Think Progress

Cafe Press Bans All ‘Pray For Obama: Psalm 109:8′ Merchandise

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)




New Birther Billboard In Colorado Features Picture Of Obama And Asks ‘President Or Jihad?’

Today, a new birther billboard went up above Wolf Automotive off I-70 in Wheat Ridge, Colorado. The sign has a picture of President Obama wearing a turban, asking, “President or Jihad?” and exhorting, “Wake up America! Remember Fort Hood”:

Obama Billboard

ThinkProgress spoke with Phil Wolf, the owner of the car dealership. He said that the billboard is his personal project because he believes the American people have a right to know the facts about the president:

I’m probably like a lot of other people that have asked the question, I want to know who our president is. And to date, I don’t think I know, I don’t think a lot of people know, I don’t think it’s ever been asked — answered. [...]

When this Fort Hood massacre occurred, and I saw the response of our Commander in Chief to this unbelievable, politically correct, nonsense — to me it was just enough. And I wanted to bring a little bit more attention to this thing, because to me it just wasn’t getting addressed.

Wolf added that he and the staff at his dealership have been receiving a significant number of death threats in response to the billboard. “I never expected people to threaten to kill us,” he told us. “I never expected people to harm my employees. … I’ve had people leave the office today — they’re terrified.”

Wolf also denied that the billboard is making a “racist comment,” calling such a notion “absolutely hilarious” and pointing out that in the presidential election, he wrote in the name of conservative Alan Keyes.

In the past, Wolf’s billboard has featured other birther designs, as well as regular advertisements for cars. Wolf denied that the billboard has any affiliation with WorldNetDaily, which has sponsored other birther signs around the country.

ProgressNow Colorado has launched a campaign asking people to boycott Wolf’s business.




GOP Lawmakers Complain About Revised Mammogram Guidelines While Opposing Requirements For More Tests

On Wednesday, a group of women GOP lawmakers held a press conference to denounce a new recommendation by the federal Preventive Services Task Force that women receive mammograms less frequently. “This is how rationing begins,” said Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). “This is the little toe in the edge of the water.”

“Women in particular may lose a great deal of clout in decision making,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN). “We don’t know how far government will go in this bureaucracy,” she added, noting that they “want to empower women” and “want to have all the data on the table so individuals can make the best decision they can.”

On MSNBC this afternoon, Dr. Nancy Snyderman took Blackburn to task for getting the “public health message lost in the politics.” “Now, there’s nothing that came out of this panel recommending rationing,” said Snyderman. “Just a prudent use of screening tests.” When Blackburn tried to claim that the guidelines meant “bureaucrats deciding what they’re going to allow,” Snyderman pointed out that Blackburn was acting as a “bureaucrat” standing between patients and “the best possible evidence”:

BLACKBURN: It is troubling also that another of our colleagues has said many times, we. And that we means bureaucrats deciding what they’re going to allow.

SNYDERMAN: But you’re one of those bureaucrats. You’re my bureaucrat!

BLACKBURN: But I’m not, no. And you see, I don’t think a bureaucrat should be between a patient and a doctor. See, I don’t want to be that bureaucrat.

SNYDERMAN: Excuse me, I think that’s exactly where you are right now.

Watch it:

As the Washington Independent’s Mike Lillis notes, the concern of the congresswomen about rationed mammograms is especially ironic considering that they oppose legislation that “would require insurance companies that cover diagnostic mammograms also to cover routine, annual breast cancer screenings for all women 40 and older.”




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“:

Missouri GOP Billboard

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)




Utah lawmaker claims he doesn’t ‘mind’ gays, but ‘I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time.’

Earlier this month, the Church of Latter Day Saints made headlines when it threw its support behind a measure in Salt Lake City that barred “landlords and employers from discriminating based on sexuality,” making it the first city in Utah to adopt the gay rights measure. Now, the Mormon Church is backing a similar statewide bill, enlisting the help of a variety of lawmakers to help get it passed. One such lawmaker is Sen. Chris Buttars (R), who, despite his adamant support for an earlier proposition that banned same-sex marriage, does believe that sexual orientation deserves protection from employer and landlord abuse. However, while explaining his opposition to allowing same-sex couples to adopt children, he told the press that while he doesn’t “mind” gays, he doesn’t want them “stuffing it down [his] throat all the time“:

BUTTARS: I meet with the gays here and there. They were in my house two weeks ago. I don’t mind gays. But I don’t want ‘em stuffing it down my throat all the time. Certainly not in my kid’s face.

