Thursday, September 14, 2006
|
|
The Conservative View: Venting About Rosie
|
|
Posted by:
Mary Katharine Ham at
8:31 AM
|
|
Click the picture to see Michelle and me unscripted and ill about Rosie. What? Two women sitting around a kitchen table and complaining about another woman for five minutes without a script? Unbelievable, I know. Heh, I think you'll enjoy it.
Update: I should have added earlier that Michelle suggested Rosie have Bruce Bawer on her show. Bawer moved to Europe to escape the "fundies" and homophobia of America, and found this:
Having recently published an indictment of Christian fundamentalist intolerance in the U.S. (Stealing Jesus), New York native Bawer relocated to Europe with his Norwegian partner in 1998 and found an even more dangerous strain of religious and cultural bigotry ensnaring Western Europe. A swarming menace called radical Islam, he writes, rings Europe's cities in smoldering Muslim ghettos, provoking everything from so-called honor killings and political assassinations to the Madrid subway bombings and the massacre of school children in Beslan.
Worse, the Taliban-like theocracy Bawer sees looming inside backward immigrant populations resistant to integration flourishes under the protective wing of Western Europe's America-bashing, multicultural, liberal establishment. The latter correspond to the appeasers of Nazi Germany, in Bawer's view, since he believes that radical Islamism is every bit the threat to Western civilization that Nazism was.
And, here's the response of the Harvard audience to Khatami's justification of capital punishment for acts of homosexuality in Iran, which we refer to in the Vent.
As a friend remarked to me, maybe if Larry Summers had come into the office every day shouting "capital punishment for gays" and "praise be to Allah," he could have kept his job. In fact, by this strange logic, we can surmise that if Fred Phelps added a couple crescents and some Koran verses to his famous signage, he might land himself a job as Harvard President.
But, silly Larry. He insinuated that innate gender differences might account for disproportiate numbers of male scientists and engineers. Neanderthal! No job for you!
|
|
Rosie's a twit, and she makes my skin crawl everytime I hear her talk. Debating her would have absolutely no benefit because of her myopic 'View' of things. It will be interesting to see if she has to recant any of her propaganda...
|
|
Am I the only one who finds that a pretty nice view? Can I be invited as a guest on the next episode?
I promise I'll bring coffee and donuts! |
|
Hey Michelle and Mary Katherine -- Thanks for the recommendation of the book "While Europe Slept" by Bruce Bauer. I'll have to get it.
My oldest sister lives in Germany -- long story - 60's radical that never grew up. Maybe I'll send her the book after I read it.
You conservative Christian women are wonderful representations of our side of the ideological isle! You go, girls!!! |
|
I wonder--is the source of Rosie's fear (and evidently many others') the gay agenda, or is it a result of years of propaganda in the schools? I remember being assigned to read The Handmaid's Tale, a dystopian novel which would put the fear of conservative Christianity into anybody! Wikipedia says it is commonly used in Freshman level college English courses in the US and at 12th grade in Candada!
Funny thing is, a similar and scarier threat ACTUALLY exists in Islamism, and those ready to battle Christian fascism don't even seem to recognize it! I don't know how else to explain the lack of outcry concerning the treatment of women in Muslim countries, for example. The left seems to be more focused on what the Bush administration MIGHT do to take away their rights in this country, envisioning (I guess) that we are already on the slippery slope to the "totalitarian theocratic state" described by Margaret Atwood in her novel. |
|
I'm not a fan of Bill or Rosie, but they make a good point that apparently has hit a nerve with far Right-Wingers - keep your religion out of politics (that was Bill's response last night on H&C) and Rosie's comments ARE TRUE.
We have heard for years the extremists in the Christian Right movement who, in the name of god, killed doctors, nurses, of abortion clinics; Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell denigrating gays as the reason for 9/11. You're being very disingenuous (sp)if you are not understanding her statement about the laws of extremism and how it acts on people.
For sure there are tons of good Christian people who would NEVER think of killing someone in the name of god since that's not their goal, but you're not very smart if you're finding this far fetched from the comparison of radical Islam. Were not most of the Germans in WWII Christian/Catholic (and don't even try and separate the two, they're pretty much the same, nice try)I mean Hitler was Catholic.
