in the Night and forced the kids to sing the lyrics, “Cold in the night, No one in sight, Winter winds whirl and bite,” to the tune of the original Silent Night.
O’Reilly was by no means the only conservative to repeat this story. During a Dec. 10 appearance on Fox News, Mathew Staver of the Liberty Counsel said the presentation at Ridgewood Elementary had “no balance here. They have no Christian Christmas carols.” He even threatened to sue the school:
People are outraged. We sent a demand letter asking them to immediately change the song and allow the actual lyrics of “Silent Night,” and if they do not, if they insist on this ridiculous course of action, we’ll file a federal lawsuit.
As it turns out, the entire story is a fraud.
Ridgewood Elementary didn’t change the lyrics to “Silent Night.” What they did was perform a 1988 copyrighted play called “The Little Tree’s Christmas Gift.”
That play actually contains numerous songs about Christmas, including the grand finale, an audience-led group singing of “We Wish You A Merry Christmas.” The play’s creator, Dwight Elrich, happens to lead the New Covenant Singers of Bel Air Presbyterian Church in Los Angeles.
In fact, “The Little Tree’s Christmas Gift” has been performed in several churches, including the Oakwood Forest Christian Church in Kingsport, Tennessee, the St. Anthony Parish School in Des Moines, Iowa, and St. Mark’s Episcopal Church of Abeline, Texas.
So why are the Silent Night lyrics changed in “Little Tree’s Christmas”? Because the play is about a small, lonely Christmas tree that is told it is “too scraggly, it will never sell.” That character sings the revised lyrics — “Cold in the night, No one in sight, Winter winds whirl and bite” — in a scene lamenting his sad state. The rewording has absolutely nothing to do with “secularizing” the song.
Sorry, Virginia, there is no “War on Christmas.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well that figures.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:06 pmWhy would BO let the truth get in the way
of his war on Christmas?
He never lets it get in the way of any other
loony rant.
I am stunned. What will I tell my children?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:07 pmSo much for the War On Christmas! Now they’re moving on to the WAR ON TRUTH!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:12 pmApparently Dwight Elrich was not informed that Christmas carols are holy scripture.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:13 pmWhat the — ? You mean O’Reilly didn’t bother to get the facts on a bullshit story that’s been echoing all over Wingnuttia as gospel truth?
The deuce, you say!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:14 pmthis is the second time in as many days that an example of this supposed “war” has been proven false.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200512130006
December 14th, 2005 at 2:15 pmMaybe if we write to the Saudi Prince that owns 5% of Fox and ask him to demand that Rupert Murdoch fact-check every story in his prime time line-up, then Fox might conclude that O’Lielly and Hannity aren’t worth the trouble.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:16 pmWhat’s this, like the fifth or sixth incident of O’Reilly slandering an entity to promote his fictitious “War on Christmas”?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:17 pmI really think the man has come unglued.
I think it would be wonderful if Thinkprogress could link all of O’Reilly’s gaffes from his “War on Christmas” into one mega post, so that all of his blabbering rants can be emailed in one nice tidy wrapped present.
Considering that I found out about the subject of last night’s O’Reilly Factor Talking Points Memo “Christmas in the media” from an advert on this Fox page that contians eleven Holiday or Holidays references but no Christmas references, you won’t be surprised that Fox wasn’t mentioned once. Despite their multiple “Holiday” parties.
The advertising blurb was :
Why does Fox hate Christmas so much?
Z.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:18 pmWith all the pain and suffering, shock and awe going on in the world, I can’t think of a less important subject for O’reilly to be concerned about.
Who CARES?
Just because Walmart doesn’t have a banner that says Merry Christmas, doesn’t stop me from celbrating Christmas.
Besides, if he wants to get technical, then I might point out that Jesus was born in April.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:19 pmBTW, I love the BO picture in this post.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:19 pmAre those “falafel” lips, or what?
My bad… They’ve changed the page…
It’s now twelve “Holiday” and still no “Christmas”
Z.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:20 pmI bet someone gets fired (not Bill O’Reilly but one of his researh assistants) over this. If TP finds this so easily, why couldn’t they?
To be fair, I saw that episode … the Silent Night re-word was one of four things mentioned during the “talking points” section.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:20 pmBill making stuff up? Taking things out of context? I’m shocked. Shocked I tell you. I think the folks in Wis. could have a defamation lawsuit on thier hands. At the very least Bill should make amends, not that it will happen, but it should.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:21 pmBill O’Reilly and all the rest of those so-called “Christian CONservatives” who lie about this kind of stuff need to be outed. Email his website, call the TV stations and call these jokers out! Where is the FCC on this? Email them too!!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:21 pmThe stockings were hung by the chimney with care,
They’d been worn all week and needed the air!
How about War On The Poor? Isn’t that the real “War on Christmas?”
Harpy Holidays.
Creator Bless!
Neil
December 14th, 2005 at 2:21 pmit’s time to hold these media monsters accountable. I’m just fed up. It’s an outrage.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:22 pmAnd also … my bet is, he’ll issue a correction … I could be wrong though …
December 14th, 2005 at 2:22 pmWhy does Bill O’Reilly hate Bill O’Reilly?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:22 pmSpeak truth to power……it really is enough isn’t it?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:24 pmThe MSM is just over the edge. It’s not about Christmas…it’s about mental dysfunction and dishonest power plays. The fact that this stuff even flys at all is a sign that Americans in large numbers/America is losing or has lost it.
who lie about this kind of stuff need to be outed
No one’s said he lied … and to assume so is a tad premature, isn’t it?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:24 pmI just called MR. Robert (BOB) Knight at Concerned Women for America, he is the guy who was on CNN with Sam Seder the other day shoveling this shit around.
Call him at: (202) 488-7000
You might actually get him in person. I got his voicemail (his real voicemail) and left him a calm, lengthy message on how we was so wrong about this and that he should check his talking points before he goes on national TV.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:24 pm#19,
The shame of “falafel”, I think.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:25 pmSo why are the Silent Night lyrics changed in “Little Tree’s Christmas� Because the play is about a small, lonely Christmas tree that is told it is “too scraggly, it will never sell.†That character sings the revised lyrics — “Cold in the night, No one in sight, Winter winds whirl and bite†— in a scene lamenting his sad state.
CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:26 pmGeo,
December 14th, 2005 at 2:26 pmSo you are saying that we should presume stupid before evil?
“And also … my bet is, he’ll issue a correction … I could be wrong though …
Comment by Giacomo”
Hey GeoMetro, the ‘corrections’ rarely get issued by faux news, and when they do, they are rarely ‘clear’ and often only get mentioned on the website. That’s what propagandists like you guys do – lie, and then rarely if ever offer retractions for your lies. You lie on this site all of the time, yet you don’t retract any of the nonsense and retarded comments you post.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:28 pmGiacomo…
What would you call it when someone presents a fact as being correct and it isn’t? I know a specific word for that, and it is “lying”. It could be accidental rather than malicious, but does that make it any better?
My guess is that Fox have special people who check facts. They’re called “researchers”. It would have taken them minutes to call the School and say “Hey, is it true that… ” and then they would have the full story. If they didn’t do that then they were sloppy. If they are that sloppy with such an easy to verify story then would you trust them for REAL news?
So either they are incompetent (they used a “Fact” without checking it) or they are liars. Which is it going to be?
Z.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:29 pm[Comment deleted by admin.]
December 14th, 2005 at 2:29 pmzwack,
Didn’t they crush rather for less? Funny how the pansy republicans their panties in a bunch when it’s a reporter they don’t like, covering a story they don’t believe – but every time one of their propaganda idiots lie, they come to the defense like a bunch of little weiners… Where’s your backbone Geo? Oh wait, you don’t have one!
December 14th, 2005 at 2:31 pm#25,
I think he is setting BO up for the incompetence
December 14th, 2005 at 2:32 pmdefense.
“I can’t check into everything that:
1) Happens in the WH basement (Ronnie version)
2) Happens in the company I am paid billions of
dollars to run (Kenny Boy version)
3) Happens in my stock portfolio even if I
am sent statements all teh time (Frist version)
4) Happens when the mafia I hire rubs someone out
(Abramoff et al version)
5) Gets into one of my loony rants (BO version)
O’Reilly venting garbage is hardly news, but the ABC news article linked is far more insane. Basically, the f*cktards at this “liberty counsel” had the whole issue explained to them and are still insisting they’ll sue if the school doesn’t drop the program.
The article also points out another reason that words are changed to traditional songs… to further the godless, Soros-funded humanist assualt on all that’s Christian? Ummm, actually, so younger kids know the melody.
These people truly are nuts.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:33 pmLast time I checked, the doors to my Lutheran church were open 24/7/365 and no one barred my entrance to the place. Similarly, I haven’t been stopped from praying anytime and any place I want to (I do it silently and inconspicuously, as Jesus suggested). Best part is, my daughter is allowed to do the same in school (often before a test!).
The local mall has a big, decorated tree in the center where the two main hallways come together. It’s a Christmas tree to me, but it’s a holiday tree to plenty of other shoppers. I don’t care what it’s called, the thing is pretty. But there’s enough pagan in me to appreciate nature for nature’s sake-maybe the tree should have been allowed to continue growing so it could provide shelter for birds and other animals…
And just what in blazes does a tree have to do with the birth of Christ anyway?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:35 pmGoddamn it:
http://www.lc.org/libertyalert/2005/la121405.htm
December 14th, 2005 at 2:35 pmEven though this is a completely fake story, by a fake anchor on a fake news channel, did Bill O’Rielly or this Matthew Staver character ever hear of church and state?
I also like the fact that the Liberty Counsel was given that name like they are advancing people’s liberties, when they are actually trying to get rid of our freedom of religion.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:37 pmI prefer the ‘Daily Show’. Not only is the fake news more entertaining, but it’s actually more accurate than the crap spewed by OLiely.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:40 pmaaaaaaaahahahahahahahaha
December 14th, 2005 at 2:41 pmThis is a War on the War on Christmas.
This must stop. How can we fight the War on Christimas while there is a War on the War on Christmas!
Cash in your gold, frankinsense and muhrr and use the money to by guns, ammunitions, and foodstuffs.
The war has entered the final stages.
-Komrade Kringle
December 14th, 2005 at 2:45 pmEven though it is hard to do, can we take this a bit seriously for a moment? Doesn’t credibility count for anything at all at Fox? As bogus as the whole war on Christmas nonsense has been, one would think that O’Reilly and company could have come up with a few REAL examples of “infractions.” There is a lot of talk on this site and others of the “reality-based commmunity” but has this part of the religious right become so unhinged from reality that they don’t even care if the purported examples they give are complete lies? Can’t they somehow be called to account?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:52 pmI think it’s time we put some anti-persecution-complex drug into the city water and calm these people down.
December 14th, 2005 at 2:53 pmEmail Fox News and demand a retraction. If indeed Fox News is a real news channel, then they would automatically retract an incorrect story. If they do not, then I guess we’ve gotten the message that Fox News has nothing to do with news, whatsoever. Yes, we already know that, but it doesn’t hurt to point it out to them over and over again.