Watch it:

In the past, Buttars has said that gay men and women are “the greatest threat to America going down.” “I believe they will destroy the foundation of the American society,” he said in February. “In my mind, it’s the beginning of the end. … Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide.” Last year, the NAACP called for his resignation because of his comments about a controversial bill: “This baby is black, I’ll tell you,” said Buttars. “This is a dark and ugly thing.”




‘Read the stimulus’ advocate Dick Armey slammed for not bothering to read the stimulus.

Yesterday, the House Oversight and Government Reform committee held a hearing on the implementation of the Recovery Act, also known as the stimulus. Republican members invited former GOP Majority Leader Dick Armey, who now leads the corporate front group FreedomWorks, to testify as their expert witness. After listening to Armey argue at length about the merits of even having any government intervention in the economy, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) asked him if he supported the unemployment compensation provisions of the bill. Armey said he might, but conceded that he had not read that portion of the bill. Van Hollen then extracted a confession that Armey had not even read the bill at all, even though he was appearing as an expert and repeatedly goes before the press to criticize the stimulus:

VAN HOLLEN: Let me ask you think. You keep saying ‘if there were,’ did you read the Economic Recovery bill?

ARMEY: No I didn’t. I had no reason to read it, I wasn’t voting on it.

VAN HOLLEN: You’re commenting on it an awful lot, both here and in the press, about the Economic Recovery bill. We ask members of Congress to read it when they vote on it and are considering it. You’ve said a lot about it, so I’m a little surprised that you have not read it. [...] It seems to me we owe it to people we are communicating with we have an understanding an read the information.

Watch it:

Ironically, as part of an effort to obstruct and derail the bill, Armey launched an online petition called “ReadTheStimulus.org.” In another bit of irony, although he postures as a fierce ideological opponent of the stimulus, Armey actually worked as a lobbyist to help businesses gain from the stimulus. According to disclosures, he was paid to lobby on behalf of Cape Wind Associates and the Medicines Company on the stimulus. His son, Scott Armey, who runs his own lobbying shop, has also worked with businesses to gain stimulus funds.




New Right-Wing Craze Prays That Obama’s ‘Days Be Few’

Pray For Obama Merchandise 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.




Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell refuses to disavow Pat Robertson’s anti-Islam comments.

Last week, while discussing the Fort Hood massacre on his program The 700 Club, notorious right-wing evangelist Pat Robertson told his audience that Islam is “not a religion, it’s a political system. It’s a violent political system bent on the overthrow of the governments of the world and world domination.” Yesterday, a reporter asked Virginia Governor-elect Bob McDonnell (R) — who took thousands of dollars from Robertson for his campaign and frequently appeared on The 700 Club — if he thought the evangelist’s comments were “appropriate.” While stressing that he wants “people of all faiths” to part of his administration, McDonnell refused to condemn Robertson specifically, citing the First Amendment:

MCDONNELL: You know, I’ve got probably 15,000 donors to the campaign, and I can’t stand to defend or support every comment that every donor might make …. I think people are entitled under the First Amendment to express whatever opinions they may have.

Watch it:

“[McDonnell's] sending the message that he wants it both ways–he wants the support of a Muslim-basher. And he wants to work with Virginia Muslims. I think those two things are incompatible,” said Council on American-Islamic Relations spokesman Ibrahim Hooper.

Update Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) issued this strong statement condemning Robertson:

When a prominent Virginian chooses to engage in hate-filled rhetoric that divides us and has the potential to fuel real discord in our polity, leaders cannot remain silent. That is why I am calling on Mr. Robertson to apologize to my constituents – Muslim and non-Muslim – for the hurt he has caused and the damage he has done. It is a week overdue.