Again, I can't stand Rosie, because you, or I don't like someone shouldn't be the reason we dismiss everything they say when they happen to say something of value that opens up debate.
I personally think that we're going to have to have another major attack, in the name of Allah, before the point of extreme religion is brought home and the damage it does.
Don't be ignorant, debate, educate.
|
|
|
For scooternyc--any comment on the Democrats using their senatorial positions to threaten ABC concerning the docudrama that aired this past weekend? Isn't that scary? What about abortion clinic personnel keeping mum about minor girls who come in pregnant? Scares me to death--forgive the pun. I can name more, and so can you. Perhaps we should pull back and fight the ACTUAL fascism that faces us, not the isolated incidents? As for Germany? Hitler was not a Christian, only born into a Catholic family. The Christians of Europe did look the other way, and German Christians are complicit. But FDR turned away a boatload of Jews seeking asylum too. A lot of dishonor in the name of keeping the peace, of not stirring the pot, of not sticking one's neck out. But don't forget Bonhoffer and ten Boom and countless other Christians who did. |
|
Seriously, Scooter? Yes, extremism bad. This is true.
But I think to find anything in America that would deserve the label “radical Christianity,” you have to move on down the line to the Fred Phelps loons and abortion clinic bombers. Both of those types are almost universally reviled, by Christians and non-Christians alike, and they have no political power.
The people who do have sway are evangelical Christians–reasonable, religious Americans who differ with liberals on the issue of gay marriage, but who go about expressing that difference of opinion with protest marches, ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments.
Is there some bigotry toward homosexuals out there in America? Yes, but to give executions and stonings in the Muslim world a pass while reviling those who collect signatures and protest abortion is pretty ridiculous. And, given the creep of sharia law in European countries where a rising Muslim population meets up with moral equivalence like yours and Rosie’s, your attitude is pretty short-sighted.
I don't like Rosie much, but that's not what made her statement ludicrous. She did that just fine on her own, sitting near what should have been the shadows of the Twin Towers, five years after the threat she downplays took the lives of nearly three thousand people.
Susie Potluck down at the Methodist church is not the threat. If you can't see that plainly, you're blind. |
|
Church may not be a threat. But her chicken salad certainly is.
Seriously, you, Allah and Malkin are all conspiring to put these Vent videos together to tease me. Right?
If so, pleases don't stop. :)
Actually, great job MKH. My mindless blog flirt notwithstanding. |
|
|
This country was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy and that is the reason she is allowed to be famous, rich, and blissfully ignorant. Those values give her the pulpit and the freedom to share her views, however misguided they may be. I said her views were myopic because the reason she is lashing out against Christians is their stance on homosexuality. However, if she were to compare the stances between the two groups in question, she might change her tune (pointed out in today's Vent). Can you really compare abortion bombers to Islamic fascists in a meaningful way? The sheer difference in the number of atrocities committed by each group ought to be enough to make Rosie's comparison ridiculous. |
|
Instead of contemplating her comments and what relevancy they might have, perhaps owning up to anything that could possibly be perceived as such, most of you want to leap into these diatribes of defense.
First of all, Hitler considered himself a Christian, "My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. -Adolf Hitler, in his speech on 12 April 1922. But that point aside, are you so enmeshed in your only thoughts, beliefs and defensiveness that you can't hear what anyone else is debating?
Yes, WE ALL should be working against Islamic Fascists, agreed. WE ALL should allow people to live their lives in freedom of choice. WE ALL should assimilate differences in order to not discriminate. Sadly, that's not what WE ALL are doing.
I find it interesting that the mere suggestion of taking religion out of politics gets the dander up. It doesn't mean we stop saying One Nation Under God. It doesn't mean we stop saying In God We Trust on our money. It doesn't mean that every cross that sits atop a mountain in San Diego comes down. These are all historical aspects of our nation that don't necessarily connotate religion, Christianity and the like.
