|
I am more often writing for SpeakSpeak News, a blog about Free Speech and The Media.
-Eric Jaffa
Protesters Demand That Wal-Mart Exploit Christmas
By Eric Jaffa, December 19, 2005
In the 1960s, Tom Lehrer wrote a song which criticized the use of Christmas by stores:
Hark the Herald Tribune sings,
Advertising wondrous things.
God rest ye merry, merchants,
May you make the yuletide pay.
Angels we have heard on high
Tell us to go out and buy!
But in Sacramento, California on Saturday, about 50 people protested outside a Wal-Mart for not using the word "Christmas" in its advertising:
Saturday's protest was organized by religious leaders including Dick Otterstad of the Church of the Divide, located in Georgetown, east of downtown Sacramento. Donning a Santa Claus costume and surrounded by a handful of supporters, Otterstad greeted shoppers with a single message: Don't forget about the meaning of Christmas.
"It is insulting that Wal-Mart has chosen to ignore the reason for the season," Otterstad said. "Taking the word Christmas out of the holiday implies there's something sinful about it. ... This is a part of our culture."
Is protesting that Wal-Mart should advertise with the word "Christmas" the best way for Dick Otterstad to convey the "meaning of Christmas"? Perhaps if he held a sign saying "Blessed are the Peacemakers" that would have conveyed the meaning of Christmas.
Stores have no obligations to promote religious holidays. Wal-Mart isn't using "Hanukkah" in it's ads, either, as far as I know.
The AP article ends with a puzzling quote from a shopper leaving Wal-Mart:
Earlee Marshall, 32, of Sacramento, pushed a big load of purchases from the store, but said he supported the protesters.
"A lot of people have forgotten the significance of Christmas," Marshall said. "It used to be about family and friends. But now it's more about who can give the biggest gifts and who got the best toys."
Apprarently, he misunderstood the protest. The protesters weren’t saying that Christmas shouldn’t be exploited in advertising for store merchandise, but that it should be.
« Where is This Coming From? »
The AP article implies the protest was indirectly based on campaigns by the "The American Family Association" and the "Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights." Perhaps, but personally I associate this nonsense more with Bill O'Reilly of Fox News.
« Church and Store; Church and State »
An interesting history of Christmas controversies is in a New York Times article by Adam Cohen, "Commercialize Christmas, or Else."
Adam Cohen's historical information includes that Christmas songs in public schools were once more controversial than today:
This year's Christmas "defenders" are not just tolerating commercialization - they're insisting on it. They are also rewriting Christmas history on another key point: non-Christians' objection to having the holiday forced on them.
The campaign's leaders insist this is a new phenomenon...But as early as 1906, the Committee on Elementary Schools in New York City urged that Christmas hymns be banned from the classroom, after a boycott by more than 20,000 Jewish students. In 1946, the Rabbinical Assembly of America declared that calling on Jewish children to sing Christmas carols was "an infringement on their rights as Americans."
|
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(8)
--------------------
The Week at SpeakSpeak
By Eric Jaffa, December 18, 2005
The motto of SpeakSpeak is "Fighting indecency fines. Promoting free speech. Watching the media."
I've been writing for "SpeakSpeak," which is owned by Amanda Toering, more frequently than I've been writing for my website here "Move Left."
Here is a list of recent articles at SpeakSpeak, some written by me and some written by others: • Bill O'Reilly admits that "Happy Holidays" isn't offensive after all. LINK
• Hillary Clinton proposes legislation that could be used to jail a protester who burns an American flag for a year. Senators should be thinking up ways to INCREASE our freedom, but no. LINK
• Departing FCC Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy says indecency fines are "probably the hardest area for me as a commissioner." If the FCC wrote clear indencency rules, this wouldn't be so difficult.LINK
• Bill O'Reilly's reporting about bans on red-and-green clothing (Christmas colors) is false. No surprise. Will O'Reilly have to resign like Dan Rather did (for a flawed story which was more ambiguous and better researched?) LINK
• New Hampshire's liberal radio host Arnie Arnesen: She may get fired because she's criticized SUVs. Car dealerships are threatening to pull advertising from her radio station. LINK
• Ted Koppel says ABC News has fewer foreign correspondents today than it did 30 years ago. LINK
• "A la carte" cable would mean people get exposed to less diversity in programming, says AdAge columnist Simon Dumenco. LINK
• Gay groups and the American Family Association took opposite positions on whether Ford should advertise cars in gay magazines. The gay groups won. LINK
• The US military is spying on civilians who oppose the Iraq War. This includes Quakers. LINK
• Conservative groups disagree on whether Congress should mandate "a la carte" programming. The Parents Television Council and Concerned Women for America argue that a la carte is the best way to address the "indecency" problem. Meanwhile, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and TBN's Paul Crouch, Jr., fear that a la carte programming would vastly decrease viewership of religious channels. LINK
• A trend in entertainment is increased consumer options in how to view content. Therefore, I argue that Congress should be hands-off for the next few years regarding indecency and mandated a la carte. Let things develop. LINK
• Bush told the NSA to spy on US citizens. LINK
• $300 million of our tax dollars are being spent on propaganda -- for example, covertly planting stories in the press of other nations. That includes allies'. Planting propaganda is legal abroad, but not in the US. LINK
• Clear Channel owns billboards, as well as radio stations and concert halls. The company refused to post a billboard which would say, “‘Wal*Mart: Killing Local Businesses…One Main Street at a Time.” LINK
• NPR is soooo liberal. If you believe the hype. If you look at statistics, however, NPR favors conservatives. LINK
• Howard Stern aired his last show on broadcast radio. He was driven out by the pressure of FCC indecency fines. Sad day for free speech. Howard Stern will start a show on Sirius Satellite Radio on January 9, 2006. LINK
• Time Warner describes its "family tier," which may debut next spring. LINK |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(1)
--------------------
Samuel Alito Is Dishonest
By Eric Jaffa, December 6, 2005
George W. Bush has nominated Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.