Rep. John Culberson Gushes Over Hate Radio Talker Michael Savage: ‘We Need You’

After years of bashing Hillary Clinton, hate radio host Michael Savage has been begging for her to intervene and use her powers as Secretary of State to negotiate an end to the travel ban imposed on him by the British government. On Savage’s radio show yesterday, Rep. John Culberson (R-TX) stepped up to help Savage contact Clinton, calling his assistance “constituent work” for an “honorary Texan.” (Savage lives in Marin County, CA.)

After repeating lines from Savage’s show, Culberson gushed that he is a “fan” who listens “regularly” to Savage’s “common sense” and promised to have his congressional colleagues join in on the effort. Savage seemed touched by the gesture:

SAVAGE: You’re the most honest member of Congress I’ve ever encountered. You’re the kind of guy that won World War 2. You’re the kind of guy that if you were my platoon leader and you said charge into a machine gun nest I would do what you told me to do. I’d be proud to fight alongside you any day of the week. But I’d like to do something for you. I don’t wanna be just be passive about accepting your kindness.

CULBERSON: You’re very gracious but you do it every day by being a warrior for freedom and standing up for our for our rights as Americans.

Culberson praised Savage for his stance on immigration, saying he “embodies” the values of “welcom[ing] any and everyone from all over the world to come and join us.” But Savage has attacked non-white immigrants for years, claiming that the new “code word” for South Asians should be “terrorists,” calling Arabs “non-humans,” and fear-mongering for days that Mexican immigrants were plaguing the country with viruses.

In addition, Culberson also said he has never heard Savage “encourage hatred or incite anyone to engage in violence.” However, Savage constantly uses his show to call for violence against his enemies. He has called for using a “bunker-buster bomb on the U.N.,” hanging “every lawyer who went down to Guantánamo,” and has said a “noose will end up around” the “neck” of Media Matters staffers.




Ollie North Launches New War Against ‘Cap And Tax,’ ‘Bird Eating Machines,’ And The ‘Myth Of Global Warming’

Oliver North's Freedom Alliance mailingLt. Col. Oliver North (Ret.) has launched a new war against the “cap and tax” plans of President Barack Obama and the “socialists in Congress.” North — when not serving as a Fox News correspondent — runs the Freedom Alliance, an organization supposedly dedicated to “defending the sovereignty of the United States and promoting a strong national defense.” In a mailing acquired by ThinkProgress, North pleads for “your most-special and generous donation” to fight the “‘cap and tax’ scheme and the myth of global warming.” North warns that if “Barack Obama and the socialists in Congress” establish a system to limit global warming pollution, it will be “at our nation’s peril!”

Never mind the fact that there is no proof of man-made global warming.

Never mind the fact that Europe's "Cap and Tax" policies have failed to lower greenhouse gases.

Never mind the fact that the world has actually been cooling for the last ten years.

And never mind that there is no evidence that greenhouse gases have anything to do with global warming in the first place.

No sir! None of this matters to Barack Obama and the socialists in Congress.

Because what they really want is to control your life and mine . . .

. . . and we allow them to succeed at our nation's peril!

North goes on to attack windmill farms as “virtual bird eating machines.” The attached “petition to President Barack Obama” claims that the “dirty little secret” of global warming “is that it is a scam designed at increasing the wealth of frauds like Al Gore and nations like Red China at America’s expense.”

In reality, the “scientific evidence is clear,” as the American Association for the Advancement of Science said in 2006, that “global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society.” In reality, the European Trading System has worked, and Europe is on track to easily beat its 2012 Kyoto Protocol commitments. In reality, the last ten years are the hottest decade in history. In reality, as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has said, climate legislation will allow us to “help this planet” that “is in peril, create millions of new jobs for Americans that need them, and to become energy independent to make us safer.”

But none of this matters to Ollie North and his conservative compatriots.

In the mailing, North notes that he “served in the United States Marine Corps for 22 years.” He does not, however, mention that he was convicted by a jury for illegally selling weapons to Iran during the Reagan administration.

Download the Freedom Alliance mailing and petition.




Texas gay marriage ban may have outlawed all marriages in Texas.

In 2005, the state of Texas adopted an amendment to its Constitution that said marriage in the state could only be between one man and one woman. The amendment also declared: “This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.” Now, Barbara Ann Radnofsky, a Houston lawyer and Democratic candidate for attorney general, is saying that the second section effectively “eliminates marriage in Texas”:

txShe calls it a “massive mistake” and blames the current attorney general, Republican Greg Abbott, for allowing the language to become part of the Texas Constitution. Radnofsky called on Abbott to acknowledge the wording as an error and consider an apology. She also said that another constitutional amendment may be necessary to reverse the problem.

