You Must Read "We Must"

I realize the Convention Cycle is well underway. I realize that Former President Bill Clinton spoke last night and said some very important things.

I realize Sandra Fluke spoke last night and said some of the most inane, insulting and stupid things ever uttered at a Convention. [Fellow Democrat Kristen Powers saw it the same way I did]

I realize President Obama will speak tonight and his speech might just determine the outcome of the election.

But I want you to direct your attention to Lee Kiester's brilliant analysis of the entire 2012 election cycle and why this may be the most important election of our lifetime.  I'm not going to reprint one word of his analysis here, but I strongly urge you to follow this link and read his entire essay (it's not too long).  It WILL change your opinion about this election.  That is a promise!

LINK- - - - ->   We Must

Religious Zealotry

These are modern times.  Religious Zealotry is no longer confined to the worship of a god or goddess.  It can be an equally blind dedication to any idol, a dedication that moves beyond admiration or even belief and into worship at the expense of all other goals, ideas, morals and principles.

While we are all familiar with the traditional religious zealotry of the far right conservative Christians and the Islamic Fundamentalists, there is equal and even more destructive zealotry on what we call the "left" or Progressive end of the political spectrum.

Because such zealotry is blind, the zealots often don't realize they are violating their very own stated principles and ideals.  Lately I've seen way too many examples of the leftist zealotry and it makes me terribly uncomfortable.

As a Liberal I strongly believe in diversity, tolerance and acceptance of all races, religions, sexual orientations, and even diverse value sets and lifestyles.  This view or principle is stated often by ALL who claim to be liberals and progressives.  You can see it and read it and discuss it on every liberal blog and progressive forum.  Tolerance and acceptance are the holy grail of Liberal beliefs.

Except........ it seems the VAST and VOCAL majority of self proclaimed liberals and progressives don't believe a damned word of it.  It seems their beliefs on any issue is actually a RELIGIOUS DOGMA that cannot and must not ever be violated.  These so-called Liberals are nothing more than the Taliban of the Left.

One need look no further than famous (and incredibly talented) actor Brad Pitt's mother to see the Taliban of the Left in action.

Jane Pitt wrote a letter to the editor of the local newspaper in response to another letter.  In what ought to be a liberal example of TOLERANCE she actually admonished a conservative Christian for his prejudice against the Mormon religion.  Jane Pitt urged fellow Christians to vote for the man who shared their ideals of being "pro-life" and opposing "gay marriage," even if Mr. Romney didn't share their exact Christian faith.

Now, to be certain Jane was vocal and aggressive in her opposition to President Obama attacked his positions on these same issues.

Of course I personally disagree with Jane Pitt's position on both gay marriage and abortion.  But, tragically, many of my fellow (not really) liberals and progressives took it much further.

Hollywood rose up and attacked Mrs. Pitt with vile and horrific glee.  And the Twitterverse was even worse:

“BRAD PITT’S MOM WROTE AN ANTI-GAY PRO-ROMNEY EDITORIAL. KILL THE B***H.”
“Brad Pitt’s mom, die”

“F*** you, Brad Pitt’s mom. The gay community made your kid a star, you whacko.”

“Brad Pitt’s mother…what a brainless old b***h…”

“Brad Pitt’s Mom Slams Obama, Gays. That stand makes her a deluded, dumba** Fascist Repuke”

“I hope Brad Pitt has been supporting his mother and decides to cut her off. What a b***h.”

“Brad Pitt’s mom can choke on a (redacted).”

Jane Pitt has also received numerous death threats and the attacks are unrelenting.  The Hollywood attacks have been played out all over television. 

What disgusts me most is that (so far) Brad Pitt himself has been silent.  He can't bring himself to step up to the plate and defend his mother. In fact the only prominent Hollywood voice to defend Mrs. Pitt is Jon Voight, Brad Pitt's Father-in-Law (Angelina Jolie's father).

As usual, conservative firebrand Michelle Malkin has said it best: "Hollywood and the American left love diversity, except when it offends their “progressive” value system."

An excellent article on Jane Pitt's letter and the Hollywood backlash can be found in The Huffington Post

UPDATE 7/12/2012: Brilliant blogger B. Daniel Blatt also defends Jane Pitt over on The Gay Patriot.  This short essay is a must read confirmation of the misplaced hatred of the left in attacking Mrs. Pitt unfairly.

Intelligent Discussions

I've been ranting lately on several blog sites I visit about the distractions and irrelevant demagoguery directed at fringe personalities rather that the real issues than need discussion and civil debate.

Rush Limbaugh is simply never an issue. He has opinions and he has a style. You can disagree with one or the other or both, but he simply is never the issue, Not ever. Discussing Limbaugh or Ann Coulter or Rachel Maddow or Keith Olbermann might be fun, but they are side players. Read them or watch them, agree or disagree with them and then move on.