Here’s where to email them:
FOX News Channel Comments
December 14th, 2005 at 2:54 pmComments@foxnews.com
Another Fox News hun spouts unresearch right wing babble…where’s the news in the story?
December 14th, 2005 at 2:54 pmWhat would you call it when someone presents a fact as being correct and it isn’t? I know a specific word for that, and it is “lyingâ€.
Well … it does depend. I could call that person ignorant of the truth. If I tell you something I believe to be true, am I lying … or do I have a crappy vetting process, or poor researchers, or false leads, etc. Lying, at least as I’ve taught my kids, is when one purposefully commits (the “I didn’t do it” when they did variety) or ommits (the when your mom asks you how school was, and you skipped the entire day and you say “it was fine” variety) … not when they said something that is later proved to be untrue (but was believed to be truthful at the “saying”).
December 14th, 2005 at 2:58 pmSince I’ve actually watched the show before, and I have seen O’Reilly issue retractions (at the end of his show before he reads the mail). Since most of you would vomit for having watched it, I’ll Tivo and see if he does retract … we’ll see (I think he will).
December 14th, 2005 at 3:00 pmThe Rude Pundit has a suggestion for fun with BO here:
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/
Just scroll down to the second bit of rudeness.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:00 pm#43 – Thanks for sacrificing yourself, Giacomo, you’re a brave man.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:01 pmMerry Falafel to all!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:03 pm[...] If you needed another reason to think the conservative message machine is full of shit, here’s a great one. The people backing the “War on Christmas” story have been spreading a line about how a school in Wisconsin rewrote the words to Silent Night to make it less religious. Nico Pitney of ThinkProgress tackles this one and makes O’Reilly look like such a large ass that I almost feel bad for the charlatan. [...]
December 14th, 2005 at 3:04 pmSpeaking of the Global War on Christmas, did you guys see Sam Seder on CNN say that we had tortured an elf to get information on the GWOC?
Check it out at Crooks and Liars:
Sam Seder and the War on Christmas
December 14th, 2005 at 3:06 pmI don’t watch that crap. Until hordes of right wing vigilantes storm into my neighborhood shouting “Death to Liberals!” it really doesn’t affect me.
And if they do, I’ll deal with the situation as it unfolds.
Merry Christmas to all (even the wingnuts)!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:07 pmEr…Spudge?
You could also check it out at Think Progress:
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/12/merry-seder-christmas/
December 14th, 2005 at 3:07 pmWhen I was in elementary school, our music teacher actually did change the lyrics of a Christmas carol in order to avoid controversy. The song was “Deck the Halls,” and the objectionable line was “don we now our gay apparel.” Instead, we had to sing “festive apparel.” How dare that heathen teacher mutilate such a godly song? I want the original song back–I want the “gay” lyric back, the way it was intended! Maybe O’Reilly will help keep the gay in Christmas?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:11 pmNice of you to cut off the part of that first paragraph where I said his researchers might just be incompetent. Don’t you think that they should have checked this story BEFORE using it?
Z.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:15 pmBut, it’s the ‘No Spin Zone’???
Can we get him for false advertising now?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:19 pmFox’s version of journalism — shoot your mouth off, get all self-righteous and sanctimonious, rile up the viewers, and THEN get the facts. Retraction? What’s that? We don’t do no stinkin’ retractions!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:19 pmWhat would you call it when someone presents a fact as being correct and it isn’t? I know a specific word for that, and it is “lyingâ€.
Well … it does depend. I could call that person ignorant of the truth.
Ignorant of the truth? What these neocons will call it to avoid using the truth… geesh!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:21 pm#53,
I think they changed it to “spins so far
December 14th, 2005 at 3:26 pmto the right you need an 18″ breaker-bar
to loosen the wingnuts”.
Torque Spec: To infinity, and beyond!
Zwack
I wasn’t trying to misrepresent you … you called it “lying” which assumes that O’Reilly knew what he said to be untruthful (or else he’s not lying). I object to throwing words around that declare motive (not proven) instead of incompetence (clearly proven, in this case) … that’s all.
There’s enough here to object to without drawing a larger unproven conclusion.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:26 pmEquating the birth of Christ(?) with materialism is the real war on Christmas. I’m pretty sure Jesus would agree BO.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:26 pmThis is hysterical. And they blast the “liberal media” for using bad sources…
Bill, you get Judy Miller’s old cell… ;-D
December 14th, 2005 at 3:26 pmIgnorant of the truth? What these neocons will call it to avoid using the truth… geesh!
Don’t word parse, unbelievable. As I said above I “object to throwing words around that declare motive (not proven) instead of incompetence (clearly proven, in this case)”.
I guess you’re free to believe he lied, but there’s only evidence to the fact that he reported something that later turned out to be innacurate … that’s not lying.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:29 pmSo why was Rather run out of town?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:30 pmIt doesn’t matter that the story isn’t true, because Fox viewers will never find out it’s not true. Because it’s Fox. And they hardly ever correct themself on anything. And most Fox viewers seem to take pride(!) in believing everything Fox News tells them is true. Therefore, if Fox says two plus two is five, and they never air a correction or apology, their legion of devoted dupes will start screwing up their checkbooks all across this once-and-still-should-be-great-but-for-the-incompetency-of-this-Administration nation. Rest assured, dinner tables throughout America will be filled with people aghast over this latest battle in The War On Facts, er, Christmas.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:30 pm#56
You sure – that would be accurate – and I am not convinced they know how… :)
December 14th, 2005 at 3:33 pm“The No Spin Zone”? My toilet flushes straight down without a vortex too Bill. It is old,useless,and needs replacing.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:35 pm#60
Don’t word parse, unbelievable. As I said above I “object to throwing words around that declare motive (not proven) instead of incompetence (clearly proven, in this case)â€.
I guess you’re free to believe he lied, but there’s only evidence to the fact that he reported something that later turned out to be innacurate … that’s not lying.
I wasn’t parsing anything, just showing your smoke and mirror tricks for what they are, oh great Wizard of Oz. Should we ignore the man behind the curtain because you say so? I am free to KNOW he lied, and I am also free to think for myself. You really should try it. You’ll like it!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:37 pm#61
Good point!!!
December 14th, 2005 at 3:38 pmYeah. O’Reilly once again gets his facts wrong on the air and you liberals attack him. Marie is a good example here, not holding off to let him use the “No Spin Zone” to weasel out of it. Sure he is a loud-mouthed, womanizing lout who’s turkey neck makes him look like he has a severe case of gout. I won’t argue those points, and leave it to guyhomo or giacomo or whatever to stick up for him.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but it reminds me of the “facts” he put out on the “factor” when NOW president Kim Gandy was his guest 2/5/02: he stated adamently that 58% of single-mothers were on welfare and got into a real pissing contest over it. The very next day he stated the report from Washington was bad and his revised number was 52% of single mothers received public assistance. On the following night (2/7) he corrected himself down to 14% of single mothers were on welfare, a far cry from his rude and loutish attack on Gandy two days earlier.
I mean, as for old Bill on this poorly researched and slanderous faux Christmas story about an entire school, lets remember what he said about Dan Rather’s flap: “Dan Rather is guilty of not being skeptical enough about a story that was politically loaded.”
Oh really, O’Really?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:43 pmThis mess is unbelievable. Does Bill O’Reilly have transcripts anywhere so I can read his own words on this issue? I can’t believe that someone objects to a new song using an old tune — this is very very common. “Silent Night” was originally composed in German, are we to start screaming that only the original intent of the song writer must be used?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:43 pmGiacomo,
I agree that there’s a big difference between knowingly saying something that is untrue and inadvertently saying something that turns out to be incorrect. The problem many of us have with Bill O’Reilly is that he doesn’t care if what he says is true or not, just as long as it sounds like it supports whatever point he’s trying to make (this month it’s his imaginary “War on Christmasâ€). And if anyone tries to correct him with those pesky little things called “factsâ€, he’ll just respond “Well that’s just your opinion†and move onto another topic.
And, in case you didn’t realize it (because I am open-minded and I’m allowing for the possibility that you didn’t know this), O’Reilly has a long history of getting his “facts†wrong and not caring about it afterwards. Just for fun, go check out http://www.mediamatters.org and see their file on Bill O’Reilly. Even if you wish to dispute whether this constitutes “lyingâ€, you have to agree that O’Reilly really doesn’t care if he gets it right, only that he gets it across. Maybe he isn’t intentionally misleading his viewers and listeners, but he’s definitely not going out of his way to make sure his facts are in order before presenting them to the public. Does that make him a “liarâ€? Or simply “untrustworthyâ€?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:44 pmI guess you’re free to believe he lied, but there’s only evidence to the fact that he reported something that later turned out to be innacurate … that’s not lying.
Of course, we all know that. After all, that’s the basis of the entire foreign policy of the Bush administration. It’s a hallmark of conservatives, ever since Reagan when he declared, “I still believe we did not trade arms for hostages, but now the facts tell me otherwise.”
Yeah, it’s not lying if you convince yourself first.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:48 pmHey Bill I’ve got another outrage for ya. My kid wore a coat to school with holes in it and they sent him home saying “it is forbidden to wear holy attire on the premises”
December 14th, 2005 at 3:50 pm#32
Excellent post!
As for this so-called War on Christmas, our local paper is seeing its fair share of supporters and detractors in the Letters to the Editor section. I get irritated everytime I see someone writing in saying how offended they are when someone tells them Happy Holidays or Seasons Greetings.
And to think that a friend or stranger spouting these words to the “offended” as an effort to deny them the right to worship Christ is, well, ignorant. If I wanted to offend these people, I’d tell them how fat and ugly they are…now I know that telling them Happy Holidays will accomplish the same effect in a nicer way.
As for denying them the right to worship, words just ain’t gonna do it. It takes action. And like Dodgeball in #32 above, I just don’t see it happening. None of the churches in my city have been boarded up, no one or no group that I know of has demanded that the members of these churches quit worshipping Christ, and several weeks ago, there were no groups who attended the annual community gathering for the lighting of the Christmas tree located that made an effort to break up the crowd.
People, get over it.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:54 pmShould we ignore the man behind the curtain because you say so? I am free to KNOW he lied, and I am also free to think for myself.
This is an unbelievable statement (groan, I know I’m not funny). You can believe he lied … to say you “know” is dumb. Just because I point out that your confidence is misplaced in this instance doesn’t meen I want to confuse you with smoke and mirrors. I don’t … why ascribe motive without proof (beyond the “I think it is so, so it is so” variety).
And, in case you didn’t realize it (because I am open-minded and I’m allowing for the possibility that you didn’t know this), O’Reilly has a long history of getting his “facts†wrong and not caring about it afterwards.
Admitedly, Wayne, I did not know this (or that this accusation had been leveled). I’ve watched the show before … I liked some segments, others seemed pure BS. I have seen him issue a retractions so we’ll see if he does now.
And if anyone tries to correct him with those pesky little things called “factsâ€, he’ll just respond “Well that’s just your opinion†and move onto another topic.
He does seem to have an aversion to dissent (with his ideas) at times.
Does that make him a “liar� Or simply “untrustworthy�
If the shoe fits in this case, I’d say untrustworthy.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:55 pm“War on Christmas” Fraud Exposed
Debunking the myth that an elementary school rewrote “Silent Night” to offend Christians.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:56 pmThe So Called News just keep Spinning Farther and Farther AWAY From What Really Started the WAR in the FIRST PLACE! Hasn,t any one realized that yet?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:56 pmI,m Thinking Bush Wants it that way.
Bush Loves it when News Dumbs down the Why of the WAR!
#27
What would you call it when someone presents a fact as being correct and it isn’t?
Bill O’Reilly would call it satire.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:57 pmWhy oh why do Huffingtonpost and ThinkProgress spend so much real estate on Fox News?
It’s beginning to look alot like – “this is the cheaper way to look like you’re talking about something important, when all you’re doing is spinning something someone else said, who spun something someone else said, etc., etc.”
If Fox news can do it, then why not ThinkProgress, Huffington, et al. Talk about what Tim Russert, O’Reilly, and any other talking head on TV says, rather than talking about issues. I get it.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:57 pmYeah, it’s not lying if you convince yourself first.
Let’s play nice now … that’s not what I said, and nowhere near what I believe. Truth is truth regardless of ideologys and self-delusion. This business of “convincing yourself” isn’t in play, as far as I’m concerned.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:57 pmI Thought the War was to Capture Osama Bin Laden, Since He was the Supposed Terrorist of 911.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:58 pmLEST WE FORGET 911.
#73
Bill O’Reilly has openly confessed that he checks his own facts. Unless he was lying about that, then I know he was lying about this… see my point?
December 14th, 2005 at 3:58 pmMaybe O’Reilly will help keep the gay in Christmas?
How do you clean coffee-spray off the monitor?
Really this is just another in a long line of GOP “wedge” issues:
Iraq
Schiavo
Gay Marriage Amendment
Flag Burning Amendment
And I’m sure we can name many, many others. Hand it to the GOP and their mouthpieces, most notably Faux “News;” if there is a way divide Americans and turn them against each other, the GOP is working on making it a compaign issue. That most seem to be merely a chance to grandstand and end up becoming displays of self-righteous, false piety, seems to have been lost on the rubes.
December 14th, 2005 at 3:59 pmThe reality is”There Is a TWO FRONT WAR Going ON,.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:00 pmThe Purpose?
Well, here’s my email to Fox:
I would like to respectfully ask that a retraction be issued regarding Bill O’Reilly and his *story* regarding the Wisconsin School changing lyrics to “Silent Night”.
It is clear the story was a complete fallacy. It was a play, a school play. That Bill O’Reilly scandalized a school play is horrific to me. I am also more than dismayed that this *story* reached the air in the first place. One phone call to the school would have ended the story right there. Now a school is villified, and quite frankly, your station and Mr. O’Reilly look like complete fools.
A retraction and an On Air apology is warranted.
Sincerely,
Think it’ll happen?
December 14th, 2005 at 4:02 pmOSAMA IS FREE!
December 14th, 2005 at 4:02 pm#73
Do you believe in God? How do you know? See my point yet?
December 14th, 2005 at 4:02 pm“Does that make him a “liarâ€? Or simply “untrustworthyâ€?
If the shoe fits in this case, I’d say untrustworthy.
Comment by Giacomo”
Untrustworthy is a synonym for dishonest (eg. someone that lies). You should have spent some time in vocabulary class while you were attending your MBA ‘nightschool’. Your command of the english language is as inept as that of politics, economics, or virtually every topic you touch…
Republican moron.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:03 pmBill O’Reilly has openly confessed that he checks his own facts. Unless he was lying about that, then I know he was lying about this… see my point?
OK, now I get you … he has said that before, hasn’t he. Well, call me naive (I’m sure several will), but I think this is an example of incomplete vetting (he found out that it did happen, but not why) … I’ll Tivo it and see what he says (if anything).
December 14th, 2005 at 4:03 pm“Let’s play nice now … that’s not what I said, and nowhere near what I believe. Truth is truth regardless of ideologys and self-delusion. This business of “convincing yourself†isn’t in play, as far as I’m concerned.
Comment by Giacomo”
And yet you post crap daily that’s untrue.
You’re a fool.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:03 pmThat a way Nico! Exposing O’Scumbag for the lying propagandist he is, priceless!
Dwight Elrich and the Ridgewood Elementary School should be filing defamation lawsuits against O’Scumbag.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:04 pmGREED
December 14th, 2005 at 4:04 pm#87
I think it’s just Bill O’Reilly trying to raise his sinking viewership. He’s jumped the shark and now he’s picking on school children to raise his ratings. His lack of ethics goes hand in hand with his inability to tell the truth.
Let us know what he says tonight. Should be interesting…
December 14th, 2005 at 4:07 pmHi Ryan
Untrustworthy – unworthy of belief; fails to take responsibility for conduct and obligations
You should have spent some time in vocabulary class while you were attending your MBA ‘nightschool’.
I chose between the two words that Wayned offered … in the context offered they weren’t synonyms but juxtaposed … why do I even explain this to you.
I do wish for once that you’d be “fair” in your response and not just quibble over one part of what I said.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:08 pm#22 Ted wrote..I just called MR. Robert (BOB) Knight at Concerned Women for America, he is the guy who was on CNN with Sam Seder the other day shoveling this shit around.
Call him at: (202) 488-7000
Thanks Ted, I left a message with Mr. Knight and I also wished him a Merry Christmas.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:10 pmAnd yet you post crap daily that’s untrue.
Why must you always argue semantically?
December 14th, 2005 at 4:11 pmWell, call me naive (I’m sure several will), but I think this is an example of incomplete vetting (he found out that it did happen, but not why) … I’ll Tivo it and see what he says (if anything).
Comment by Giacomo — December 14, 2005 @ 4:03 pm
Well, Giacomo, you have to agree that O’Reilly is guilty of, at least, sloppy reporting (if what he does can be called reporting).
How can he/his team air a “news” piece that was so blatantly false, and that could have been “nipped” before airing by simply calling the school?
If O’Reilly is so untrustworthy in a story as simple as this one, how can anyone expect accuracy in his show on more complex, hard-to-verify issues?
December 14th, 2005 at 4:13 pmThe Fox News comment mailbox is full.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:16 pmIf O’Reilly is so untrustworthy in a story as simple as this one, how can anyone expect accuracy in his show on more complex, hard-to-verify issues?
A valid question that must be answered by O’Reilly.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:21 pm#73If the shoe fits in this case, I’d say untrustworthy.
Well that’s just your opinion. :)
Seriously, though. Check out the Media Matters site. It may seem at times that they are notpicking, I know, but they do it because the man sets himself up to be so self-righteous and smug. He’s practically begging to be taken down a peg or two.
O’Reilly has also said that if you smear someone, you have an obligation to face that person or else you’re a coward. (Perhaps you’ve heard him say that.) O’Reilly constantly smears David Brock and Media Matters yet refuses to have Mr. Brock come on his show and debate him about anything. O’Reilly also likes to smear George Soros because of how he chooses to spend his billions on liberal causes, but he won’t say anything about Richard Mellon Scaife who does the same thing for the right with his money. I have written to O’Reilly often just to remind him that by his own definition, he’s a coward. I admit that it’s a guilty pleasure of mine. But you know me, I’m a bit of a hedonist. :)
December 14th, 2005 at 4:22 pmOkay, that should be “nitpicking”, not “notpicking.” I know I’m going to get “notpicked” to death for that one.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:25 pm#98
Wayne,
Did you see the debate (more like knock out actually) between O’Reilly and Michael Moore around the 2004 election? If not, you should look for it online. It will satisfy your Hedonistic sweet tooth :)
December 14th, 2005 at 4:27 pm#86 and #92
Relax, it was my choice of words, not his. I was making up what i was going to write as I was writing it and I just needed a word that was similar but without the same connotations.
Perhaps instead of “untrustworthy”, I should have used the word “unreliable.” That was the sense in distinction I was aiming for. Though I do think “foolish”, “ignorant”, and “disingenuous” may also apply.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:31 pmAll O’Nut-job did by reporting this alleged non-story, was try to stir the pot. He’s probably been told by his handlers to try to increase his numbers in Red States that he needs to better in. It’s entertainment, not news. Just wait though…at some point here very soon, he’s going to be getting down (for lack of a better term), on the movie “Brokeback Mountain” and its ‘love story’, just to stir the pot a little more and get his numbers up a little more. It may have already started with Rush and some of the other media dirt clods, but I don’t listen to them and won’t start now, just to research my comment. My wife and I have decided we will go see that movie now, if it’s going to piss off some conservative, fundamentalist loser.
Again though folks, it’s talk radio/talk television and therfore is nothing more than entertainment, not news. They are playing to a very reactionary, uneducated audience.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:34 pmI cant say “have a happy holiday” when referring to Christmas?
Christmas is no longer a holiday?
Wish somebody would have told me.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:34 pm#100 unbelievable
No, I did see the Tim Russert show with O’Reilly and Paul Krugman. O’Reilly gave himself some pretty high but undeserved marks for his debating skills there. I thought Prof. Krugman held up quite nicely against him. I didn’t know O’Reilly debated Michael Moore. That I would like to see. Unfortunately, no internet access at home.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:34 pm#78 And yet, that is the strategy used by conservatives across the board. Aluminum tubes, Niger yellowcake, the necessity of a gay marriage amendment, and Christmas story rewrite. What do they have in common? They are not “lies” because apparently a lie is almost impossible to tell. In order to call a conservative a liar, you practically need a mind-reading device. Otherwise, it’s just a factual mistake. Oopsie we invaded Iraq! Bad intelligence. Mistakes were made.
Karl Rove did not leak Valerie Wilson’s name. Bush promised to get to the bottom of the leak. O’Reiley simply forgot to check if the holiday song was a cute take-off on a well-known tune or a sinister liberal plot to destroy your religion.
It’s all B.S., but apparently not lies.
Absolutely disgusting, isn’t it?
December 14th, 2005 at 4:34 pmSo this is what passes for researched debate on ThinkProgress – everyone jumping on board to agree that Bill O’Reilly is a buffoon.
Gawd what a joke this blog is. You know the country is in trouble when people who purport to be concerned about national security get all in a froth about an ahole on TV who’s job it is to say things to get people like you to do exactly what you’re doing – talking about him. That’s what he wants – for you to talk about him, and dis him, and talk about him some more. And tomorrow he’ll say something else outrageous and yet more hours will be spent talking about him – and he’ll keep doing it
don’t you get it yet? jeez you supposed progressives are dense
December 14th, 2005 at 4:50 pmGawd what a joke this blog is.
And still you post here… Telling.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:52 pmDavid
December 14th, 2005 at 4:54 pmThat’s good. so now attack me. that’s fine. i’ll sit back now and watch all you seasoned debaters do your ‘research’ and try not to call me too many names to be banned – you’re just proving my point David – you might as well face it – if it weren’t for people like O’Reilly this blog would have nothing to talk about – except to attack other bloggers
Can you blame us for being a bit defensive? We have the country’s leaders and media personalities questioning our patriotism, morals, religion, and claiming we’re out to destroy the country. Any opinion that disagrees with the ruling conservatives is branded anti-American. We’re called traitors because we don’t support Bush. So excuse the hell out of us if we let out a little steam at those who attack us.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:57 pmIn other words, Nico, the words of the song were changed. Your spin doesn’t change that fact.