“You do not have to have a fancy law degree to read this and understand what it plainly says,” said Radnofsky, who will be at Texas Christian University today as part of a five-city tour to kick off her campaign.

Abbott’s spokesman Jerry Strickland replied to Radnofsky’s charge by saying, “The Texas Constitution and the marriage statute are entirely constitutional.” This isn’t the first time the reach of the second section has been questioned. Before the amendment passed, a group called Save Texas Marriage warned that a judge could potentially void all marriages in the state if the language became part of the Texas Constitution.




Rep. Louie Gohmert: Democrats want another terrorist attack so they can pass a new jobs bill.

Recently, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that alleged 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other terrorism suspects will be tried in U.S. courts in New York City, which has prompted outrageous reactions from conservative politicians and pundits. One of the most extreme reactions came last night during an exchange between Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Fox News Host Neil Cavuto. When Cavuto questioned Gohmert about whether we should try 9/11 terror suspects in New York City, the Texas congressman “joked” that Democrats who support bringing the alleged terror conspirators there for trial are hoping for another terrorist attack so they can “create a new jobs bill” to rebuild the city:

GOHMERT: You’ve got millions of New Yorkers that would be put at risk [by trying Khalid Sheik Mohammed in New York City] … Unless they’re trying to create a new jobs bill by allowing terrorism back in New York, this is insane. And even that would be insane.

Watch it:

(HT: Media Matters Action)




Palin-Beck 2012?

By Amanda Terkel on Nov 18th, 2009 at 2:18 pm

Palin-Beck 2012?

Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin 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)




‘Tenther’ Oklahoma Lawmaker Considering Bill To Opt Out Of Hate Crimes Act

russell A common right-wing objection to federal health care legislation is that it’s unconstitutional. So-called “tenthersargue that the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution never explicitly gives the federal government the right to regulate health care, leaving that power exclusively in the hands of the states. To that end, officials in various states have raised the possibility of passing legislation to exempt their residents from federal health care reform if it passes.

Oklahoma state Sen. Steve Russell (R) is proposing to use the same argument and tactic to try to exempt his state from the recently-passed Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act — which extends hate crimes protections to gays and lesbians — because he claims it infringes on freedom of speech:

Russell said because the government has decided to intervene on issues of morality, he is worried that religious leaders who speak out against any lifestyle could be imprisoned for their speech.

“The law is very vague to begin with,” Russell said. “Sexual orientation is a very vague word that could be extended to extremes like necrophilia.” [...]

Russell said Oklahoma can opt out of the law on the basis of the 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The bill gives the federal government power that was not given to them in the Constitution,” Russell said. “I am aware of the supremacy of the federal government over state governments, but the federal requirements are vague enough for us to make actions. We just have to be very careful on how we proceed.”

Hate crime protections have been on the books since 1969, but Russell seems to object to only those which protect gays and lesbians. Moreover, Russell and the other tenthers have flimsly legal basis for their claims. The Constitution gives Congress broad power to “provide for the common defense and general welfare,” but as Ian Millhiser noted, tenthers “insist that these words don’t actually mean what they say.” The right-wing fringe believes landmark federal programs such as Medicare, Social Security, the federal highway system, and rules regulating airplane safety are unconstitutional.

Other right wingers have echoed Russell’s concern about the new hate crimes bill: Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) said on the House floor that the measure would lead to Nazism and the legalization of pedophilia and necrophilia. But as Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) said, “Nothing in this legislation diminishes an American’s freedom of religion, freedom of speech or press or the freedom to assemble,” because the law “targets acts, not speech.” These acts need to be targeted. In 2007 — the most recent year for which data is available — 16.6 percent of all hate crimes reported reported to the FBI “resulted from sexual-orientation bias.”

Update If Oklahoma wants to refuse federal funds to fight hate crimes, it has the right to do so. However, Russell is trying to have it both ways -- accept the federal funds and refuse to apply them for their intended purpose:

When asked about whether the state of Oklahoma should reject the $5 million in federal funds that the federal government would give to law enforcement agencies to help prosecute hate crimes, Russell said he thought about finding a way to pass his law while taking the money, but said it would be a compromise in the values of his bill.