There are real issues and thanks to Barack Obama's far reaching vision we will need to become educated and well versed on many issues over the next four years. President Obama will drag us forward, even if we are kicking and screaming, toward the goals he has set for America.

If we are open minded and if we are really willing to learn we can contribute to this future. Once we actually focus on Education, the Environment, Government Regulation, and Health Care we can build a better America and, hopefully, a better world.

I often get really furious at Keith Olbermann. I feel he is intellectually dishonest, at best. But he often has learned guests and he represents a point of view that is shared by millions. He is saying important things, even if he says them badly.

I was out a noon time today, a real rarity for me. Naturally, Rush Limbaugh was on the radio and I listened for an extended period. Rush's comments and points were excellent. He can be snide and sarcastic. He is an easy mark for those on the left who love to copy, edit and paste. But, if you actually listen to him, he is extraordinarily bright and has extremely valid points.

Rush and Keith are simply two of many sources of information. They are not the issues, they have opinions.

For reasons I can only guess, some folks want to make them the center of the debate. People who do that have an agenda and it's not good. They want to limit debate. They want to distract. They want to inflame fears and build a mob mentality.

Despots have taken this approach throughout history. Blame the Jews. Blame the Blacks. Blame the Hispanics, the Irish, the Italians. Blame the Rich. Blame the immigrants. Blame the welfare mothers. Blame Rush Limbaugh.

Beware anyone who doesn't want to discuss the issues.

In the interest of learning and exploring the real issues, I want to CHALLENGE my readers to link over to Michelle Malkin's excellent discussion about Canadian health care, Did Canadacare kill Natasha Richardson? Michelle and other conservatives are already being demagogued to death by the powers that want to stifle debate for talking about Natalie Richardson's death.

By falsely claiming the Michelle and others are "exploiting" Natalie Richardson's death, these folks simply want to end the discussion about health care. That is so wrong on so many levels. Malkin's article is well written and excellent. It is thought provoking. It raises issues that simply MUST be discussed as we all work together toward the much need national health care system.

So don't listen to the people who want to somehow make Malkin the issue instead of Health Care. Malkin is not the issue. Read her article. And find others who actually discuss the real issues.

Liberal Intolerance, Hate and Derangement

I simply must take today's five minutes to express my profound disgust at the giant cadre of liberal pundits and bloggers who are mounting an unrelenting attack on Reverend Rick Warren, pastor or the immensely popular Saddleback Church, in Lake Forest, California, a "new age fundamentalist Christian church." Warren's egregious sin? He was chosen by President-elect Barack Obama to give the invocation at Obama's inauguration on January 20, 2009.

The level of intolerance and absolute stupidity being portrayed on the pages of The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Slate Magazine and others is stunning and deeply saddening, especially coming during the holiday the celebrates the birth of Jesus Christ. So much for peace on earth and good will toward men.

I absolutely refuse to post a single link to any of the crap out on the blogosphere from those who insist on condemning Warren for actually daring to believe the tenets of Christianity. Warren is roundly condemned for daring to both believe the basic dogma of his church and then to actually have the intellectual and moral courage to practice his faith in his daily life.

I am a deeply devout Unitarian Universalist. Warren and I share very few religious beliefs. I disagree with him profoundly on most theological issues. I most certainly disagree on the issues of human sexuality and lifestyle, especially Gay Marriage, which I strongly support.

But I disagree with almost every large and fundamentalist religion worldwide. I strongly disagree with most Islamic teachings and abhor the discrimination against women embedded in many religions.

But I DO NOT EXPECT, LET ALONE DEMAND that Pastor Warren magically abandon his core beliefs, just because liberals find some of those beliefs distressing. Far from it. I actually expect Warren to believe, follow, live and preach the word and commandments of God as he believes them. If Warren failed to do this he would simply not be a fundamentalist Christian.

Many, in fact most, of my close personal friends are Jewish. Many are Orthodox and live very conservative lives, keeping the Sabbath and following the laws of Judaism as closely as they can. Like Warren they reject homosexuality, They also deny that Christ is the savior.

Some day very soon a strongly conservative or ever Orthodox Rabbi will give an invocation at an Obama state function. Likewise I'll bet we soon see a Muslim pray at a state sponsored event. Will we so-called liberals DEMAND that they renounce their most sacred beliefs?

Or do we only demand that Christian ministers give up their beliefs and deny their God, as so many are now demanding of Warren?

And why do these supposed liberals insult and ridicule Christians, but remain reverent and respectful of other world religions? I've actually read these moronic pundits insult Christ in the most foul mouthed and demeaning language possible and then turn around and condemn the Danish who published the Mohammad cartoons for insulting Muslims and failing to respect their "deeply held beliefs."