Bush said about Samuel Alito , "I know he's thinking about his late father. Samuel Alito Sr. came to this country as a immigrant from Italy in 1914. And his fine family has realized the great promise of our country."
The Christian Science Monitor uncritically quoted a family friend on this matter:
"His father came [from Italy] as a 14-year-old immigrant, and by the time he was in his 20s he was teaching high school English," says Jack Lacy, a former Hamilton Township councilman and family friend for 50 years. "To me that is quite an accomplishment, considering he came here speaking Italian."
Note how the year 1914 got turned into age 14 by someone trying to sell Alito to the public.
But according to his military records, Samuel Alito's father (also named Samuel) was born in 1914 in New Jersey.
Samuel Alito, the nominee, didn't set the record straight. He should have spoken up after Bush's statement or after the Christian Science Monitor article. Instead, it took a blogger to report the truth. The Dishonesty and Corruption of Samuel Alito
Previously, Samuel Alito lied to the Senate in 1990, saying he would recuse himself from cases involving Vanguard, a company whose mutual funds he owns. Alito didn't recuse himself. Instead, he ruled in favor of the company.
Alito has also said that his job application for the Reagan Administration, in which he said that the US Constitution doesn't protect a right to an abortion, shouldn't be taken seriously as a reflection of his views. Alito said the statements were part of his attempt to land a job.
The Christian Science Monitor isn't the only media organization to provide Supreme Court nominee Alito with dubiously positive coverage. On December 1, PBS had two law professors as guests on "The News Hour" to discuss Alito. Both praised Alito and didn't discuss why he's controversial.
Conclusion
Samuel Alito is a dishonest man. He doesn't belong on the Supreme Court. He should be filibustered. |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(11)
--------------------
US Military Spying In America
By Eric Jaffa, November 28, 2005
The US military is already gathering data on civilians in America.
The Bush Administration wants more of this, including investigations of federal crimes conducted by the military instead of the FBI.
From a Washington Post article by Walter Pincus:
The White House is considering expanding the power of a little-known Pentagon agency called the Counterintelligence Field Activity, or CIFA, which was created three years ago. The proposal, made by a presidential commission, would transform CIFA from an office that coordinates Pentagon security efforts -- including protecting military facilities from attack -- to one that also has authority to investigate crimes within the United States such as treason, foreign or terrorist sabotage or even economic espionage.
...One CIFA activity, threat assessments, involves using "leading ede information technologies and data harvesting," according to a February 2004 Pentagon budget document. This involves "exploiting commercial data" with the help of outside contractors including White Oak Technologies Inc. of Silver Spring, and MZM Inc., a Washington-based research organization, according to the Pentagon document.
For CIFA, counterintelligence involves not just collecting data but also "conducting activities to protect DoD and the nation against espionage, other intelligence activities, sabotage, assassinations, and terrorist activities," its brochure states.
CIFA's abilities would increase considerably under the proposal being reviewed by the White House, which was made by a presidential commission on intelligence chaired by retired appellate court judge Laurence H. Silberman and former senator Charles S. Robb (D-Va.). The commission urged that CIFA be given authority to carry out domestic criminal investigations and clandestine operations against potential threats inside the United States.
Any group can be labelled a potential threat, since they might do something. People who engage in dissent-peace activists, environmental activists, animal rights activists-may be subject to spying on those grounds.
Please tell your Senators and Congressperson that you don't want the US military gathering data on civilians or investigating civilians.
You can find contact information at vote-smart.org. |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(2)
--------------------
A Simple Question for Michelle Malkin
By Eric Jaffa, November 28, 2005
Has your husband ever posted under your name?
At your blog, were any articles presented as "by Michelle Malkin" written entirely by your husband?
Conservative blogger Michelle Malkin avoided the question when asked about it by Brad Krantz of WZTK-FM, calling the authorship accusation "vile," but not false.