“I understand the state could use all the money it can get, but we can’t compromise our values for some quick cash,” Russell said.



Palin On Muslims In The Military After Fort Hood: ‘I Say, Profile Away’

After the tragic shooting at Fort Hood by Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who reports now indicate had some contact with a radical Islamic cleric, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey expressed concern over “a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.” Predictably, some conservatives have called for a crackdown on the American Muslim community, including those serving in the military. Now, in an interview with her hagiographer, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin has called for increased profiling of Muslims in the military:

She commented on the trail of evidence linking the alleged Ft. Hood shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, to militant Islam. “There were such clear, obvious, massive warning signs that were missed,” she said. “This terrorist, even having business cards” that identified him as an “SoA” or soldier of Allah. Palin blamed a culture of political correctness and other decisions that “prevented — I’m going to say it — profiling” of someone with Hasan’s extremist ideology. “I say, profile away,” Palin said. Such political correctness, she continued, “could be our downfall.” If the upcoming investigations into the attack reveal bad decision-making on the part of senior officials, Palin continued, those officials ought to be fired.

In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, which is set to air in full tonight, Palin predicted the backlash that would come from her embrace of profiling. “Because I use the word profile, I’m going to get clobbered tomorrow morning,” said Palin. “The liberals, their heads are just going to be spinning, they’re going to say, ’she is radical, she is extreme.’” Watch it:

“I say profiling in the context of doing whatever we can to save innocent American lives, I’m all for it then,” concluded Palin.

Update In an interview on Hugh Hewitt's radio show last night, Bill Kristol, the editor of the magazine that Palin told of her desire to "profile away," claimed that Palin didn't mean "profiling religiously." "But profiling someone who shows the kind of extremist tendencies, and violent tendencies, including if they’re based on an interpretation of a religion, that Hasan showed," said Kristol.



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.

Christmas apparel

“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.”




Rep. Chaffetz: Carrie Prejean could run for office with a ‘strong message.’

chaffetzTMZ reports that Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) recently suggested that former beauty pageant contestant Carrie Prejean would be a serious contender for public office:

[Carrie] has the ability to draw crowds and if she has a strong message to go with that, who knows what she can do? She has star power which can open doors.

We’ve all made mistakes when we were 17. [The sex tape] is going to be an impediment, but people are excited about her convictions and her beliefs.

Prejean, who believes gay couples do not deserve the right to marry, has been dogged recently by accounts of her appearances in various “sex tapes” and photos. The conservative National Organization for Marriage has apparently removed Prejean from its website, after previously touting her as “the future of our movement, and the future of America.” Chaffetz did not elaborate on what he considers to be Prejean’s “strong message.”




‘Teabagger’ was an Oxford Word of the Year finalist.

In February, when conservatives began protesting against President Obama with tea parties, the Washington Independent’s Dave Weigel photographed a protester carrying a sign that declared, “tea bag the liberal Dems before they tea bag you!!” Soon after, the term “tea bagger” became a ubiquitous and often derogatory handle for right-wing protesters. Now, Mediaite reports that the term “teabagger” was a finalist in consideration to be the New Oxford American Dictionary’s Word of the Year:

In a press release touting “unfriend” as the word of the year, the New Oxford American Dictionary may have unwittingly made a more controversial move than the New Oxford American Dictionary pretty much ever does.

No, it wasn’t another cutesy tech neologism: they included “teabagger” as one of their Word of the Year finalists.

According to the release, they define “teabagger” as “a person who protests President Obama’s tax policies and stimulus package, often through local demonstrations known as ‘Tea Party’ protests (in allusion to the Boston Tea Party of 1773).”




After ‘getting a lot of flack,’ Tea Party protesters rethink burning Periello and Pelosi in effigy.

On Saturday, the Danville Tea Party in Virginia plans on holding a “Fired Up for Freedom” rally. The group originally boasted that it would be “burning Rep. Tom Perriello and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in effigy in response to the passage of landmark healthcare legislation.” Even after significant media attention and criticism, Tea Party organizer Nigel Coleman vowed on Friday to move forward with their plans. Yesterday, however, Coleman said that those plans are now “up in the air” because the group is afraid of counter-protesters:

But Coleman said Sunday that some members of his group were “uneasy” with the idea of counter-protesters and that people might mistake the TEA Party Patriots for being violent. Coleman compared the event to similar acts of protest in the nation’s history, such as opposition to the Stamp Act of 1765. [...]

“I still would like to do it,” Coleman said, “but it’s still up in the air at this point. We’ve already started stacking firewood and building the effigy …we will have a bonfire. Burning someone in effigy was just gonna be part of it.” [...]

“We were using it as a symbol of how things are similar to that (colonial) period in history,” he said. “Things have gotten out of hand … the more real we get, the more unreal it gets.

Coleman added that the public reaction to the group’s plans has been “kinda strange.”

Update The Plum Line's Greg Sargent spoke with Coleman today, who said that the local property owner hosting the rally canceled the effigy plans:
"We will not be going forward with the plan,” a crestfallen Coleman told me by phone moments ago. “We had to cancel it. The property owner won’t allow us to do it. The media attention was something that he didn’t want.”

Coleman said he was upset that people had gotten the wrong idea about his plan. “I'm disappointed that the story got out of hand and people misinterpreted something we thought would be a little historical lesson,” he said. “They made people believe that we were committing an act of violence,” in a reference to the “liberal blogs.”




UPDATED Shields: I’m ‘Nostalgic’ For A ‘Manly Man’ President Who Will ‘Kick Some Tail And Ask Questions Afterwards’

UPDATE: Shields contacted ThinkProgress and kindly informed us that his comments below were intended to be sarcastic. We regret our error in misinterpreting his comments and for questioning his motives. Shields told us that his comments were meant to disparage those who consistently argue that more war will solve America’s problems and that his statement was directed at co-panelist and right-wing neoconservative Charles Krauthammer, who, according to Shields, was displeased with the remark. With a deeper appreciation for his wit, we extend our sincere apologies to Mr. Shields.

Since reports emerged last month that top commander in Afghanistan Gen. Stanley McChrystal asked President Obama for upwards of 40,000 additional troops to continue the war there, the right wing has been attacking the President for taking time to make a decision on his new strategy. “It is absolutely unconscionable,” Liz Cheney said yesterday on Fox News, that Obama “is denying our troops on the ground in Afghanistan the resources that they need to prevail to win that war.”

Also during that time, Obama has made reflective gestures to those who have fallen in the wars he is now running, paying tribute to returning war dead at Dover Air Force Base and making an impromptu visit to Section 60 at Arlington Cemetery on Veterans Day to commemorate Iraq and Afghanistan war casualties. Yesterday on Inside Washington, during a discussion of Obama’s upcoming decision on Afghanistan, syndicated columnist Mark Shields scoffed at Obama’s demeanor, wishing instead for a “manly man” in the White House:

SHIELDS: We have a president of real intellectual horse power who is cool, detached and analytical and if anything you can watch the emotional side of him emerge in this whole process. … There’s an emotional aspect, the comforter in chief as well as the commander in chief. Both roles. And I think it makes me nostalgic for those days when we had a manly man in the White House who could say, “Let’s kick some tail and ask questions afterwards” you know? That’s what we really need instead of any reflection.

Watch it:

Shields’ rhetoric is eerily reminiscent of New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman’s justification for the war in Iraq, who in May 2003 argued that after 9/11, the U.S. had to invade in order to “burst” the terrorism bubble:

FRIEDMAN: And what they needed to see was American boys and girls going house to house, from Basra to Baghdad, and basically saying, “Which part of this sentence don’t you understand? You don’t think, you know we care about our open society, you think this bubble fantasy, we’re just gonna to let it grow? Well, Suck on this, okay?” That Charlie is what this war [in Iraq] is about. We could of hit Saudi Arabia, it was part of that bubble. Could of hit Pakistan. We hit Iraq because we could.

Of course Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 and after nearly 4,400 U.S soldiers dead, 32,000 wounded and nearly $1 trillion spent, the U.S. still has well over 100,000 troops stationed in Iraq.




Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports


Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll