Manners

As in, what we've largely forgotten in today's society.

Just basic decency and respect for others.

A gay "rights"*** group interrupted a church service, yelling and throwing fliers at people (which, I might note, is technically assault), as well as protesting outside the church.

This kind of intimidation is absolutely unacceptable. What are the consequences of the "protest?" Let's see:

churchgoers were unclear as to the purpose of the demonstration.

The Eaton County Sheriff's Department responded to the scene Sunday but no arrests were made.

Moral of the story: It's okay to act like a violent, spoiled child, as long as you're acting that way toward the politically-unpopular people who disagree with you - those oh-so-threatening religious fundamentalists who, I hope the "protesters" noticed, didn't attack them and yell hateful things back...

***in quotes because they already have specially protected rights - it's not a matter of rights anymore, but rather a matter of shutting down those who disagree, which is neither right nor respectful of others' rights.

More Free Speech Issues

1. Obama boots opposition reporters from plane
   Hmm... yeah, that shows a willingness to "reach across the aisle"... not to mention a receptive attitude to different ideas from our "open-minded" candidate. Previous, SECOND shut-down effort on radio station hosting opposition here. And then there are his "truth squads."
   
2. Fairness Doctrine explained at Mormanity (and parallel drawn to religious freedom)
   Shows that - like most fascist schemes - it's not about "fairness" so much as shutting down opposition. From the article quoted in the article (in the house that Jack built):

   As Bill Ruder, an assistant secretary of commerce under President Kennedy, noted, "Our massive strategy was to use the Fairness Doctrine to challenge and harass right-wing broadcasters in the hope that the challenges would be so costly to them that they would be inhibited and decide it was too expensive to continue."

We're going to need to fight loud and hard if Obama gains the presidency, especially if Congress has a liberal supermajority. Political correctness eroded the foundation of free speech, and now this "outlaw speech" idea is being extended to attack and quash simple dissent.

Dissent - free political discourse - is what "free speech" in the First Amendment is really about; and if we lose our First Amendment rights, all others will follow.

A Taste of One Future

[Update 28Oct2008/12:43]: Here's an article that lists the questions the anchor asked both McCain and Biden. She's not throwing anyone softballs.
---

Hey, look! It's a whole new "don't ask, don't tell" policy!

The Hostiles

Yep. Hostiles. I could call them "The Others," but I believe that term is pretty well-taken by the Lost series.

Why don't I put a bumper sticker on my car once I've made up my mind? (Well, aside from not wanting to deface my form of transportation?) (And no, these stories do not mean I'm supporting McCain; I'm just illustrating how the Rabid Ones tend to work...)

(h/t Drudge)

• Example 1: McCain signs get a guy's home shot up. In a traditionally Republican (pro-McCain) area
• Example 2: Female McCain supporter gets a "B" carved into her face during mugging. Yes, the guy actually did it because she supported McCain.
  [Update 24Oct2008/11:51 - This story is starting to look like it might fall apart - if she's lying, BAAAAD woman. But there's a picture now, too.]
  [Update 24Oct2008/15:33 - SHE MADE IT UP. Any volunteers to cart her away to exile??? LIARS STINK.]
• Example 2: Guy gets assaulted at restaurant over political argument.
• ... and Example 3: I was physically "contacted" over a political discussion at work a few years ago.

So...

Free speech vs. the Savages. Hostiles. Rabid Ones. I'm trying to come up with a good nickname to use for this particular faction of society.

This is a natural outgrowth of what I call, "PC overload." Political correctness is becoming the highest law of the land - and only the officially-endorsed, politically-correct opinion. People view legitimate political opinions - not "fighting words" - as personal attacks now, and they're evolving into physical attacks. Not that the attacks are sanctioned, of course, but good luck reining it in.

Sure hope that Free Speech survives the election.

In the Interest of Free Speech

[Update 08Oct2008:] Here's the edited skit. I guess they were concerned that someone might take the "people who should be shot" line seriously. You know, because no one uses that line in real life... (although I must admit that since becoming a life member of the NRA, I've changed my saying to, "people who need to be horsewhipped," just in case someone does take me seriously; I suppose that will work until horsewhips are common tools again. I had a teacher who used to say, "whipped with a wet noodle" - is that peaceful enough?) [h/t: Drudge; language alert on above link from "take"]

Here's a link to screenshots and the transcript of the SNL bailout skit that's been pulled... [update: here's the actual video... high traffic alert ;-)]

... and here's an article about Google checking your sobriety, more or less, at certain times of day (if you want them to) - ideally to prevent you from sending something stupid while impaired, LOL. Since it's self-imposed, it seems like a good idea. Starts the imagination going, though... wonder how it could work in, say, CHINA... [*awareness of nipping at the hand that hosts me...*]

To quote, "Enough is Enough!"

What. The. Heck.