Groups such as the ACLU have sued to remove Christmas displays on public property in a number of communities. These facts cannot be denied by any sane or honest person.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:58 pmNo, it is the left that is doing that.
December 14th, 2005 at 4:59 pmLemmings. Conservative – fox – nipple – feeding – parroted – sheeple lemmings. Funniest thing I have read all week.
Now to Master of Nothing comment. It is these budinski’s conservatives that have made this canard of the war on christmas into an issue… and now you say that we’ve people who purport to be concerned about national security. Jesus. They made-up this issue to wage a war against progressives to futher support their false assertion that liberal are against mainstream, traditional values… ie Christmas.
They are the first to deflect from the Iraq issue, our national security by this silliness. Regardless, it must be answered and challanged. Now if we didn’t can you guess what would be said? Oh liberals are week.
This is swift boat if it isn’t painfully apparent. Just the scale is different but the means, the type of lie and application and impleementation is exactly the same.
I rather fight the fight.
Besides. Moderates, liberals, can do both.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:01 pmCynical ex
Oh please – stop the cry baby routine – i’m probably older than you and have a son that could end up with his ass in Iraq – I’ve protested my way through Vietnam war and this one – I’m sick of it – and I’m sick of how the supposed progressives do absolutely nothing except buy into the structure that’s handed to them, and then complain about it, and then watch some more, and then get into a hissy fit because O’Reilly is a jerk. Can we just settle this. The man is a class one jerk. He’s bought and paid for whore for the WH and the neo-cons, as is most of msm. So stop expecting anything else from them.
When are you going to just turn off Fox news and stop watching. That will be the most revolutionary thing you’ll do in a long time – Just turn it off and don’t buy the products advertised. And stop talking about O’Reilly. If every left-wing, moderate, progressive, whatever blog just stopped paying any attention to the NYTimes, Tim Russert, O’Reilly – that would be progress.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:01 pmwwallace: Groups such as the ACLU have sued to remove Christmas displays on public property in a number of communities. These facts cannot be denied by any sane or honest person.
And you understand why that is Wallace? Do you understand why that is? I doubt you do. Your a lemming that only has the talking points, framed, for you to state as such. A simple google would suffice. NOw you can agree with it, or disagree with it. If you take the latter, over the former, you’ll understand the depth of the suit. Your ilk wants your religion shoved in every public space, without consideration to others religion. You represent the dominion theology, whether you are aware of it not. My guess, you’re played like a fiddle, lemming, and don’t realize it.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:06 pmQuicksand
They made up this war on christmas because people will watch – it’s like any entertainment – it grabs your attention because it has the word “war” and “christmas” in it. Please. You are being had by hackneyed low brow entertainment methods – give ‘em a show and keep ‘em coming – and you think it has any importance?
Every time Pat Robertson gets on his channel and says anti-war people are traitors and they should all be hanged, he’s doing it to beef up his ratings. And he gets rewarded by having his ratings up – it’s like Pavlov’s dog – you ring the bell and the dog salivates
O’Reilly says war on christmas and the progressives go nuts – just stop reacting to it and get on with real issues – like the fact that the Congress is getting ready to cut 50 billion from food stamps, and health care.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:07 pmM.O.N,
I hear you and your right in some parts and in others I do however, disagree. We speak the truth, they speak rhetoric and when they speak it is in non-sequitars. lies by removing the context or changing the context – a common tactic of the dishonest.
If I say Flip-Floper… who do you think of right away?
This is preception marketing. This is branding.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:10 pmComment by wwallace — December 14, 2005 @ 4:58 pm:
Just curious–would you object to having Muslim, Hindu or {insert any non-Christian religion here} displays on public property?
The church down the street from us has a huge, lighted nativity scene out front, facing the road–that’s as it should be. The public school across the street from the church doesn’t. As a Christian, I’m happy to see the nativity scene in front of the church (and in the living room of our house). But I could care less if it’s in the schoolyard or on the lawn in front of the capitol building.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:11 pmO’Lielly speaks, O’Lielly lies.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:12 pmQuicksand
December 14th, 2005 at 5:13 pmI agree that it is all lies – they speak only rhetoric and we try to speak truth – but we fritter out time corretcting their rhetoric – Why? Why bother sending emails to O’Reilly – everytime his email box gets full – he gets elated cause he knows he’s succeeded in getting attention – Maybe the people who had been through parenthood will udnerstand this better
When you reward bad behavior – it gets repeated
Every time we email O’Reilly about his bad behavior, we are rewarding him
A valid question that must be answered by O’Reilly.
Comment by Giacomo — December 14, 2005 @ 4:21 pm
The question: “If O’Reilly is so untrustworthy in a story as simple as this one, how can anyone expect accuracy in his show on more complex, hard-to-verify issues?” must be answered by his viewers who expect facts and accuracy on the news.
In light of this failing, can you, Giacomo, safely expect accuracy from O’Reilly’s show?
December 14th, 2005 at 5:13 pmI will now stop talking any more about Bill O’Reilly or the fact that this blog spends too much time talking about Bill O’Reilly. And if this blog is really serious about issues and research and debate, it too will stop talking about Bill O’Reilly. Otherwise, it is just another gossip column on the internet.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:14 pmThe Bed-Wetting Conservative Keyboarders are a funny bunch.
I haven’t heard this much bitching and moaning over nothing at all since the first season of Survivor!
The cons are behaving like a boderline personality disorder girlfriend: Making shit up to try and pick a fight. Key point: Making shit up.
They’ve got nothing. No one who’s not already a thumb-sucking matress stainer believes their padded room rantings about Christmas being under attack.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:17 pmYour juvenile ad hominem attacks will not change the facts, quicksand.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:18 pmM.O.N: When you reward bad behavior – it gets repeated
Exactly. Have you noticed how outrageous he’s gotten recently, like Farwell by their big mouths from these over-the-top statements?
It may be a reward to them in some ways, but we get the bigger reward…their mouths do the work, we just highlight it for the reasonable republicans, conservatives, and others that are left. The more they connect themselves to the right, the more the divide grows between the extreme right wing loonie-moonies, pushing them torward our more reasonable and nunanced worldview.
At least that’s the way I see it, and if we disagree, its okay.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:20 pmwwallace: Your juvenile ad hominem attacks will not change the facts, quicksand.
Awww poor baby. Of course I’ve insulted you. If you had any backbone and any clue at all, you’ve would have ignored it and refute me with those facts that you’ve alluded to above. But you didn’t, because your argument does not rest on facts, but distortions thereof.
Boo hoo Wallace, Boo hoo.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:24 pmI grew up in the “Bible Belt”, where killing Americans to defend the right to keep slaves, bigotry, and hating people who believe differently are considered good Christian moral values. And yet, I’ve heard “Happy Holidays”, “Holiday Season”, and “Holiday Celebrations” all my life. Why? Because, oddly enough, other holidays happen around the same time as Christmas. No, I’m not talking about Hanukkah or Kwanzaa…remember, this is the deep south. Remember Thanksgiving and New Years?
Want to know the safest place in the world? That wide, open space between BO and the truth…
December 14th, 2005 at 5:26 pmI know this is off subject, but thought it might be worth the detour…
I just saw that Bush said he was not going to leave Iraq until we won the war, right after he said that we went to war on faulty intelligence. I’m confused. If we went to war on faulty intelligence, then what’s still left to fight or, for that matter, win???
December 14th, 2005 at 5:28 pm#104
Michael Moore kept telling O’Reilly that if he was so certain that Bush was right to invade Iraq, then would Bill send his own offspring to justify that war. Well, O’Reilly couldn’t say “No way – never!” so he just tried to spin, but Michael Moore kept repeating the question until O’Reilly began to babble. It’s was a beautiful moment. I think I cried :).
December 14th, 2005 at 5:33 pmUnbelievable, we’re fighting for democracy in the Middle East, didn’t you get the memo?
Oh wait, we were fighting to uncover and destroy the WMD’s and nuclear program Saddam had.
Oh, no, we were fighting because Saddam aided and abetted the terrorists who attacked American on 9/11.
Jeez, I’m confused too, unbelievable. Sorry.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:33 pm#129
Well, thanks anyway Marc…
December 14th, 2005 at 5:34 pmBO: Fra-gee-lay. That must be Italian.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:41 pmMrs. Parker: Uh, I think that says FRAGILE, dear.
BO: Oh, yeah.
War on Christmas? Another weapon of mass distraction.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:44 pmSo what do we have to do to make the espousal of a “War on Christmas” a lie? At what point is it disproven sufficiently that anyone claiming its truth is a liar?
It appears that until we convince the wing nuts that there is no WoC, their assertions will not be lies. At least not by the Karl Rove Morality [tm].
Isn’t that odd?
December 14th, 2005 at 5:50 pmAnother O’Lielly lie. I just heard on NPR that Bill O’Rielly stated on his show that the Dallas Independent School District would not allow kids to wear red and green because the colors represent Christmas. They followed this with a comment from a DISD spokesperson who stated this is not true and never was.
Again, I ask, where the hell is the FCC in all of this? I am calling Faux News, their advertisers, and anyone else associated with this nut to voice my outrage. America has got to hold the MSM accountable for allowing this poison to continue. It has to stop. Starting a boycott is the only way we will make our voices heard. I have heard enough conservative propanganda in the last 5 years to last a lifetime. Enough is enough. I want the truth. I want my country back.
December 14th, 2005 at 5:50 pmThe more I read about stuff like this, I can only assume that some nutcase hears about something from some other nutcase third or fourth hand and emails O’Reilly with “proof”. Bill, being the ace reporter on the front lines of the battles being waged on christmas quickly makes sure the world hears about the new assault before satan takes over… Its really not his fault… He is just trying to save the christian world… right?
December 14th, 2005 at 5:56 pmThe war on Christmas is “The Immaculate Deception”
December 14th, 2005 at 6:00 pmYour Freedoms are >NOT
December 14th, 2005 at 6:02 pmI’m one of the ones who sent a message to Fox,(see #83) but I am a bit dismayed at the amt. of attention he’s getting here at TP.
December 14th, 2005 at 6:52 pmHow about some of that anger vented at the post regarding the lack of Ethics Hearings against some of these House / Senate Members.
If you all went over there and emailed the Committee Members, you’d actually be doing more for our country than we’re doing here.
Just wanted to through a personal opinion out. Hope I haven’t offended anyone.
This is the same lie that Bob Knight from one of those “pro-family” organizations used against Sam Seder the toher day. It makes it look even more obvious that someone passes out talking points to all the Republican officials, Fox News anchors and the Jesus-freak crowd. They all just repeat the same talking points and hope people believe it.
December 14th, 2005 at 6:59 pmWow!
I haven’t seen a string this long with so much silence from the right in I don’t know how long. Says a lot when the rabid dog won’t bite, eh?
Gotta give WWallace credit, though. He’s hinging his point on the fact that the words were actually changed. True to the letter of the law but unhinged from obvious reality.
Wwallace, do you understand the concept of “context”? It’s taught in 3rd or 4th grade or so. Apparently, the churches that put this play on at Christmastime do. The whole point of using the familiar Christmas song and these lyrics was to illustrate the true Christian meaning of Christmas.