If you've already made up your mind, then clearly there's no discussion or debate - which most of you have already done. But I was raised Catholic, went to Catholic school during my elementary years and STILL I don't think that religion of any kind should be part of our politics. It's too personal, it's too controversial as to who's god deserves more media than the other, and the aspect of Islamic Fascists proves that we can rationalize anything in the name of god.
|
|
"Can you really compare abortion bombers to Islamic fascists in a meaningful way?"
Listen, you can rationalize all you want, but we make decisions DAILY about killing life that is all around us. We make decisions about who lives and who dies all the time. ALL LIFE IS VALUABLE, it's the rationalizing that leads us to destroying it when it suits our purpose. But, let's not get self-righteous about moral-equivalency.
|
|
and I am sure scooternyc knows it. He had his people re-writing the Bible, he thought Jesus and any who follow Him a weakling and he planned to Destroy the Church in Europe. Anything he said that sounded favorable was a SOP for the masses.
But you can't bring yourself to admit that, can you?
I'm sick and tired of useful fools. |
|
"Listen, you can rationalize all you want"
I'm not trying to rationalize anything. I am saying the comparison is bogus.
"ALL LIFE IS VALUABLE, it's the rationalizing that leads us to destroying it when it suits our purpose."
Life is precious. In order to protect it, sometimes you have to exterminate the type that is bent on killing our people in the name of religious fanaticism. There's no moral equivalence about that. We are fighting evil. I don't think many reasonable people would argue that dropping the A-bombs to end WWII resulted in the protection of more lives than it took. |
|
...to refute my quote if you can find it, I would be happy to retract it, but the facts at this point stand. It's not to say that he didn't hate the religion at some point, but it's facts that make a point, not conjecture.
But still, you don't address the issue of getting religion out of politics. |
|
"I'm not trying to rationalize anything. I am saying the comparison is bogus."
To what are you attributing that it is "bogus", simply your opinion? My statement of fact is that we kill life around us everyday, that is a fact. Where are your facts?
Simply because you "disagree" with a statement doesn't make it bogus, it merely means you have no reasonable argument.
|
|
"I think to find anything in America that would deserve the label “radical Christianity,” you have to move on down the line to the Fred Phelps loons and abortion clinic bombers. Both of those types are almost universally reviled, by Christians and non-Christians alike, and they have no political power."
You make the point practically that it is the "radicals", as was ROD statement. To
say that Christians have no political power, is erroneous. Look how they try to influence government all over the place. Why look at the postings on this site:
tdau1997 writes: Thursday, September, 14, 2006 3:18 PM
One more point...
This country was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy
|
|
the comparison is bogus because the disparity in the number of atrocities between radical Islamists and radical Christians is enormous. It's like comparing the effects of a thunderstorm to those of Hurricane Katrina.
"My statement of fact is that we kill life around us everyday, that is a fact."
In the name of Christianity? Where? Who's "we"?
I kill bugs - that's about the extent of it for me.
The principles that I am referring to: all men are created equal, freedom of religion, freedom to pursue happiness, freedom of expression, etc. Those were derived from the Judeo-Christian philosophy. Do you disagree?
Because some nut/murderer characterizes himself as a Christian doesn't make it so. If he kills in the name of Christianity, he is doing so out of ignorance. (Unfortunately, there is a lot of that going around.) That's not what Christianity teaches.
MK's point was that the Christian radicals don't have political power - the KKK-types. There is a big difference between those outfits and most churchgoers. Surely, you're not equating the two.
|
|
So, now what you're doing is equating any support of Judeo-Christian philosophy with abortion clinic bombing? This is the problem. This is the problem with Rosie's statement. It's ludicrous.
And, the amount of political power these "radical" groups have in their respective countries is not irrelevant. Here, abortion clinic bombers and Fred Phelps are met with revulsion and ridicule, respectively. Our "radicals," such as they are, don't get the respect and free passes that radicals in Middle Eastern countries, even moderate Muslim countries, get. For that matter, they don't get the free passes from people like Rosie that radical Muslims get, despite the fact that radical Muslims are doing far more damage on a daily basis.
