After conceding, then unconceding, then conceding, then unconceding, Hoffman now concedes.
After conceding, then unconceding, then conceding, then unconceding, Hoffman now concedes.
On Nov. 16, ThinkProgress reported that failed Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman told Glenn Beck that he was unconceding the NY-23 special election, even though the winner, Democrat Bill Owens, was already in office. Shortly thereafter, however, Hoffman’s spokesman said that they weren’t unconceding the race. But then on Nov. 19, Hoffman posted a statement on his website, this time making clear that he was actually unconceding the race, citing concerns about voter fraud at the hands of ACORN and labor unions. Today, Hoffman has put out another statement, this time saying that he is conceding:
Yesterday, the remaining ballots were counted in the 23rd Congressional District special election. The results re-affirm the fact that Bill Owens won.
Since, the morning of November 4th, many of my supporters have asked me to challenge the outcome of this race. Their concerns centered on the veracity of the new voting machines used, for the first time, in the majority of the eleven counties that make up the Congressional District. Over the past three weeks, we nearly cut Bill Owens’ lead in half. Sadly, that is not enough.
- Comments
- 70
Dick ‘Five Deferments’ Cheney Talks About War From The ‘Perspective’ Of U.S. Troops
Dick ‘Five Deferments’ Cheney Talks About War From The ‘Perspective’ Of U.S. Troops
In a new interview with right-wing radio host Scott Hennen, Vice President Cheney again criticizes President Obama’s national security policies, harping on his belief that Obama is “dithering” on Afghanistan and endangering U.S. troops. To make his point, Cheney talked about the “perspective” of men and women serving on the front lines:
I worry that there’s a lack of understanding there of what this means from the perspective of the troops. You know, if you’re out there on the line day in and day out and putting your life at risk on a volunteer basis for the nation, and you see the Commander in Chief unable, to or appearing to be unable, to make a decision about the way forward here — you know that raises serious doubts. Nobody wants to think of volunteering to be participate in that kind of operation. [...]
It may in part be inexperience on Obama’s part. It may be that there’s confusion on the staff. But I’m not encouraged by it.
Listen here (beginning at 2:20):
Cheney really doesn’t have any more authority on this subject than Obama does. He neither served in the military, nor has he been Commander-in-Chief. As the New York Times noted in 2004:
Eventually, like 16 million other young men of that era, Mr. Cheney sought deferments. By the time he turned 26 in January 1967 and was no longer eligible for the draft, he had asked for and received five deferments, four because he was a student and one for being a new father.
Bush administration officials also seemed to think that they were soldiers in the military, with former White House press secretary Tony Snow saying that President Bush was on the “front lines” and “in the war every day.” In April 2007, First Lady Laura Bush said that “no one suffers more than their President and I do” during wartime, and Bush would speak on behalf of U.S. servicemembers to bolster his policy ideas. “The [military] families gathered here understand that our troops want to finish the job,” Bush said in 2007 during a speech opposing Iraq redeployment.
Dobbs Embarks On His Political Career, Claims He’s Reaching Out To Latino Groups To ‘Bridge’ Differences
Dobbs Embarks On His Political Career, Claims He’s Reaching Out To Latino Groups To ‘Bridge’ Differences
Since Lou Dobbs left CNN, he has been mulling a run for office — possibly even for president. Yesterday in an interview with WTOP radio, Dobbs said that part of his strategy to transition from being a media figure is to reach out to all the Latino organizations he alienated while at CNN:
DOBBS: And for the first time, I’m actually listening to some people about politics. I don’t think I’ve got the nature for it, but we’ve got to do something in this country, and I think that being public arena means you’ve got to part of the solution. By the way, I’m reaching out right now to Latino groups, to the Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable — all of the groups with whom I’ve been in an ongoing debate, to try to bridge some of these conflicts and try to create solutions. And I think we’re well on our way to doing that.