Frankly, if Barack Obama chose Rick Warren to give the invocation at his Inauguration, I suspect that Barack Obama actually wanted a conservative Christian of deep moral faith to give that Invocation. Otherwise Obama could have chosen one of the many extremely fine and talented Methodists, Episcopalians or Unitarian Universlists to give the Invocation, or perhaps a great rabbi or Buddhist monk.

As to my fellow bloggers and pundits, have the courage to direct your outrage toward the person who chose a fundamentalist Christian to speak. Direct your outrage toward Barack Obama.

The Middleman

If you are actually blogging, or even worrying about, the "Cone of Silence" or McCain's superior performance in Saturday night's Saddleback Forum, you need to just relax and tune into tonight's episode of The Middleman, one of the most brilliant television series ever created.

Created by Javier Grillo-Marxuach from his own graphic novels (or comics if you prefer) by the same name, The Middleman is absolutely overflowing in trivia, cultural references and inside jokes. If somehow you glossed over this series thinking it's some sort of modern day Batman (the Adam West version), you need to sit back down and watch it again. It's closer to modern day Get Smart, with Natalie Morales a legitimate heir to Don Adams brilliant comic timing.
But the writing is well beyond Get Smart's simple humor and mild satire. Each of The Middleman's thematic shows is a veritable treasure trove of layered humor, nuance and tribute to past cultural icons. You literally need to watch each episode several times to catch and find the references. And even then you'll need to log into one of the many Middleman forums and read comments from other viewers.

The comedic acting, led by Morales and the equally talented Matt Keeslar, is wonderful. Mary Pat Gleason, as the annoying and all too human android Ida, is a joy to watch.

Watch every detail. No detail is too small and absolutely nothing is unimportant. In a recent episode that overflowed with Ghostbuster references, a street sign had the name "Ray Palmer Jr. Ave."

So, take a break from your stress over who will be nominated as Barack Obama's Vice President and immerse yourself in an hour of real fun and frivolity. Discover one of television's hidden treasures, The Middleman.

Prejudice

I am becoming increasingly concerned about blind prejudice in our society. You know the kind of prejudice I mean. When one group makes a blanket condemnation or criticism of another group, usually wrapped up in rather hateful or even hate filled jargon, that is pure prejudice.

As a society we generally condemn racial prejudice and occasionally condemn religious prejudice. Liberals, like myself, are quite quick to condemn prejudice based on sexual orientation. Why do so many in any society insist upon the stereotyping of people who are perceived as different?

Often such prejudice is just plain laughable. Or it's just plain stupid. It's generally always based on ideas or assumptions that is simply wrong. Blacks are not lazy. Hispanics are not thieves. Muslims are not terrorists. Gays can be good parents.

I'd like to think we all recognize prejudice.

But, here in the blogosphere I'm becoming increasingly concerned about BLIND and totally misguided prejudice base solely on political and/or economic beliefs. The name calling and the blanket condemnations are seriously out of control. Just read the comments sections of almost any political blog, left or right. Hate is being spewed in almost laughable proportions. Except it's just not funny.

I've got news for you. Conservatives DO NOT HATE the environment. LIBERALS DO NOT HATE America. Conservatives DO NOT HATE minorities. Liberals DO NOT HATE the military.

If you think I'm wrong you are just not getting out enough. You are not reading the blogs of those who differ from you politically and making a genuine effort to communicate (not lecture or call names).

I have a list of 26 blogs I try to read at least once weekly. Three are decidedly non political. Eight concentrate on International events or regional issues (Darfur, Iraq, Iran, Burma, etc). The remaining fifteen are political.

Of those 15, eight (8) are liberal and range form the very large (Daily Kos and Huffington) to the small and thoughtful (The Vigil and Liberal Values).

One is a rather middle of the road blog. That leaves six (6) that are conservative, again from the large (Pajamas Media and Little Green Footballs) to the very small (the unbelievably prolific Freedom Eden, I swear the woman writes 24 hours a day).

The comments attached to these blogs are nearly identical. I mean scarily word for word identical. Every damned day. Just remove the key words "liberals," "conservatives," "democrats, or "republicans" and the comments can simply be picked up and moved from the blogs on the left over to the blogs on the right. All spew blind and blanket prejudice. All are laced with vitriolic hatred. Many actually wish death upon their political opposites.

Michelle Malkin, who I always read and frequently quote in this blog, has pointed out the incredibly hypocrisy of and obvious prejudice of liberal economist Robert Reich. Her article today, The left-wing bullies in Robert Reich’s backyard, is really worth a read.

But even after Malkin gets it so spot-on right, a few of her own readers quickly revert to the same exact name calling and hate speech and class prejudice she has just condemned