On the other hand, O’Reilly used this fact as evidence of the exact opposite, that the creator of the play is part of a vastly powerful Liberal conspiracy caught in the act of attempting to subvert the true meaning of Christmas.
This playwright is the enemy of Christmas? With enemies like that, Christmas will suffer no Casualties in this (contemptuous harrumph) “war on Christmas.”
I hope your contortions of logic don’t hurt your back.
And BTW, Happy Chanukah! (Not your religion? How about “Happy Kwanzaa!” Oh… not your religion either… I guess “Merry Solstice! will do… oh… not your religion either… how about “Merry Christmas!” Is that the right one… ah, good. I guess I should just say Happy Holidays, out of respect for the many possible holidays you may be celebrating…)
Wishing people a happy holiday is fundamentally respectful of all religious differences and the fact that there are several holidays celebrated by different groups in the US, and that we give equal respect and merit to all.
When someone says “Merry Christmas” to me, should I retort, “I’m not a Christian and I’m offended by your broad assumption that I am one… you are waging a war on non-Christians!” NO. That would be overly sensitive. Overly “politically correct.” I hate that PC sh*t. So don’t accuse me of the same when I wish you a happy whatever-it-is-you-celebrate.
Republicans and Right wing Christians seem to want mob rule to replace civil democracy.
This is not a Christian nation. There is no state religion. And article 6 of the US constitution forbids religious tests for office holders. That is direct evidence of the intent to separate church and state by the founders.
Peace to you all, even those of you who disrespect me and question my patriotism.
December 14th, 2005 at 7:09 pm#50
MLDB,
Sorry, I just moved and just got my PC plugged in. I had no access to them Internets until today. I thought I was gonna die going for 3 days without getting a chance to bash Bush, but my friend got himself a new republican girlfriend for me to Bush bash live, so I survived. :)
December 14th, 2005 at 7:16 pm
December 14th, 2005 at 7:23 pm#140
I-RIGHT-I’s blow up doll dumped him this week… I think he’s sulking.
December 14th, 2005 at 7:37 pmIn other words, Nico, the words of the song were changed. Your spin doesn’t change that fact.
Comment by wwallace — December 14, 2005 @ 4:58 pm
There is no spin, my logically-impaired fiend, just an explanation that, if you cared to read the story, would lead you to understand that the elementary school staged a Christian play with Christian songs.
The play has been performed at churches, and its creator is the musical director at a Presbiterian church in LA.
O’Reilly misinformed his audience when he presented this as another evidence on the “war on Christmas”.
Your feeble, pathetic attempt at a jab on the ACLU is going nowhere simply because they had nothing to do with the change of the lyrics.
December 14th, 2005 at 7:38 pmThere is no war on christmas? That would explain why my kids schools won’t let them say christmas in their “Winter Assemblys” and why Kwanza gets billboarded on the stage but the word christmas doesn’t…I’m sure it’s just an oversight…
December 14th, 2005 at 8:28 pm#145
No, there isn’t. Sure, there might be battles by people who have had enough of the Zealots trying to force religion on people who don’t want it. But there is no war.
By the way, if you don’t like being in the minority of those who are oppressed, then remember that feeling of exclusion the next time you want to be the oppressor… What do you all say “Do unto others…”???
December 14th, 2005 at 8:35 pmunbelievable: “I’m confused.”
You sure are. Thanks for the admission.
December 14th, 2005 at 8:45 pmHey y’all. Read this:
http://poynter.org/forum/view_post.asp?id=10784
This is from a former Fox News producer. To summarize, he states that it is Fox’s policy to bring up divisive issues on purpose, such as the “War on Christmas.”
December 14th, 2005 at 8:45 pmA “former” employee? LOL
December 14th, 2005 at 8:48 pmThank you Gregor, your typical weasely dishonesty was expected.
December 14th, 2005 at 8:49 pm#149
And your point is…?
December 14th, 2005 at 8:55 pm#151, your source is biased.
December 14th, 2005 at 8:59 pmHey wwallace:
ROTFLMAO!
December 14th, 2005 at 9:02 pmTurk,
December 14th, 2005 at 9:22 pmThat is such crappola and you know it.
School concerts sing ALL of the Christmas carols.
My kid’s H.S. just did one. The ONLY secular one was
“Let it Snow”.
BTW: We live in Massachusetts. REAL liberal state. I live about 1 1/2 miles from the Kennedy Compound. So I don’t want to hear that crap about school’s forbidding anything “Christmassy”.
Thank you wwallace, your typical weasely dishonesty was expected.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:27 pmwwallace, what’s left of your brain is biased and retarded :()
December 14th, 2005 at 9:27 pmI predict Ryan will continue to offer nothing but childish insults, in blatant violation of the site Terms of Use, but Judd will let it go because he agrees with Ryan’s politics.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:31 pmSeriously, wwallace…you really do make me laugh.
Is that the best you can do? You seem to be implying that he is biased simply because he is a former employee.
Please elaborate. Instead of short one-liners you like to use, such as “that’s a lie” and “your source is biased,” how about a serious discussion on this. Think you can handle that? Better yet, go read the article again and point out the author’s bias. And back up your accusations…tell me why you feel that it is bias. And then tell me that the subject of divisiveness that the author brings up is in no way related to the crap that O’Reilly is spouting on his show.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:32 pmI predict wwallace will continue to offer nothing but childish insults, in blatant violation of the site Terms of Use, because he’s a partisan hack who can’t tell opinions from facts. :()
December 14th, 2005 at 9:32 pm#147
Just like you wwwwwwingnut… take satire literally. wwwwwwwingnut, if anyone here is really confused, it’s you hanging out in this progressive forum with your third grade neocon mentality and lack of a sense of humor.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:33 pmbiased : to give a settled and often prejudiced outlook to
The dictionary proves wwallace is biased. :()
December 14th, 2005 at 9:34 pmwwallace proves monkies can be trained to type :()
December 14th, 2005 at 9:34 pmWC, one disgruntled former employee’s opinion is of no interest.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:36 pm“…it is Fox’s policy to bring up divisive issues on purpose…”
wally, YOU sound like a fox “employee”…
Happy Holidays to All!
December 14th, 2005 at 9:38 pmkaty, what’s wrong with bringing up “divisive” stories? What is a “divisive” story?
December 14th, 2005 at 9:40 pmwwwallace puts the Iraqi’s interest before his fellow Americans. What a traitor.
December 14th, 2005 at 9:43 pmSusan insulted me, what will I do now? LOL
December 14th, 2005 at 9:45 pmSo you don’t support the “spreading of democracy” in Iraq wwwwallace?
You don’t think we should be spending a billion dollars a week of our hard earned money on this cause?
Are you flip flopping?
December 14th, 2005 at 10:08 pmI don’t know about you, but I’ve been fretting about the creeping secularization of Easter…
December 14th, 2005 at 10:27 pmHow do I address the manufactured right-wing controversy over either saying Merry Christmas or Happy Holidays?
I just wish everyone a “Happy New Year”!!!
Hey, it works. And gets them laughing.
So, Happy New Year everyone.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:06 pmI’m sending Bill a felafel kit and I’ll sign it as anonymous and wish him “HAPPY HOLIDAYS”.
Boy, the reaction on his aryan-bred face will be priceless.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:22 pmwwallace, you are so full of it, but most everyone on here knew that.
No surprise that your opinion is that the article is of no interest. I ask for a serious discussion, but all you can give is generalizations. He’s biased. He’s disgruntled. Blah blah blah. You wouldn’t know a serious discussion if it bit you in the ass.
There’s nothing in the tone of the article to indicate he is disgruntled. More than anything it is a window into the inner workings of Fox News.
As for what is wrong with bringing up divisive stories? Why, nothing is wrong with it. It’s what fuels debates. It’s what fuels discussion. But you wouldn’t know anything about that. There’s a difference between bringing up an issue to foster debate, and bringing one up to specifically divide people on purpose. Mr. Reina points out that Fox News, on more than one occasion, brought religion into the discussion when it did not belong. And he gave specific examples. To cite one: The fact that a person is an Athiest has nothing to do with his charitable acts, which was the subject of the interview. The interviewer (or his superiors) made the decision to interject an unrelated issue at the very last minute.
I’ve given up for the night. You are a waste.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:29 pmBy the way, Bel Air Presbyterian Church was Ronald Reagan’s congregation for most of his Republican life.
December 14th, 2005 at 11:35 pmBack to the Dodgeville School District and their ‘WAR’, do you realize the name of the school was/is even wrong? It’s RIDGEWAY not RIDGEWOOD!!! The problem is that this was brought up by a parent of the Ridgeway elementary school. Does this person want to teach that only their way is the right way?????? Come on, I thought we were supposed to be teaching our kids the ways of America and it’s Cultures, not of one culture. You would not believe the e-mails this school district recieved! They have now stepped up security at the schools in the entire district not just Ridgeway. Threatening e-mails. This school district is now ‘Marked’ for quite a while. Maybe BO should have done a little Investigative Reporting, before continuing to spread this horrible injustice.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:18 amThank you Gregor, your typical weasely dishonesty was expected.
Comment by wwallace — December 14, 2005 @ 8:49 pm
wwallace is projecting, as usual -no surprises here.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:44 amThere is no war on christmas? That would explain why my kids schools won’t let them say christmas in their “Winter Assemblys” and why Kwanza gets billboarded on the stage but the word christmas doesn’t…I’m sure it’s just an oversight…
Comment by turk fowler — December 14, 2005 @ 8:28 pm
As far as I can recall, no one in this blog has advocated a ban on the word “Christmas”. If the dropping of the word Christmas is a clue to the co-conspirators in this “war on Christmas”, you should be really worried because you are up against powerful opponents such as Laura Bush, and Pres Bush himself.
I don’t know why your kids’ school won’t display the word Christmas. I am not one to support that. In my opinion all religious symbols deserve equal treatment: schools, etc. should display all symbols or none.
If you feel wronged, voice your concerns to your school. There is nothing anyone here can do to help you, as we are not part of this conspiracy against Christmas.
If after reading the article subject of the thread you don’t have a hint of suspicion that this “war on Christmas” might be phony, bogus, a non-issue, and that O’Reilly and his sycophants are grappling at straws in order to fuel it, then you have had too much Kool-Aid.
I mention the word Christmas seven times in this comment. I clearly have no problem with it. Please leave me out of your conspiracy theories.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:24 amWeren’t Dan Rather and Mary Mapes crucified for something just like this?
Oh, wait. That’s right…Rather reported what was actually true and no one has ever proved otherwise, but O’Reilly seems to have just whistled out his ass.
Yep, that’s the difference.
The biggest and most amazing story of them all is that anyone still watches Fox News. The amount of misinformed retarded people in this country must be reaching staggering numbers by now.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:52 amHey, he personally brought down the price of gas about a buck as he threatened all the heavies in the industry. Give the moron a break.
December 15th, 2005 at 2:42 amOnly 10 more days of covering the non-issue Bill O’Reilly tells you to be outraged about. Are you all getting excited yet ?
Just out of interest does Fox send you guys the day’s talking points via fax or email ?