Listen here:
ThinkProgress spoke with Lisa Navarrete, vice president at the National Council of La Raza, the nation’s largest national Latino civil rights and advocacy organization in the United States. Navarrette said that Dobbs had not yet reached out to the group at all.
Dobbs did recently do an interview with Telemundo, in which he said that he was one of the Latino community’s “greatest friends.” However, he also falsely denied ever saying that undocumented immigrants are bringing leprosy to the United States, instead attacking the interviewer for even bringing up the subject. If he wants to start to “bridge” the differences with the Latino community, maybe he should start by not only apologizing for portraying undocumented immigrants as carriers of diseases, but also as criminals and invaders intent on conquering the United States for Mexico, as well as for promoting dangerous nativist conspiracy theories.
Transcript: More »
A Dobbs run would immediately activate Hispanic voters who are predominately Democratic party supporters. In 2008, Hispanics went for Obama 67 to 31 percent. Next time around, they'll be a much larger chunk of the electorate -- Hispanics are one of the fastest growing populations in the country -- and, if Dobbs runs, not only will they be weighing all of the issues that are important to all voters, they'll also be facing a candidate whose careless smears of illegal immigrants and embrace of Minutemen groups have made him a symbol of xenophobia. If that doesn't boost turn-out among that community on election day, I don't know what will.
O’Reilly: ‘Jesse Watters Is Responsible For Bill Moyers Leaving’ PBS
O’Reilly: ‘Jesse Watters Is Responsible For Bill Moyers Leaving’ PBS
On Friday, distinguished veteran PBS journalist Bill Moyers announced that he was retiring from weekly television. “I am 75 years old,” he explained, noting that “Bill Moyers Journal” had been having a “good run of it,” so he felt “it’s time.”
Last night on his Fox News show, Bill O’Reilly used the news to attack Moyers and his journalistic ethics. He also claimed that his producer, Jesse Watters, was solely responsible for Moyers resigning. “Now I think we — Jesse Watters drove him out of PBS,” said O’Reilly. “I think Jesse Watters is responsible for Bill Moyers leaving.” Watch it:
In 2007, Watters ambushed Moyers on the street outside his home. O’Reilly had Watters harass Moyers after the PBS journalist ran a program about impeaching President Bush. O’Reilly claimed that Moyers symbolized “Americans who want their country to lose in Iraq, based upon hatred of all things Bush,” which he determined was a good reason to send his henchman to Moyers’ house. According to O’Reilly, this one interview was what drove Moyers out of his job two years later.
Of course, what O’Reilly didn’t show was a 2008 confrontation between Moyers and Fox News producer Porter Berry, which didn’t go as O’Reilly had planned. This time, Moyers turned the tables on Berry and called O’Reilly a coward for sending out producers to do his dirty work and for refusing to appear on his PBS show. Watch it:
Last night was a prime example of O’Reilly’s inflated ego. He has also taken sole credit for saving Christmas, lowering gas prices, John McCain being behind in the polls in October 2008 (because the senator refused to appear on The O’Reilly Factor), and Spanish prosecutors deciding to drop an investigation into the Bush administration’s torture regime (because O’Reilly threatened a Spanish boycott).
Later in the segment, O’Reilly added that another reason that Moyers is retiring is because PBS was mad at him for not being tough enough on Rev. Jeremiah Wright in a 2008 interview.
Transcript: More »
Lieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
Lieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has repeatedly tried to get Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to come on her show and debate health care. However, he and his office have refused to even respond to her requests for statements. Last week, Mike Stark caught up with Lieberman and asked him whether he’d go on Maddow’s show. The senator declined, saying the tv host has “a point of view”:
STARK: You’ve expressed an interest to have a serious policy debate instead of all the invective and that. And I think one of the best folks from the progressive side is Rachel Maddow —
LIEBERMAN: (LAUGHTER)
STARK: — and she’s been trying to get you on her show for a really long time.