She also avoids the question in a long post at her blog.
She writes about marriage ("I have my hubby's help for a few hours a week.") She writes about Al Franken (he has "research assistants," she irrelevantly notes.) She writes that the question is "racist." She writes that her husband "helped me with a handful of blog posts out of the estimated 3,000 I've written since June 2004," without explaining whether "helped" means wrote in their entirety, or how many blog-articles constitute a "handful."
But she doesn't write, "None of the posts here with with 'Michelle Malkin' in the byline were written entirely by my husband."
Her evasiveness suggests she's guilty of deceiving the public. There is no reason for her to be so evasive unless she is out to con us.
If Michelle Malkin lets someone else write entire posts under her name, which seems to be the case, then she is a fraud. |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(10)
--------------------
Bush Power Grab: A Temporary Retreat
By Eric Jaffa, November 24, 2005
Does George W. Bush have the power to label any one of us an "enemy combatant" and lock us up for the rest of our lives without trial?
For three years, the Bush Adminstration has been claiming such severe power for Bush, in the Jose Padilla case.
But on Tuesday, they instead went forward with the case in a normal manner and indicted Padilla in a federal grand jury, instead of pretending that George W. Bush accusing someone of a crime makes it so. From Tom Tomorrow:
The NY Times got this one exactly right:
The Padilla case was supposed to be an example of why the administration needs to suspend prisoners’ rights when it comes to the war on terror. It turned out to be the opposite. If Mr. Padilla was seriously planning a “dirty bomb” attack, he can never be held accountable for it in court because the illegal conditions under which he has been held will make it impossible to do that. If he was only an inept fellow traveler in the terrorist community, he is excellent proof that the government is fallible and needs the normal checks of the judicial system. And, of course, if he is innocent, he was the victim of a terrible injustice.
The same is true of the hundreds of other men held at Guantánamo Bay and in the C.I.A.’s secret prisons. This is hardly what Americans have had in mind hearing Mr. Bush’s constant assurances since Sept. 11, 2001, that he will bring terrorists to justice.
I’ve been writing about Padilla since the case initally appeared on the radar. I never understood how anyone, regardless of political affiliation, could blithely shrug off the fact that an American citizen was being stripped of his constitutional rights on the say-so of the President. As one of the ACLU people I met in Seattle over the weekend noted, it’s called the Bill of Rights–not the Bill of Suggestions.
This is a strategic retreat by the Bush Administration because the current Supreme Court might not go along.
Bush still wants the power to lock us up without trial, though he isn't claiming that power for now.
After Bush appointees have made the Supreme Court more conservative, this issue will probably return. |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(1)
--------------------
Lack of Stadium Seating Can Cause Concert Chaos
By Eric Jaffa, November 18, 2005
Concerts should be designed for safety.
As a general rule, concerts should only be given in places where the audience sits on an incline, whether it’s indoor stadium seating or an outdoor slope.
The risk otherwise is that the audience will surge towards the stage as they try to see the performers.
There have been successful outdoor concerts on flat ground, like assorted concerts in Central Park in New York. It’s not impossible for that to succeed, but it’s risky. There have also been lots of concerts where the audience is on flat ground, and this sort of thing happens:
Chaos at a concert in a mall near Minneapolis, Minnesota (November 12, 2005)
Just as B5 finished its first song — “You Got Me” — and started the second, an enthusiastic fan jumped on the stage. Within seconds, the crowd surged forward and onto the stage, sparking what one witness called “total chaos.”
Witnesses and law enforcement officials said several girls were stepped on, the band was whisked to safety, and the Brooklyn Center mall was cleared and closed for more than two hours.
Four people were taken to North Memorial Medical Center in Robbinsdale where they were treated for minor injuries and released. Five others were treated at the scene.
Brooklyn Center police officials said no one was arrested.
“I was right in front,” said [Amber] Andrews of Minneapolis. “Girls were running on stage, security guards were throwing them off. The girls were tearing off [band members’] clothes.”
…When asked if there was enough security at the event, Shelley Klaessy, the mall’s marketing director, said more than 20 people were working the concert — 10 mall security guards and at least 11 Radio Disney personnel.
“I think we pulled together the right amount,” Klaessy said.
Malls are usually bad places to have a concert, because of the flat-ground issue which causes the audience to surge towards the stage, lacking a good view because they're not on an incline.
Pearl Jam
In 2000, nine people in were killed at a Pearl Jam outdoor concert on flat-ground when the crowd surged forward. The organizers learned from the experience that “life is fragile” but continue staging concerts on flat-ground. The concert was at the Roskilde Festival in Denmark. It’s unfortunate that the organizers didn’t learn from this to install stadium seating.
There are other factors which affect safety. If it's crowded-a lot of people per square yard-and there is no stadium seating, that makes it more dangerous. Relatedly, it's better if there are chairs, instead of most people standing. |
PERMALINK AND COMMENTS(0)
--------------------
|