December 15th, 2005 at 2:58 amLMAO
Thank GOD I did not grow up with such insanity. I sung Silent Night, Away in a Manger, and a few others without anyone getting their panties in a twist.
December 15th, 2005 at 7:15 amdid anybody check to see if sploid is right before posting your comments? did that occur to anyone?
December 15th, 2005 at 8:19 am#169 Bob the Nihilist
No kidding. You know, they start with Easter and really, it creeps right into Saint Patrick’s Day. They’ve already contracted the holy word Saint into St. (wasn’t X in Xmas enough already?) And the whole event just revolves around beer… what ever should we do? I’m just sick with worry about what will be next – the commercialization of the Immaculate Conception???
:)
December 15th, 2005 at 8:55 am[...] [...]
December 15th, 2005 at 9:35 amIf as Uncle Smokes understands is correct, that
December 15th, 2005 at 9:45 amChristmas Carols are Biblical Text and holy scripture,
he must also think that his toilet tissue is as well.
Love these intellegent statements by design.
Hey Uncle…………got some holy water for you.
The intended use of the story precludes an oversight or an accident in research. o’reilly wanted any convenient news snippet that he could use to point out the war on christmas, and sow the seeds of discord. Real facts usually get in the way propaganda, so you have to snip a bit of truth hear, and use it to inflame the ignorant masses.
There is enough real tragedy and corruption going on in the world, if o’reilly is wasting time on this kind of shit, makes you wonder what their real intent is.
December 15th, 2005 at 9:53 amAll symbols don’t have the same prominence in American culture as symbols related to Christmas. The government is under no obligation to play make-believe and pretend they do.
December 15th, 2005 at 10:15 amToast to the host of “The O’Reilly Factor”–
Lest we be thought to be lacking in tact or
Guilty of seasonal secularizing,
Dismissing THE DAY instead of reprising–
Our host, though HE wish US a season in hell,
December 15th, 2005 at 10:24 amWE, turning our cheeks, bid HIM: “Joyeux Noel!”
Hello unbelievable,
It’s a good thing we never celebrated Jesus’ circumcision.
December 15th, 2005 at 10:35 amCould you imagine the commercializtion of that?
What’s the difference between a religion and a cult?
Nothing, except that a religion is a cult that nay be a little older and has grown big enough to attract enough followers to earn a higher level of respect. The Moonies are no different from the Hindus, Jews, Catholics, scientologists, Muslims, snake-handlers, etc. They all whack you senseless if you step out of line.
My religion is no more “make believe” than yours. Or anybody’s. Christians believe that converting others to their brand of groupthink and behavioral control is a valid and good thing. I happen to believe that prosletizing to anyone is arrogant and ignorant. Why should people who have a religion already just give it up and adopt yours? Why were native African religions inferior to the Christianity practiced by Europeans a hundred and fifty years ago?
They weren’t. But the missionaries were followed by the industrialists, and Whitey got rich.
You can’t argue that “our faith is the one true faith and yours is make-believe” without revealing yourself as a narrow-minded, uneducated bigot. It’s the same logic as saying, “blacks are inferior to whites because I say they are.”
In America this kind of argument should have been eradicated centuries ago.
“Prominence in American culture” (read: let the mob rule)is as weak an argument for formalizing institutional preferences for Christianity as any I’ve ever heard. Besides, as you know from your study of biblical history, Christianity was a movement within Judaism for centuries before it became a separate faith. Jesus himself had no intention of starting a new church.
The ten commandments are Jewish law. Period. The moral laws of Christianity are based on supercession and are thus Jewish laws.
Last thought:
“What if we’ve picked the wrong religion? Every week, we’re just making God madder and madder.” – Homer Simpson
December 15th, 2005 at 10:54 am#90
Hi Michael,
hahaha – good one! The visuals on that one are pretty scary :)
Am working on an email to send you in between giving exams this week (so much fun).
How’s your day going so far?
December 15th, 2005 at 10:54 am#192
It’s been a busy month–end of the year rush here at work. I know this is a busy time for you as well…hang in there :)
December 15th, 2005 at 11:12 amWingnuttia??? I thought it was called “Dumbf**kistan? Is this another Burma/Myanmar thing going on?
December 15th, 2005 at 11:14 amScary, I almost agree with wwallace…
I say almost because I believe that his reasoning is wrong.
There are too many religions/cults for any place to display all religious symbols for all religions. For example there is the cult of the golden calf (who claim to be the world’s first victims of monotheism) there is the Reformed Druids of North America (and their spin off sect the Reformed Non-Aristotelian Druids of North America, RNA-DNA), the Pastafarians, the Javacrucians, the Discordians, the Erisians… Do you want me to continue?
However, saying that it is OK for a school to display Christian or (in fact) Pagan symbols but no others is not acceptable. At this time of year celebrating Christmas is fine, but how about celebrating other Religious festivals at other times of year? Passover, Devali (sp?) and so on…
Teaching children about other cultures will not harm them, and may help them. This isn’t indoctrination it isn’t forcing them to be non-Christian, it’s opening them up to the fact that there are other cultures out there in America that do things differently.
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 11:17 amWhy do we still call them Christians? I call them “ku klux kristians”! God forbid, O’Reilly should actually read or listen to the entire story. that would be too much like the truth….we don’t want that.
December 15th, 2005 at 11:27 am#193 We’ve been so busy talking about school I don’t know what your job is…
Thanks. You do the same!
December 15th, 2005 at 11:52 am#191
Well said!
December 15th, 2005 at 11:54 amThere is enough real tragedy and corruption going on in the world, if o’reilly is wasting time on this kind of shit, makes you wonder what their real intent is.
Comment by Rex Thomas — December 15, 2005 @ 9:53 am
That’s is exactly it – DISTRACT, DISTRACT, DISTRACT. It is part of their master plan, and they will continue to do so. Anything to take attention away from the REAL issues. And it seems to be working…..
December 15th, 2005 at 12:01 pmTeaching children about other cultures will not harm them, and may help them. This isn’t indoctrination it isn’t forcing them to be non-Christian, it’s opening them up to the fact that there are other cultures out there in America that do things differently.
I can personally attest to this. Grew up in a conservative, christian, traditional family. My parents never ventured outside their own livingrooms very often. They were ignorant to what was going on in Russia, so they just believe the propaganda about the Commies coming to getthem. My father was religious about Ronald Reagan. He called Evolution “Evil”. And my mother, who was taught to be submissive, just remained loyal to the party.
I am not a very liberal, non-traditional, vegan Atheist. This is a result of my leaving my own livingroom and traveling the world. In meeting and knowing people who have come from different cultures and backgrounds. From reading non-fiction and having an open mind.
The neocons know that knowledge and awareness will lead to their finality. This is why they fight and resist it with every fiber of their Bible-thumping beings. And why we must resist them.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:03 pmOops – change “not” to “now” in 200
December 15th, 2005 at 12:04 pmThanks unbelievable…
I grew up as a Christian (in a congregationalist church, so a very democratic and open church where the members make all the decisions and the minister is just a better (theologically) trained person)…
I’ve been involved in ecumenical activities (different Christian sects working together, promoting Christianity as a whole rather than promoting the United Free Church as being better than the Reformed Free Church…) and interfaith activities (Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Moslems, Jews and Sikhs all discussing the commonalities of faith as well as the difference)… It hasn’t hurt my faith at all. I’ve remained a very liberal Christian. I have an understanding of my faith that I wouldn’t have if I had remained insulated from alternate thoughts.
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:40 pmA huge giveaway when dealing with self-described “Christians” is the love test: Christians are taught that they will be recognizeable because of their love for their fellow man and each other.
I have received great kindness and generosity in the past from Christian people who did not attempt to convert me or “save my soul.” These people, significantly, repudiated the brand of Christianity practiced by Dobson, Wildmon, and the other one, whose name I forget, who puts up those “God hates fags” signs everywhere. Where’s the love in that?
I get a strong whiff of hurt and rage from the apocalyptical evangelical movement. But as I understand it, aren’t they are supposed to be suffused in joy all the time, love me wholeheartedly – and show it?
Someone who knows better, please explain this movement to me.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:41 pm[...] Think Progress On Friday, Bill O’Reilly took to the airwaves to share the latest “War on Christmas†outrage: [...]
December 15th, 2005 at 12:45 pmGun toting liberal…
I wish I could explain it to you…
Unfortunately I can’t.
I’ve worked with Christian Missionaries (from the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands) before and found that they were precisely the kind of Christians that I like. They did everything that they could to help people. They made it obvious that they were Christians without being sanctimonious or ramming it down people’s throats. They were just all around “nice” people. They felt that if people were going to convert to Christianity they would do it because they saw what these people were doing and would ask (someone) about why they were the way they were. They didn’t preach, they acted.
I’ve also met the “shove it down your throat” type. I don’t like them and I would never be converted by being told that I am a sinner, and I should repent. Even though I am a Christian I always have to fight back the urge to heckle these Hellfire and Brimstone types. One of my favourite stories on this subject concerns a preacher at a local church. One Sunday at about 10:45 he stopped his Sermon and said “Can you hear that? That (the traffic noise) is the sound of people going to HELL!!!” A friend was in the congregation at that Church at the time. When she told me about it I laughed… About that time one of the cars going past was ours… And we were on our way to a different Church where the service started at 11:00.
The Self-Righteous, my way is the only way, evangelicals scare me as much as fanatics of other religions do.
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 12:55 pmChristmas carols are holy scripture? Some maybe – but if all are, please tell us the chapter and versus for Silent Night.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:04 pmO’Reilly is really a moron. With 1.5 Billion christians world wide, I don’t expect Christmas to disappear soon. Dammit.
The truth is that Christmas is humbug. There is absolutely no actual relationship between the birth of Christ and December 25th.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:26 pmI’ve worked with Christian Missionaries (from the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands) before and found that they were precisely the kind of Christians that I like.
Comment by Zwack — December 15, 2005 @ 12:55 pm
What a small world. My in-laws are good Calvinist Dutch people who are devout followers of the Christian Reformed Church, a splinter of the Reformed Church you mention.
Curiously enough, Christian Reformed folks think Reformers are wrong and their souls will go to Hell when they die.
This takes me back to the point I was trying to make: Getting the government out of the religious business protects Christians too. What if -for some strange reason- the government decided to endorse the Catholic way as the only way to celebrate Christmas, with pictures of the Pope and the Virgin Mary? I know my in-laws would not be happy at all.
By the way, we had our Christmas get together this past weekend. No mention of the “war on Christmas”, fortunately.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:26 pm#202
It’s too bad what the neocon zealots are doing to your religion. All of my Christian friends are like you – live by the faith they believe in.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:27 pm#208
Or if in the footsteps of tyrants like Mao Tse Taong or Stalin, they eliminated religion all together… the zealots don’t see that, do they?
Giving Congress the right to say ‘one nation under god’ gives congress the same right to say ‘one nation devoid of god’. Do they really want that?
December 15th, 2005 at 1:31 pmIs Bel Air Presbyterian Church the church President Reagan attended?
December 15th, 2005 at 1:35 pmWow, I am always so not suprised at the level of non thinking when the Giocomo’s & Wwallace’s get in the mix.