LIEBERMAN: She’s got a point of view. I think we’re going to have this debate on the floor of the Senate. And I look forward to it. In other words —
STARK: There’s no chance you’ll do her show?
LIEBERMAN: I don’t think so.
Watch Maddow’s segment on Friday:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Fort Bragg sales of Palin’s book are ‘weak’ in advance of her visit.
Fort Bragg sales of Palin’s book are ‘weak’ in advance of her visit.
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin is in Fort Bragg, NC today, for another stop on her “Going Rogue” book tour. Army officials initially banned the media from covering Palin’s visit, fearing the event would turn into political grandstanding “directed against the commander in chief.” But after objections from the press, the military relented. As a compromise, Palin “will not make a speech, pose for photos, or personalize notes in the books she signs.” Local WTVD-TV reports that bookstores around Fort Bragg were experiencing “slow sales” in advance of Palin’s visit, which is nevertheless supposed to attract “hundreds” of people. Watch it:
New FBI data show a sharp increase in the reported number of hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation.
New FBI data show a sharp increase in the reported number of hate crimes motivated by sexual orientation.
Today, the FBI released its latest annual statistics on U.S. hate crimes reported in 2008. Overall, “the 2008 numbers are up slightly — 7,783 incidents and 9,691 victims” were reported last year. Reported hate crimes based on sexual orientation had the largest increase — nearly 11 percent. Hate crimes based on religion rose 9 percent and the “largest category, racially-motivated hate crimes, fell less than 1 percent.” A breakdown of the 1,706 victims of sexual-orientation hate crimes:
– 57.5 percent were victims of an offender’s anti-male homosexual bias.
– 27.3 percent were victims because of an anti-homosexual bias.
– 11.6 percent were victims because of an anti-female homosexual bias.
– 2.0 percent were victims because of an anti-heterosexual bias.
– 1.6 percent were victims because of an anti-bisexual bias.
The FBI notes that with the recent passage of the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act, it will now “begin the process of adding the collection of hate crimes motivated by gender and gender identity and incorporating them into our annual report.”
Chris Wallace selectively quotes CBO analysis to suggest Senate health bill increases costs.
Chris Wallace selectively quotes CBO analysis to suggest Senate health bill increases costs.
This morning on Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace selectively quoted the Congressional Budget Office analysis of the merged Senate legislation to suggest that the Senate health legislation would increase government outlays on health care over 20 years and bend the cost-cure upward:
WALLACE: According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, federal outlays for health care would increase during the 2010-2019 period and the government-run health insurance plan would typically have premiums that were somewhat higher than the average premiums for the private plan. So here’s the question. The Democratic plan by the CBO’s own scoring fails to bend the famous health care cost curve at all over the course of these 10 years, and could you name a single Congress that has ever cut Medicare by half a trillion dollars as this legislation would?
Watch it:
Page 16 of the CBO report does predict that “federal outlays for health care would increase during the 2010-2019 period,” but the last paragraph of that same page adds that “during the decade following the 10-year budget window, the increases and decreases in the federal budgetary commitment to health care stemming for this legislation would roughly balance out, so that there would be no significant change in the commitment.” As Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) pointed out, the $848 billion bill would actually “save $130 billion in the first 10 years” and $650 billion in the next decade. Over on the Wonk Room, Igor Volsky debunks Wallace’s other claims about the bill failing to “bend the famous health care cost curve” and whether previous sessions of Congress ever cut Medicare.
Historic health care legislation moves forward for debate in the Senate.
Historic health care legislation moves forward for debate in the Senate.
The Senate voted along party lines tonight to avoid a GOP filibuster and move forward with debate on historic health care legislation. The final vote was 60-39, with Ohio Republican George Voinovich not voting. The AP reports that the “spectator galleries were full for the unusual Saturday night showdown, and applause broke out briefly when the vote was announced. In a measure of the significance of the moment, senators sat quietly in their seats, standing only when they were called upon to vote.” Full debate will begin after Thanksgiving.