Why? Because people like Rosie, in their zeal to accept and be tolerant, end up granting them the legitimacy in their persecution of women and homosexuals. It's a shame, but they call it a cultural difference.
Christians "influencing government" through, you know, voting and ballot initiatives is not the same as sharia law clamping down on the liberties of those in Muslim countries. Seriously, you can't see that? You can't see how wonderful we have it? This is not a theocracy. Get a grip. |
|
When people make statements about Christians without a whole lot of knowledge to back it up, it's not any different from making statements about blacks or, well, fill in the blank. Even the statement, keep religion out of politics, really shows a lack of understanding of the foundations of our republic and the beliefs of Christians.
First, you have to recognize that the Constitution guarantees Christians (and anyone else) the right to free speech. So, legally, we don't have to check our faith at the door of the polical arena. You may not like that, but the Founding Fathers didn't seem to have a problem with it. In fact, they put freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the same amendment, making me think they thought they were equal, if not hopelessly intertwined, rights. Hmmm, interesting.
Second, the Christian God and Allah are not, despite what your high school western civ teacher taught, the same god. They don't teach the same things in their respective manuals of faith and they clearly don't have the same goals. Not surprisingly, they produce followers of two very different sorts. What can I say? Mohammed cribbed a lot from the Jews and Christians, but I don't think he really understood either one of them and he was quite ignorant of the God who stands behind both faiths.
Allah asks his followers to do unspeakable acts of horror on his behalf. "Kill the infidel when you meet him." Allow him to convert or pay you a heavy tribute if it's useful to your mission, but usually, it's just best to kill the infidel. If you convert him, you have another Muslim and if you make him pay tribute, you'll have money, but if you kill him, you get all those virgins in paradise, so just kill him! I'm mocking, but that's pretty much what the Koran says (and, yes, I've read it!)
The Christian God gave His son to die for the sins of all mankind, even the ones who reject Him. Right there should show you that this is a God who is not the same as Allah. This God says "go into all the world and tell people about Me." The one thing you can't do is convert dead people. Christians have not been called to kill, but to die (if necessary) for the faith. And history records a fair number of radical Christians. All of the original apostles (except John) died a martyr's death because they would not shut up about what they believed when the authorities told them. Coming forward into our time, Corrie ten Boom and her family made the radical Christ-inspired decision to give their lives to protect Jews from Hitler. Only Corrie survived to tell the story. Dietrich Bonhoffer insisted upon speaking out and writing against Hitler based upon his understanding of the Bible and he was executed for it. These were "radical" Christians. Note that they died for their beliefs. They didn't kill for them. They didn't commit acts of terrorism. They were not attempting to force anyone to believe as they believed. They refused to compromise their beliefs and they were killed for it. I know Christians operating in Islamic countries today who are there to spread the gospel, even though it is against the law and they face death for their activities. They don't plan to kill anyone when (hopefully, not) they get caught. They are, however, willing to die to do what God expects them to do. Huge difference!
Third, just because Hitler considered himself to be a Christian doesn't mean that he was. There's a client at my place of work who thinks he's a space alien. He's not; his delusion doesn't change the fact that he was born on earth of human parents. If Hitler had thought himself to be an automobile, that would not have made it true. God determines who is a Christian. He has laid out His plan of salvation in the Bible and there is no other means to being a Christian. Just because you bend a knee at an altar and cross yourself with holy water does not mean you're right with God. A Christian is defined by the Bible as someone who has admitted they're a sinner, asked Jesus to take that fault away, and confessed to that change of heart. Hitler didn't qualify as a Christian by the definition. He might have qualified as a client with the agency I work for, however.
Radical Muslims kill people, usually by horrific means, because Allah has promised them paradise for killing the infidel. Radical Christians give their own lives up because God has promised us paradise for loving the non-believer. That is a glaring difference!