It’s intersting when someone actually prefers the word “untrustworthy” to “liar” in defending the B.O.’s of the world. There mut be a “Lower the Bar” sect out there somewhere. You really must be politicians or related to Scott McClellan or something. Distract, Decieve, Divide = Fear = Power. Straight out of the repug playbook.
Where did all you Zombies come from?, and where do you hide? You are really starting to creep me out.
Happy Holiday’s
Roothogg
December 15th, 2005 at 1:41 pmUnbelievable, I don’t think that I share a religion with the neocon zealots. They seem to have a superficial grasp on faith where if they say certain words then God will bless them. They heard the phrase “Ask and it shall be given” and took it literally. They pick and choose which bits of their translation of the Bible that they want to unthinkingly follow and anyone who doesn’t conform is a damned heretic. They are the sort of people who believe that there is a place for debate and that place is on top of a bonfire tied to a stake.
At times I wish I had their certainty that I am right, but I don’t. I just trust in a merciful God and hope that by doing what I perceive to be right I am doing his will.
Gregor, the history of the Church of Scotland is remarkably similar. In fact there is a saying that if you get two Scots together you have a Church, three and you have a Schism. It reminds me of Monty Python’s Life of Brian, where the anti roman factions are all variations on a theme… The Judean people’s front, the Popular front of Judea (one man), the People’s front of Judea…
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:46 pmIt seems obvious, at least to me, that the entire “war on Christmas” is a distraction from real problems in the world, as are the “wars” on homosexuality, flag burning, abortion rights, and even terror. Otherwise, why are the so-called Christians not as militant about children living in poverty, our inadequate education system and other real issues that affect not only the quality of life of the people directly involved, but the security of America? Security is much more about a healthy, well-educated populace than it is about fighting wars and flag burning (or the prohibition thereof). Pollution is a much, much greater threat than chemical or bio-weapons from a foreign enemy. Toxins in our air, soil, and water are invading us in ways many people are totally unaware of, creating terrible birth defects, cancer, and a host of respiratory ailments.
But to pick up on the main theme of this blog, I am a non-Christian living in the Bible belt state of West Virginia. I celebrate Christmas as a rather pagan holiday and call it Christmas only due to habit. When my son was in the choir in school, virtually all the songs all year long were Christian oriented in one way or another. I often feel socially marginalized because of my lack of Christianity. I work for the school system, and our office party every year consists of everyone else singing Christmas carols. (Which I find mostly musically boring along with blatantly mixing state and religion.) Formal prayers begin our county school board meetings. I know I should object to this, and should have objected to the abundance of Christian music in my son’s school. Laziness and perhaps lack of desire for a huge confrontation prevents me from doing so, I suppose, and it’s not something I am particularly proud of.
Aside from all of the above, how ridiculous is it for the wingnuts to get so upset about not specifically and exclusively assigning Christianity to a holiday that uses pagan symbols like decorated trees and Santa Claus and holly and mistletoe? The Colbert Report did a great bit on that last week.
Christmas and all its associated pagan, Jewish, and other religious holidays at this time of year are symbolic of renewal. They celebrate the end of the shortest days in the middle of the coldest time of year as the reassurance that, as the days lengthen and the true dead of winter resumes, spring and rebirth are inevitable.
For those of us who don’t believe in the deity of Christ, the Christ story is just one among many myths of kings, princes, and other leaders who gave their lives for the good of humankind. The Arthur legend, ancient Celtic myths, and many others reflect this theme. It’s a way of explaining (or attempting to explain or rationalize) mortality. Some things die so others can live, sacrifice can be noble, the old makes way for the new.
And, even if it is true that Christianity is more prevalent than other religions, this is precisely why America’s founders were so adamant about separation of church and state; they wanted to ensure that minority religions were not oppressed. One would think that a country founded on the basis of enlightenment would have progressed significantly in over 200 years, but instead much of American thought has regressed into Medieval oppression, narrowminded fundamentalist interpretations of ancient (and multi-translated) texts, and semantic nonsense. What’s next – burning witches at the stake? Inquisitions? Book banning? (Oops – that’s already underway!) Thought police? (Oh, yeah, sorry. That’s underway too.)
Anyone else notice, by the way, that all the rightwingnuts who are so hot to post the JEWISH ten commandments all over the place are not so eager to post the CHRISTIAN beatitudes of Jesus? “Blessed are the peacemakers” wouldn’t go so well with “respect our dead troops by putting more young people in danger for the sake of the oil,” now would it? One of the most ardent supporters of the war on Iraq here at work had the audacity last Christmas to sing “Let There Be Peace on Earth.” I left the room.
December 15th, 2005 at 1:54 pm#213
Z
I’ve heard that the meek shall inherit the earth… :)
No one truly ‘knows’ many things. We can’t. We don’t have all the information, just a microscopic perspective on the universe. Makes us all Agnostic in that regard. From there, each of us has to decide whether to have faith in a spirituality or to not. You choose to have faith. I choose not to. I really don’t see why anyone thinks that affects our ability to come together to figure out how to solve problems and make a better world. At least, it shouldn’t…
December 15th, 2005 at 2:13 pmLeAnn
You’re definitely not alone. I’m an Atheist living in rural Georgia working as a high school teacher. This is definitely a conservative Christian area.
Today, I had a discussion with my students about the “war on Christmas” (one of them brought it up). I gave them the other side of the story to think about. I think that the best we can do is to plant seeds and hope for the next generation to sprout them into tolerance. It seems like our generation is beyond remedy most days…
December 15th, 2005 at 2:18 pmLeAnn,
There’s a wonderful book called ‘Natural Atheism’ by Dr. Greg Eller, PhD in Cultural Antropology that does a wonderful job of explaining how religious culture works and what we can do as non-religious people to make our point of view known.
December 15th, 2005 at 2:22 pmAll 3 of my kids went to Ridgeway (Iowa County, Wisconsin)where the Dodgeville school district’s entire District’s 5th grade attend. All three are now college students. None of them were traumatized as a result of going to 5th grade in Ridgeway. I haven’t asked any of them if they’d heard of this “much ado about nothing” yet. Sure hope they get me something nice for that “Silent Night” coming up soon!!
December 15th, 2005 at 2:41 pmUnbelievable…
I have been known to describe myself as an Agnostic Christian. I don’t believe that it is possible to prove the existence of God, or to disprove it. It is a matter of faith. I choose to believe but I don’t believe in Intelligent Design or literal Creationism. Obviously believing in God, I believe in a “creator” but that doesn’t make Genesis correct.
Being one of those damned liberals I believe that it is up to you to choose how you want to live your life (within certain limits)… If you choose not to believe in God (or Flying Spaghetti Monster, or The Golden Calf or…) that’s up to you. We can still solve problems together. I would hope that you would use “ethics” and “morality” (but I’m not using Leviticus as my judge of what is moral) to guide your suggestions, but as long as we can produce an agreeable solution I don’t care what is guiding you.
One of my favourite non-Christian religions is Javacrucianism. The Javacrucians have one holy ritual. They rise at dawn, face towards the rising sun and lift the holy cup to their lips. They drink, and utter the holy words “God, I needed that!”
My wife is a Catholic who trained and worked as a Special Ed teacher (now burned out). While we disagree about certain matters of faith, we agree on others. She is tolerant of my heresies (but dislikes when I tell disrespectful jokes about Jesus).
I don’t see what is wo wrong about being respectful of others opinions, wasn’t that one of the things that Jesus stood for? Perhaps I have a faulty translation of the Bible, and really Jesus said “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” and then he lobbed a rock and added “OK Lads, it’s your chance to stone her now.”
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 2:54 pm[...] In Dodgeville, Wisconsin, the Ridgewood Elementary School has changed the song Silent Night to Cold in the Night and forced the kids to sing the lyrics, “Cold in the night, No one in sight, Winter winds whirl and bite,” to the tune of the original Silent Night. O’Reilly was by no means the only conservative to repeat this story. During a Dec. 10 appearance on Fox News, Mathew Staver of the Liberty Counsel said the presentation at Ridgewood Elementary had “no balance here. They have no Christian Christmas carols.” He even threatened to sue the school: People are outraged. We sent a demand letter asking them to immediately change the song and allow the actual lyrics of “Silent Night,” and if they do not, if they insist on this ridiculous course of action, we’ll file a federal lawsuit.”I think the American people should return the favor and file a federal lawsuit with the FCC for misrepresenting the facts: [...]
December 15th, 2005 at 2:55 pmFor all of you who might find it interesting: The poem to Stille Nacht was an inspiration by the Pastor of the Church, Joseph Mohr, when he saw a heavy snow around the creche at his church one evening and was pondering the silence of the scene. Nothing more, nothing less. I thnik both he and Franz Gruber (who changes the melody more than one time) would be pround the song is still sung and very bemused that it has become so “sacred” of a text.
As to the history of Carols, one should start with the “Oxford Book of Carols” which shows how sacred texts were often added to well known winter songs to make the “religious” as Christmas became more of a religious holiday in the mid 19th Centuries, while many of the “melodies” were centuries older.
And, many of the carols (Deck the Halls, The Boar’s Head Carol and even the original text to “Ring Christmas Bells” reflect the secular aspects of the holiday season: merry making, gift exchanging and even, yes, drinking!!!
There are well established guidelines for presenting religious music in a public school program, court approved, and they can be found by contacting the MENC (Music Educator’s National Council).
And with that, a season of merry making and songs of all types are wished to be foisted on you all!!!
December 15th, 2005 at 2:57 pmZ
That sounds like a great attitude to me. I feel the same way that you do. Live and let live, as long as it doesn’t infringe upon others. I saw a really interesting Discovery Channel show on chimpanzee social ethics. They put one chimp in a cage that had a view, but no access, to another larger cage. In side the larger cage, the door was obstructed from the view of the ‘lurking monster’. It was up to the chimp in the separate cage to inform the chimp coming into the larger cage about the impending danger, or not. What was interesting is that the guardian chimp would warn other chimps he liked (those who played nicely with others) about the monster, but not those who he didn’t like (the ones who infringed upon him or other chimps ).
My father was so prejudice against everyone who wasn’t just like him. And he was so bitter and filled with hate that he actually made me not want to be like him. Acceptance, as you’ve discovered, is really so much easier. Yet there are those who fear change so much, they refuse to consider anything but the way they know. Sad really.
December 15th, 2005 at 3:10 pmI don’t believe that it is possible to prove the existence of God, or to disprove it. It is a matter of faith. I choose to believe but I don’t believe in Intelligent Design or literal Creationism. Obviously believing in God, I believe in a “creator†but that doesn’t make Genesis correct.
Comment by Zwack — December 15, 2005 @ 2:54 pm
Interesting. This is roughly the theological position of my Catholic relatives -my extended family are all good Catholics. But then the Catholic Church, as of late, has taken on a more “enlightened” position regarding many issues.
My relatives have always regarded evangelicals with bewilderment and wariness because of their overt, public displays of religiosity, and their attempts at “proving” the Bible’s historicity and the existence of God.
When I was younger, my grown-ups used to tell me: “If you have faith, you need no proof. But if you need proof, then you have no faith.” -I still like that dictum.