Immediately after the vote, the White House put out a statement saying, “The President is gratified that the Senate has acted to begin consideration of health insurance reform legislation.” RNC Chairman Michael Steele complained that “a number of moderate Democrats sacrificed their principles to give Harry Reid a victory that brings America dangerously closer to having a government-run health care system.” Igor Volsky has been following tonight’s debate over on the Wonk Room.
If the first procedural vote is delayed until Saturday, Voinovich won't be around Washington to participate. He's got an anniversary to observe -- his 30th since being elected Cleveland's mayor in 1979 -- and he's going to spend it with his old team. It's not that Voinovich's vote won't matter, but he's in the "no" column already, and Reid needs 60 "yes" votes just to move to the next procedure.
Sen. Lamar Alexander Repeatedly Calls Medicaid A ‘Medical Ghetto’
Sen. Lamar Alexander Repeatedly Calls Medicaid A ‘Medical Ghetto’
Today on the Senate floor, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) railed against Medicaid, the health insurance program funded by both the federal and state governments for low-income Americans, by calling it a “medical ghetto” and blasting Democrats for proposing to expand the program:
– “We’ve heard eloquent statements about how moving 15 million low-income Americans into a program called Medicaid, which is a medical ghetto, is not health care reform.”
– “The governor of Tennessee, who is a Democratic governor, has estimated that the cost to our state of this bill — of moving 15 million Americans into this medical ghetto — is about $800 million over five years.”
– “Or arrogant in its dumping of 15 million low-income Americans into a medical ghetto called Medicaid that none of us, or any of our families, would ever want to be a part of for our health care.”
Watch it:
Conservatives frequently rail against this program, which currently covers around 60 million Americans, including people who are often rejected by private plans. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has suggested that people are better off uninsured than insured under Medicaid.
While Alexander may think he is too good for Medicaid coverage, a 2005 Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that 74 percent of Americans consider Medicaid very important and most would oppose cuts to the program. Families USA has pointed out that, despite its flaws, Medicaid is cost-effective and provides a solid foundation on which to expand coverage:
Medicaid is cost-effective compared to private health insurance. After controlling for health status (since Medicaid enrollees tend to have greater health care needs), it costs more than 20 percent less to cover low-income people in Medicaid than it does to cover them in private health insurance.
The program protects low-income Americans from uncontrollable out-of-pocket costs charged by private insurers and also “covers services not usually covered in private health insurance.” Under the Senate health bill, “most nonelderly people with income below 133 percent of the [federal poverty line] would be made eligible for Medicaid” starting in 2014. Additionally, the legislation would “increase federal Medicaid funding for states that cover recommended preventive services and immunizations at no extra cost.”
Cafe Press Bans All ‘Pray For Obama: Psalm 109:8′ Merchandise
Cafe Press Bans All ‘Pray For Obama: Psalm 109:8′ Merchandise
This week, both the websites of CafePress.com and Zazzle.com decided to stop selling merchandise that featured the latest right-wing craze: the slogan “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8.” However, Cafe Press then changed its mind and told ThinkProgress that it was reinstating the merchandise, which fell within “fair political commentary.”
Whether it’s “fair political commentary” was quickly questioned. While 109:8 reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office,” the next line is, “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow,” suggesting far more violent rhetoric than simple criticism. Diana Butler Bass at Beliefnet has explained that Psalm 109 is “considered one of the most difficult of all the psalms — full of violent images of vengeance and death.”
Yesterday, Cafe Press announced that it was again reversing itself and removing all the merchandise in response to strong public pressure:
The public debate started with questioning if the design was simply intended to be criticism of the President or something much worse. The discourse was surprisingly civil online, given the heated nature of the topic. Given that, and the positions of groups like the ACLU and the Anti-Defamation League, we decided to let the dialogue play out publicly before making a final decision.