And, it's a difference that people like Rosie O'Donnell hate. They don't like Christian voices in the political arena because they don't like what we have to say. You see, God loves people, but He doesn't love the things we do that hurt us. He asks His followers to sometimes show love by telling people the truth about their lifestyles. That's not forcing anyone to believe what we believe, but it is exercising our right of free speech to tell people what we believe. The actual believing is up to you. We're called upon by God only to tell. Again, that's a big difference between "radical" Christianity and radical Islam. We tell and let others believe or reject. Islam says convert or die. Now, Rosie, she'd just as soon that we shut up altogether and she thinks she has an argument based upon "religion has no place in politics." That's like saying Christians cannot speak on any political issue. Our faith in Christ informs our worldview, which informs our politics. For those of us who truly live Christianity, faith, worldview and politics are hopeless interwoven. Because our God requires that we talk about and base our live upon this intensely personal experience, we don't have the option of keeping our faith private. A Christian is a Christian all the time!
Wow, maybe the Founding Fathers understood that and that's why they contained freedom of religion and freedom of speech in the same amendment. Maybe they understood that what you believe about the world (your worldview, which grows from your faith or lack thereof) is what you base your politics upon and so they sought to protect us from the Rosie O'Donnells and scooternycs of this world who would try to gag us because they don't like what we have to say.
News flash -- you can believe whatever you want and you can tell me about it. However, you can't force me to believe as you do. All I ask if my Constitutional right to believe what I believe and to tell you about it. I'm not forcing you to believe it. I just want equal protection under the law and I believe the Founding Fathers already gave it to me! |
|
|
|
|
Nicely said, aurorawatcher. Scooter sounds like the extremist to me. Those few Christians he mentions don't advocate throat slittings, hi-jackings, beheadings, or strapping explosives to their own children and sending them into shopping malls. We don't have networks of brainwashed, blood thirsty thugs scattered throughout the world who train endlessly to ruthlessly murder people who happen to be of a different faith or of no faith at all. Yes, some people claiming to be Christian step out of line once in awhile or say something silly. However, you would have to be an idiot(or a left-wing anti-Christian bigot) to compare these Christians to Islamic terrorists. |
|
"Seriously, you can't see that?"
No, he can't. Lefties and conservatives use the same words, but they mean totally different things. Case in point: radical Christianity. To the conservative, radical Christianity conjurres up images,as you noted, of Fred Phelps, etc. To the lefty, it conjures up images of Joe Evangelical writing his congressman to vote in favor of parental notification as well as Fred Phelps, etc. If you ever run into Phylo se Fizer on here, just ask him about "moral absolutes" and you'll see what I mean.
And if/when you have nothing better to do, check out:
http://ducts.org/06_06/html/reviews/goldblatt.html
I think it explains why he can't see it. |
|
MKH,
Great job at Vent with Michelle Malkin.
The 'bad potato salad' remark had me laughing out loud this morning---which is rare for me to do before I've drank my morning Dr. Pepper.
Unfortunately, the world is filled with morally confused individuals such as Rosie O'Donnell and this poor commenter, scooternyc.
By definition, morally confused people cannot properly identify what actually threatens them, therefore, they fear Susie Potluck of the local Methodist church as much as they do Osama Bin Laden !
Fact is, American Christians' beliefs have defined the American mainstream since the Jamestown Colony in the early 1600's.
It is the secular left which is 'radical' in its Stalinist attempt to re-define issues such as marriage, national sovereignty, the notion of private property, personal accountability, etc. |
|
|
Rosie suffers from what I call CS which is, of course, Celebrity Syndrome, a sickness affecting those successful in one field ( sports, music, comedy, acting etc..)who automacially become omnipotent and are experts in all areas of life.Poor Rosie and her magazine were a disaster as was her Boy George show! Her next project, I hear, is an all female radio network which will last as long as Air America, if she is lucky. When she goes on about Christians, saying little about our enemies, I picture her in a birqua trying to change the world with her liberalism. It's not a pretty picture! In a birqua, CS might prove fatal. |
|
took into account all of the Judeo/Christian organizations that contributed toward caring for those affected by hurrican Katrina (not to mention any other tragedy throughout the world). What a radical idea! Groups of religious people out to unconditionally help those around the world that they do not even know.
Her equating Christianity to Islamic Terrorists would be laughable if it weren't so sickening. |
|
|
|