December 15th, 2005 at 3:15 pmThe ability of O’Lielly and the Immoral Right to look you in the eye and lie so knowingly and consciously (and REPEATEDLY!) to serve their own narrow purposes is shocking to anyone with a shred of decency in them.
Everyone can see THEIR standard of “honesty and integrity” out in plain sight–and it is shameful and abyssmal!
I didn’t know having no integrity or sincerity was an essential part of Christs’s message—-Well, Obviously it wasn’t.
But dishonesty and filthy, vile LIES are definitely an essential part of conservative xtians’ philosophy of
darkness, deception, larceny and death.
Immorality is part of conservative christians’ character like WHITE ON RICE!! (and that goes for CONDO-SLEEZA too!!
December 15th, 2005 at 4:02 pmBoth of your comments reminded me of a Hymn by Sydney Carter…
“When I needed a neighbour” the chorus is…
That pretty much sums a lot of my thoughts about Christianity up. Too many people claim to be Christian but act in decidedly unchristian ways. Christianity is not about going to church on Sunday, or insisting that Evolution shouldn’t be taught in Schools or even that “Holidays” should be replaced by “Christmas”…
Christianity should be about doing what you can to help others
Z.
December 15th, 2005 at 4:14 pm#225
Amen :)
December 15th, 2005 at 5:12 pm“…a small, lonely Christmas tree that is told it is “too scraggly, it will never sell.â€
It is freedom, democracy and truth as presented by this adminstration and it’s mouthpiece that is scraggly and unsellable, to half of us anyway.
December 15th, 2005 at 6:39 pm… Tepeetonka – That’s why the BushCo. crew keeps trying to dress up their nasty left-overs with sparkly new ‘ talking points ‘ and maple syrup , hoping we won’t notice the foul taste ! But it’s NOT working anymore , and they’re getting desperate ! Happy Holidays ( ’cause I include everyone ) ! … ;)
December 16th, 2005 at 12:07 amTell your children that it is ok to practise death penalty.
Tell your children that it was heroic to bomb Iraqi civilians.
Tell your children that torture, theft, murder and lies is appropriate for American christians.
Believe me the west can’t stay no longer with your “christian American value system”. You may right whatever you want, but it is the innocent who have been murdered by your troops.
Merry christmas America!
December 16th, 2005 at 1:08 ammaybe someone will point out to shrill bill that the words to silent night have already been changed….from the original German version.
December 16th, 2005 at 12:37 pmWell why is their still no additional information regarding the school and this play? I’ve searched all over the internet and can’t find anything. Is the Liberty Council the only people that this school district speaks with, because thats the ONLY source of any news about this story.
Why hasn’t the press followed up with the rest of the story?
December 16th, 2005 at 12:42 pmLessee here.
The kids sang a song accompanied by music that would be universally recognized as “Silent Night”, but instead of actually singing “Silent Night” they sang “Cold in the Night.”
Is anyone disputing this? I don’t see anyone disputing this. I see people trying to excuse it, or explain it.
That this change was made as part of a Christmas play from 1988 only says that someone was willing to co-opt or tamper with the words of a well known song a lot longer ago than was originally thought. And it makes no difference to me. Weird Al can parodize “Beat It” all he wants, because “Beat It” is not a song that holds significant religious or spiritual meaning for people. And besides, the point of parody is good fun. There’s no such good reason to take, co-opt, and bastardize a song that is personally representative of many people’s spiritual devotion or religious belief unless it is your intent to be offensive.
You can parody celebrities. You cannot parody starvation.
You can parody politics. You cannot parody genocide.
If you see the pattern there, then you know already what I mean. If you do not, then there’s not much that can be done for you.
December 16th, 2005 at 5:08 pm#232
Silent Night holds no spiritual value for a lot of people. Get over it already. Pick a real problem and stop whining about a silly song we lifted from the Germans to begin with. You have plenty of options for a real issue. Let’s see… There’s AIDS, the Occupation of Iraq, the minimum wage too low to live off of, child molestion by priests, cancer, starvation, high crime, second-hand smoke, and on and on and on…
December 16th, 2005 at 9:02 pmBO is a twat! PERIOD. So is Bush…..
December 17th, 2005 at 3:06 amchrist is the invisible man.
hahahahahaha… love it!
December 17th, 2005 at 11:50 amMy kids go to Dodgeville School District and the supposed ‘Outrage’ over the Silent Night song just doesn’t exist. There is Outrage that the school district has received thousands of e-mails and voicemails, many of them threatening and hateful. They have received so many that there has to be extra security at our schools!!! How is this part of the Meaning of Christmas???? The song was changed to tell a Christmas story — the title even has the word Christmas right in it! My fear is that after this year and the ridiculous ‘War on Christmas’, many of the little school districts and small towns are going to decide to skip the Christmas celebrations. They can’t win!! If they celebrate Christmas with traditional Christian symbols, they are threatened with lawsuits from the ‘Freedom from Religion’ groups, if they dare to celebrate Christmas without traditional Christian symbols, they are threatened with lawsuits from the Liberty council and other Christian groups.
Whatever happened to the Christmas Spirit — Peace on Earth, Goodwill towards Men? I always thought that Christmas was a time to set aside differences and celebrate family and friends. What has happened to this country?????
December 17th, 2005 at 12:22 pmLaurie
#237
Laurie, to answer your question, Bush was elected president. He thinks that either you are with him and his ideals, or you are against him. From his actions, that means that either you are like him or you are at war with him. Hence this war on Christmas.
December 17th, 2005 at 1:06 pmIt gets weirder and a Hunter Thompson trip everyday!
December 17th, 2005 at 3:24 pmO’Reilly’s really on a tear with the “War on Christmas”. Here’s another story about lies he’s spreading. Plano ISD has asked for a retraction, but the lies are still on the Faux News website.
http://www.statesman.com/news/content/gen/ap/TX_OReilly_School_Dispute.html
Plano schools angered over comment by Bill O’Reilly
PLANO, Texas – School officials want talk show host Bill O’Reilly to retract his on-air comment about the district banning students from wearing red and green because the colors represent Christmas.
O’Reilly told the audience on his Fox News Channel show “The O’Reilly Factor” that a Plano school told students they couldn’t wear red and green clothing. “That’s flat-out fascism,” he said during the broadcast.
The district, located in an affluent Dallas suburb, said in Wednesday’s editions of The Dallas Morning News that it never has prohibited such clothing, and sent e-mails to parents and posted a statement on its Web site about the “false rumor.”
“What vehicle do I have to say Bill O’Reilly is flat wrong?” said Richard Abernathy, an attorney for the school district.
December 17th, 2005 at 11:03 pmFrom my web log: Secularizing Jingle Bells
As it turns out, no one rewrote “Silent Night” as part of any War on Christmas, but it got me to thinking about doing unto others as I would have them do unto me, and turning the other cheek, and giving gifts in the true spirit of Christmas.
Here is my gift to the world, a politically incorrect rewrite of the disgracefully secular so-called Christmas song, “Jingle Bells”
Written in the profound belief that Jesus belongs to the whole world. Merry Christmas, everyone!
December 18th, 2005 at 3:19 pm[...] Think Progress [...]
December 18th, 2005 at 3:51 pmI’d like to see a lawsuit filed against O’Reilly himself. Threatening to file a lawsuit against a school that does a play featuring songs with altered lyrics is just plain dumb. And he’s probably asking himself: “Why would I do such a thing like that?”
In the words of Ben Stein and his audience from Win Ben Stein’S Money:
Ben: “Call me crazy.”
Audience: “YOU’RE CRAZY!”
Yes, Bill is crazy. Let me just tell you people that I avoid Fox News altogether, and that’s the best Christmas (or Holiday) gift I can get.
And even better, I’d love to see Bill in the Boardroom, and Trump would tell him, “I can’t believe you would threaten to sue a school just because of something offensive to you. Just because something’s offensive to me I wouldn’t sue unless I had a good enough reason to do that. You don’t have a good enough reason to sue them. So, Bill, YOU’RE FIRED!”
(O’Reilly takes elevator down to the ground level, where his cabride home awaits)
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all! Hope you’ll find something good under your trees and in your stockings (and pray that O’Reilly and Conservative, Inc. get lots of coal)
December 19th, 2005 at 1:11 amI think Christmas won.
Each, or all of the celebrations at the end of December, are nothing more than aberrations of ancient secular observations of the annual recurrence of the Winter Solstice, observed by–for example–the as yet unknown ancients who constructed Stonehenge in England and the fortifications upon the island of Malta 500 years before the pyramids of Egypt; the Sumarians of the Tigris-Euphrates river delta, 500-1000 years before the Old Testament; and the Confusionists and Dynastics of China who celebrated the flooding of the Changjiang(Yangtze) River, while White people in Europe were still wearing hides, living in caves, and eating rotting scavenged meat.
How ’bout we just call it: “Happy December 21st?”
JR Ford
UP (Unsubstantiated Press)
St Petersburg, Fl
sixtimeseven@aol.com
http://hometown.aol.com/sixtimeseven/myhomepage/profile.html
“The O’Reilly Factor is the most popular commentary program on cable television, drawing upwards to 15% of the total viewing audience; and one pile of crap will draw a million flies.” — JR Ford, Jan 2006.
January 9th, 2006 at 5:35 pmThere is more to this story even yet. The school district could have cleared up the misunderstanding but did not. See this entry for more from Liberty Counsel: http://wthrockmorton.blogspot.com/2005/12/happy-holydays-redux.html
January 11th, 2006 at 4:36 pm[...] As it turns out, the entire story of the school banning “Silent Night” is bogus. [...]
January 28th, 2006 at 5:11 pmSpeaking of the war on Christmas, Best Buy has just dug their heels in and returned to the trenches by banning the greeting, “Merry Christmas” from their advertising campaign this Christmas.
I’ve been fighting back with this song (feel free to use it in your campaign if you like it):
Best Buy Inn
Dr. BLT (c) 2006
http://www.drblt.net/music/BestBI.mp3
for more information, visit my blog:
http://people.bakersfield.com/home/Blog/blognroll/2759
or my website:
November 25th, 2006 at 12:37 amhttp://www.drblt.net
war on christmas good on him christmas is full of lazy mugs andf idiots
December 7th, 2006 at 4:46 amI support the war on Christmas!
It is filledwith dumbasses desperate for money dressed up as Santa Have they any dignity?!
Christmas is a load of crap!
I hope some1 breaks into every house on christmas eve and steals all the presents then burns them!!
December 7th, 2006 at 4:51 amamerica is crap like christmas now die you little fools
December 7th, 2006 at 4:53 amNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
P.S CHRITMAS IS RUBBISH!
HEY KIDS! SANTA’S NOT REAL!!!!#
December 7th, 2006 at 4:54 amHE IS FAKE AND HE DESERVES TO BE KILLED WITH A SHOT GUN
[...] Turns out that a lot of the right wing media simply fabricated a lot of the anti-Christmas stories. Bill O’Reilly? Making shit up? Surely you jest! Do your research, look up “War on Christmas”. Dollars to donuts that your results will reek of Bill O’Reilly’s soapy falafel. Why would Fox News create an entire controversy out of almost nothing? Ratings. [...]
December 19th, 2006 at 4:26 am