Last night we posted a poll on our blog, read through the emails we’ve received and weighed the nature of the calls we’ve received on the topic. In the process we also learned that many of the original designers of the Psalm 109:8 designs had already decided to remove them on their own.
General consensus has proven that the design does point to a broader interpretation of the Psalm and thus has been deemed inappropriate for sale at CafePress.
The results of the Cafe Press poll were 76 percent calling the slogan “overly inflammatory and inappropriate” and 22 percent saying it was fair.
(HT: TP commenter Marie)
PBS’s Bill Moyers to retire from weekly television in April 2010.
PBS’s Bill Moyers to retire from weekly television in April 2010.
Veteran PBS journalist Bill Moyers has announced that he will be ending his Friday night public affairs show “Bill Moyers Journal” as well as “Now on PBS” on April 30, 2010:
Mr. Moyers said he had been planning for some time to retire the program on Dec. 25, but was asked by PBS to raise the funds to continue through April, which he did.
“I am 75 years old,” he said of the decision to end the series, which began in April 2007. The program has recently been having a “good run of it,” he added in a telephone interview on Friday, “so I feel it’s time.” He said he was not quitting television work, although he has no new projects planned.
“Bill Moyers Journal” originally aired in 1972, and after a few breaks, returned on-air in its current form in 2007, with the critically acclaimed documentary “Buying the War.” The film highlighted how, “in the rage that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the media abandoned their role as watchdog and became a lapdog instead.”
Angry supporters boo Palin for leaving in the middle of her book signing: ‘Quittin’ on the job!’
Angry supporters boo Palin for leaving in the middle of her book signing: ‘Quittin’ on the job!’
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin was in Indiana yesterday for a book-signing at a Borders store. One thousand lucky fans with wristbands to meet Palin stood in the rain all day waiting for her to arrive. However, Palin quit the event before she had the chance to sign all the books, leaving 100 supporters out in the cold:
“I’m very disappointed. I think it was very rude. She could have at least apologized, and she didn’t even do that,” said Teresa Hedrick. [...]
“We bought two books from Borders to have our receipt and our wristband to get it signed tonight,” said one woman. “My books are going back to Borders tomorrow.”
“We gave up our entire workday, stayed in the cold. My kids were crying,” said one man. “They went home with my wife. She was out here in the freezing cold all day. I feel like I don’t want to support Sarah.“
People who didn’t get to meet Palin “went home only with a piece of paper with Palin’s signature.” Video from the event shows angry wristband-holders loudly booing Palin and yelling, “Sign our books!” and “Quittin’ on the job!” Watch it:
(HT: Ben Smith)
New Missouri billboard tells Americans to ‘prepare for war’ against the government.
New Missouri billboard tells Americans to ‘prepare for war’ against the government.
Fired Up! Missouri points out that the Lafayette County Republican Central Committee is highlighting a new billboard in the state with steps for a “citizens guide to revolution of a corrupt government“:
This billboard replaces one that warned that the socialist “Obama-Nation” is “coming for you.” It’s unclear who the owner of the billboard is, but the first one was the work of a “Missouri businessman.” (HT: Oliver Willis)
Barbour refuses to say Palin’s qualified to be president, pauses and stumbles when questioned about it.
Barbour refuses to say Palin’s qualified to be president, pauses and stumbles when questioned about it.
Mississippi Gov. and Repulican Governors Association (RGA) President Haley Barbour (R) attracted attention on Wednesday for praising former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, saying that she’s “a heck of a lot smarter than she gets credit for.” But that doesn’t necessarily mean Barbour thinks she’s ready to run for president. Today on MSNBC, Chris Matthews repeatedly asked Barbour if he thought Palin was qualified to be president. In response, Barbour would stop, stumble, and muster out weak statements like, “Constitutionally, she sure is” or “I don’t know anything that disqualifies her from being president” (perhaps subtle winks to the birther community that believes Obama is unconstitutionally unqualified?). Watch it:
While governor, Palin was not accepted into the inner circle of the RGA’s leadership, and Barbour never seemed very impressed with her self-proclaimed foreign policy expertise.