I just completed a survey through a company I'll not name, since I understand that they're just the agents of questioning. I'm also resisting the (STRONG) temptation to post screen shots, for concern over copyright and confidentiality infringement.

But some of the questions were just blatant race-baiting, and I was highly affronted. I'd say "offended," but it's not quite right... "smacked in the face-shocked" is probably the best term.

They had indicators to measure how warmly you felt about "black people." And "white people."

Huh?

You'll have to name the individual to get an actual opinion! For example, I think very highly of Condoleezza Rice, and very poorly of, say, Michael Moore. I think Rev. Wright and Timothy McVeigh are/were hateful individuals. I think Bill Cosby and Mother Teresa and George Washington are/were wonderful individuals.

Isn't judging someone based on who they are and what they do as a human individual, (you know, "the content of their character"), what Dr. King was fighting for?

Another question pertained to whether Barack Obama is "black enough."

Okay - first response: outrage at stupidity of color-based assumptions. How on earth are we supposed to all get along if we keep asking questions based on the premise that people still hold assumptions about others based on how much melanin their skin produces?

Second, as a "white" person, how would I make that call? What could I say that wouldn't be taken as an insult?

Third, since that's been a common criticism from the "black community" (read: a bitter editorialist who happens to be black), I'd have to ask what you actually mean by "black." Are you just judging on skin color, or are there socio-economic factors at work? Like, how critics say Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Walter Williams, etc. are "not really black" because of their positions - in society and on the issues? Could a "white" person be "black" if they fit those socio-economic factors?

Fourth, I know that there are still some die-hard idiot racists in this country, but I'd venture to say that the vast majority of us aren't badmouthing any particular color, or making sweeping (negative) judgments about individuals based on what hue their genetic make-up produces. (Yes, regardless of what recent surveys say.) So enough with the stupid, prejudice-imbuing, "when did you stop beating your wife?" questions!!!

Or maybe I'm wrong, and we're all just haters, and I don't get out enough.

Um, This Isn't Good

There's a chance that the government might look at enforcing the Fairness Doctrine on the INTERNET. As in BLOGS.

Oy.

Not that they'd come after someone like me who has virtually no traffic, LOL, but STILL. It's horrible.

Here's a summary quote:

McDowell told BMI the Fairness Doctrine isn’t currently on the FCC’s radar. But a new administration and Congress elected in 2008 might renew Fairness Doctrine efforts, but under another name.

The name? Probably "net neutrality."

Count me in on the "crash the phone bank" effort if they try it!!! Not that they'd listen, but hey... one more straw can't hurt, right?

Check Another One Off

I just changed a light bulb in our hallway.

The flood of brilliant light was so refreshing - been waiting to change that for days while we've been stumbling and fumbling through the hall.

But it reminded me of how glad I am that we can still buy incandescent bulbs... and it reminded me to stock up.

Seriously.

I am SO fed up with the government mandating what we do in our homes. Shortly we will be forced to introduce POISON into every light fixture in every room in our homes, if we haven't already been badgered into it, and I'm not even being metaphorical. Yikes... and we worry about conserving water bottles and sorting the recycling? It just took an EPA team almost a week to clean up a mercury spill locally...

But let us be metaphorical for a moment: It's just one more straw.

Inflammatory Words

Two police officers were viciously attacked for asking a girl to pick up (her? The article doesn't say, but it doesn't make sense that they'd ask some random person to pick up some random piece of) litter.

That was after she picked it up, carried it over, and dropped it in front of them.

So... what would you call a rabid group of 30 people?

“Whilst we would never use the word 'mob' which is an inflammatory word, we can confirm that eye witnesses have described their initial fear that officers were going to be seriously injured or killed.”

How ridiculous is that? There's a reason the word "mob" is inflammatory - it describes an inflamed, irrational mass of what would otherwise be considered human beings. One officer had BITE MARKS on his shoulder. "Mob" is the least offensive term I can think of for the attackers.

Wonder when they'll re-term a group of crows in the UK ... "murder" is such an inflammatory word... and the crows haven't even hurt anyone.

The Appropriate Response to the New Yorker Cover

... is LAUGHTER, for Lefties.

... and eye-rolling with a collective sigh and a shake of the head, for Righties.

Check out Stu's latest blog at Glenn Beck's site - here's an excerpt:

Since I don't think every Muslim is a terrorist and every person with a gun is a murderer, I assumed the cover of New Yorker was attempting to portray the Obama's liberating a terrorist stronghold.

More here...

Finding Offense, Scottish-style

According to this article, Scottish Muslims have gotten their collective panties in a bunch over a photo of a police dog on the local authorities' postcards.

Give me a FRIGGIN' BREAK.

Now a special group has the right to intimidate stores into not displaying emergency info posters because they're offended at a photo of one of God's creatures??? And they're cowing the POLICE over it???

It must be hard, living in this world and being so perpetually and easily offended.

I bet they'd be offended at my short, uncovered hair, too. Maybe I should send them all a family picture.