New Right-Wing Craze Prays That Obama’s ‘Days Be Few’
New Right-Wing Craze Prays That Obama’s ‘Days Be Few’
The newest far-right craze is an anti-Obama slogan that is making its way onto t-shirts, bumper stickers, mugs, and even teddy bears: “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8,” which reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” The meme is also taking off on Twitter, with conservatives calling it “hilarious.” Commentators have noted that it’s unclear whether the intent is to hope for an end to Obama’s time in office — or an end to his life. But a look at the lines in the rest of the psalm hint at the latter:
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor.
Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.
Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out.
Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.
Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth.
Diana Butler Bass at Beliefnet explains that Psalm 109 is one of the “imprecatory” prayers, “a lament in the form of petition to destroy one’s enemies.” While perhaps intended to be a joke, she notes that the psalm actually “entreats God to destroy the president”:
It is the personal prayer of an individual, someone who has been dealt an injustice by another–and usually more powerful–person. The words of Psalm 109 are those of deep agony, the longings of a victim for retribution and justice. This psalm is considered one of the most difficult of all the psalms–full of violent images of vengeance and death.
Quite a few of the “Pray for Obama” items are being sold at CafePress.com, although many of them have been taken off of the site (here’s a cached version of some of them). Cafe Press representative Margene H. told ThinkProgress that while the site took down some of the “Pray for Obama” items today, it is now in the process of reinstating them:
We initially pulled the Psalm 109:8 content from our products today because broader media dialog indicated that these designs potentially suggested violence towards the president. Based on current public discourse and further review of the actual content, we have determined that it is fair political commentary and we are in the process of reinstating this merchandise. As with all of our content, these designs will continue to be reviewed and if at any time their meaning is construed as advocating violence we will revisit our decision.
On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow spoke with “Patience With God” author Frank Schaeffer, who said that while the psalm was “frightening” in a secular context, it’s even “more threatening” in a biblical context.
Senate health bill restores abstinence-only education funding.
Senate health bill restores abstinence-only education funding.
President Obama’s FY2010 budget eliminated funding for abstinence-only education and school districts are increasingly moving away from such programs because they have proven to be ineffective at reducing teen pregnancy. However, Newsweek reports that the recently released Senate health care bill restores some funding for abstinence-only programs, inserted by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), which seems to be “a slight concession to the Senate’s social conservatives”:
Their provision would restore a program called Title V, which, since the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, has allocated a yearly $50 million in grants to abstinence-only education programs. Obama let the program lapse in June, leaving some abstinence-only groups in dire straits. So in September, Sen. Orrin Hatch offered an amendment to restore Title V via heath-care reform, which (much to the outrage of liberal groups) just squeaked through the Senate Finance Committee with a 12–11 vote. A similar amendment, offered in the House by Rep. Terry Lee from Nebraska, died in committee.
If the Senate language survives reconciliation, the Title V program will be extended through 2014. This will not, however, bring abstinence funding back to the levels of the past decade. In 2008, Title V grants accounted for just under 25 percent of the federal abstinence budget (the rest of the budget came from other abstinence-only funding sources not restored in the Senate bill, including Community Based Abstinence Education Grants and the Adolescent Family Life Act).
Funding for comprehensive sex education is also in the bill. Sec. 2953 also provides “$75 million per year through FY2014 for Personal Responsibility Education grants to States for programs to educate adolescents on both abstinence and contraception for prevention of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV/AIDS.”
Palin-Beck 2012?
Palin-Beck 2012?
In a new interview with Newsmax, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin hinted that a “dream ticket” of Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck is not out of the question:
“I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I’m not there yet,” Palin tells Newsmax. “But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He’s a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way. And he’s so bold – I have to respect that. He calls it like he sees it, and he’s very, very, very effective.”
Palin is a big Beck fan. In August, she wrote on her Facebook page, “FOX News’ Glenn Beck is doing an extraordinary job this week walking America behind the scenes of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and outlining who is actually running the White House. Monday night he asked us to invite one friend to watch; tonight I invite all my friends to watch.” Maybe they could go up against Michele Bachmann and Steve King? (HT: Ben Smith)
Right-Wing American Family Association Misfires In The War On Christmas
Right-Wing American Family Association Misfires In The War On Christmas
It’s not even Thanksgiving, but the American Family Association (AFA) has already taken up arms in the War on Christmas. On Nov. 11, the right-wing organization announced that it was urging its followers to boycott Gap Inc. (Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy) from now until Christmas Day because the company refuses to say the word “Christmas”:
For years, Gap has refused to use the word Christmas in its television commercials, newspaper ads and in-store promotions, despite tens of thousands of consumer requests to recognize Christmas and in spite of repeated requests from AFA to do the same.
Last year, Gap issued this politically-correct statement to Christmas shoppers: “Gap recognizes that many traditions are celebrated throughout this season and we feel it is important to display holiday signage that is inclusive to everyone.”
Christmas is special because of Jesus. It’s not just a “winter holiday.” For millions of Americans the giving and receiving of gifts is in honor of the One who gave Himself. For the Gap to pretend that isn’t the foundation of the Christmas season is political correctness at best and religious bigotry at worst. The Gap is censoring the word Christmas, pure and simple.
AFA’s first shot in the war is a misfire, as Dan Neil of the LA Times points out today. In one of the first lines of Gap’s new holiday ad, the actors yell, “Go Christmas!” (as well as “Go Hanukkah! Go Kwanzaa! Go Solstice!”) Watch it:
ThinkProgress also checked out the websites of Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy and quickly found several items that feature Christmas items including several Christmas books, a pair of boxer shorts that says “Christmas” in several languages and pajama pants that also have “Christmas” written on them.
“The big loser here is the AFA,” writes Neil. “The annual War-on-Christmas drumbeat is absolutely not about defending the sacredness of Christmas. It is instead — transparently — marketing, a ratings gambit for Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, and for the AFA, the centerpiece of its annual fundraising. This year, thanks to Gap, the AFA fumbled its boycott ball and in the process managed to look both intolerant and out of touch.”
Mukasey: Rep. Moran Has ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ And Should ‘Get Professional Help’ From Major Nidal Hasan
Mukasey: Rep. Moran Has ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ And Should ‘Get Professional Help’ From Major Nidal Hasan
Last week, Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) came out in strong support of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute the five 9/11 defendants in U.S. federal court and sharply criticized Republicans who were attacking the decision. “They will seize on any opportunity to [demagogue], and that means they’ll even take a stand that’s un-American. It’s un-American to hold anyone indefinitely without trial. It’s against our principles as a nation.”
Former Bush attorney general Michael Mukasey is one of the Republicans who has been speaking out against Holder. Last week at a Federalist Society conference, Mukasey said that holding the trial in Manhattan increased the risk of a terrorist attack on the city.
In an interview with Washington Times radio this morning, the hosts asked Mukasey about Moran’s comments. Mukasey responded by suggesting that the congressman “get professional help” from Maj. Nidal Hasan:
Q: Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia says anybody that questions KSM coming to New York City for a civilian trial — that they’re un-American. What is your reaction to that?
MUKASEY: I think he’s lost touch with reality. He ought to get professional help, perhaps from Maj. Nidal.
The segment then ends with the hosts laughing over Mukasey’s “joke.” Listen here:
Nidal, of course, is the Army psychiatrist suspected of going on a brutal rampage at Fort Hood and killing 13 people.
Asked for a response to Mukasey’s comments, Moran’s spokesperson Emily Blout said, “Leading conservative activists and scholars agree with Mr. Moran’s position, which is based on this nation’s long history of upholding its most fundamental values- even in the face of horrific crimes.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll