• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

White supremacy is terrorism.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

Consistently wrong since 2002

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

You can’t love your country only when you win.

Happy indictment week to all who celebrate!

Tick tock motherfuckers!

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

Russian mouthpiece, go fuck yourself.

This year has been the longest three days of putin’s life.

He really is that stupid.

“What are Republicans afraid of?” Everything.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

Reality always lies in wait for … Democrats.

A democracy can’t function when people can’t distinguish facts from lies.

You don’t get rid of your umbrella while it’s still raining.

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.

The republican caucus is already covering themselves with something, and it’s not glory.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Humorous / Aha!

Aha!

by Tim F|  December 1, 20058:35 pm| 60 Comments

This post is in: Humorous

FacebookTweetEmail

From a memo passed to me by a source who insists that he/she can be trusted:

The next meeting of the War on Christmas, Pittsburgh chapter, will be held this saturday at the usual time in the Masonic temple in Oakland. Please bring a #2 pencil if you plan to vote in the steering committee election, and non-perishable goods for the food drive. To whoever brought an half-empty box of spaghetti last month, it makes you look bad and it makes us look bad, so knock it off.

Scheduled topics include our progress in infiltrating government, possible alternative names for the peri-New Year’s holiday (as per last month’s vote, Bacchusmas is no longer an option) and pagan efforts to reclaim the tree and rabbit. Remember, if the O’Reilly Factor shows up it’s CRITICAL to deny everything. We can’t afford to be exposed with victory so near at hand.

XXXXXX
Secretary pro tem

Consider this an open War on Christmas thread.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « “Freedom” Of The Press
Next Post: Stories Making The Rounds »

Reader Interactions

60Comments

  1. 1.

    jpok

    December 1, 2005 at 8:40 pm

    My bad, I’ll bring an entire box this time.

  2. 2.

    Joey

    December 1, 2005 at 8:58 pm

    Sweet. They didn’t notice the half-eaten bag of Doritos that I brought. Suckers!

  3. 3.

    bains

    December 1, 2005 at 9:03 pm

    OReilly is ripe for satire, but that was lame…

  4. 4.

    TallDave

    December 1, 2005 at 9:12 pm

    That area might not be safe. There are unconfirmed reports of caroling, and a man in a Santa suit has reportedly been menacing passers-by with oppressive, exclusionary chants of “Merry Christmas!”

    A rumor that several houses are flagrantly exhibiting colored lights in violation of our right to a Christmas-free neighborhood is being investigated.

  5. 5.

    ppGaz

    December 1, 2005 at 9:28 pm

    OReilly is ripe for satire, but that was lame…

    But apparently not lame enough to dissuade TallDave ….

    Good god. Is there free meth in idiotville tonight?

  6. 6.

    Geek, Esq.

    December 1, 2005 at 9:28 pm

    Has O’Reilly gone after the people responsible for Christmas with the Cranks?

    Because he really should.

  7. 7.

    Duncan

    December 1, 2005 at 9:30 pm

    I recognize that you are going for “humor,” but frankly you and your associates really would like to see Christmas eliminated as a nice kind of “time of the year.” Personally, I would be just as happy to see you dead.

  8. 8.

    demimondian

    December 1, 2005 at 9:31 pm

    A rumor that several houses are flagrantly exhibiting colored lights in violation of our right to a Christmas-free neighborhood is being investigated.

    This is a message from Brother Scalpel of the Ineffable Argument. I represent the Unitarian Jihad.

    As God is our witness (or, at least, the witness of the 20% of us who accede to believing in a personal deity, although Sister Solitude of the Personal Solipsist asks that the minutes reflect her belief that none of the other votes count, as she alone exists. She remains silent on whether there is a personal diety)…we have acted as we (or others, acting on our behalf, as 80% of committee suggests) have in order to protect our brothers in arms (aware, as we are of the sexist connotations of the terms “brothers”, to which 36.27% of the committee, with a 95% error bar of 6.7%, object) by delightening the oppresive people of colored lights.

  9. 9.

    James Emerson

    December 1, 2005 at 11:32 pm

    And just in case I forget to get around to this later:

    Happy Holidays ALL!

  10. 10.

    Ancient Purple

    December 1, 2005 at 11:33 pm

    I loved the fact that after BO’s tirade about the WoC, it turns out that his own network was selling “holiday ornaments” for “holiday trees.” Well, until everyone got to laughing at the irony of it all and Fox changed it to “Christmas ornaments.” Link.

    Honestly, I can’t decide who is more disingenuous: BO or Bush.

  11. 11.

    ubernerd83

    December 2, 2005 at 1:40 am

    Recognizing the fact that other religions have holidays around this time is CLEARLY anti-Christian. I mean, they’re clearly just trying to feed off of the popularity of Christmas. What’s that you say? Christmas actually takes place on a pagan feast day? And most of our traditions are based on older pagan ones? DECEIVER!!!

  12. 12.

    John Redworth

    December 2, 2005 at 1:48 am

    I have had my chuckles at the arguments presented about this war on Christmas that I keep hearing about… to me when BOR makes a comment along the lines that there are less than 15% non-Christians in America and you are willing to upset 85% of this nation for that 15%… along with that according to his own research, only 1% of the nation is so against Christmas that they would stop shopping at places that say “Merry Christmas” while all of the Christians would stop shopping at places that didn’t say it…

    I have no clue where he gets his numbers or his idea that Christians will be so offended if they hear Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas from the minimum wage cashier at the Mega-Wal-Mart…

  13. 13.

    cd6

    December 2, 2005 at 2:15 am

    it might be because im drunk, but this was hilarious to me

    hceers tim

  14. 14.

    Pb

    December 2, 2005 at 3:31 am

    Did anyone else see Denis Leary’s Christmas special on Comedy Central? It was so wrong. And I laughed so much…

  15. 15.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    December 2, 2005 at 6:47 am

    The so-called “War on Christmas” is what you get when a secular nation is overrun by Christian Fundamentalists.

    They may have the power to back them up, but we have something better…the US Constitution.

  16. 16.

    Shygetz

    December 2, 2005 at 7:17 am

    Why don’t the store clerks just say “Merry Christmas” to the Christians? You know, they all look alike…

    Personally, I think we’ve turned a corner in the War on Christmas. Christmas is in its last throes.

  17. 17.

    docG

    December 2, 2005 at 7:54 am

    Who cares about Christmas. I am out to end that horrendous glorification of torture, All hail the “War on Easter”! Please join me in removing this hideous Fundamentalist celebration of the painful, slow death of a whore hugging LIBERAL. My group, the “War On Easter Fundamentalist Undermining Liberals” (WOEFUL) is funding a group of forensic anthropologists to prove that the holes in Christ’s wrists and hands were actually White Phosphorus burn holes, not injuries from spikes. We will publish our results two weeks before Easter, thus proving that the neo-con element of the Roman Legion ginned up the whole “Christians are a threat to the Roman way of life” issue simply to avenge Pontius Pilate’s father’s failed invasion of Judea with a fake crucifixion. This will turn the entire country against Easter!! We win!!!
    (Please send your donations to http://www.woeful.com, a wholly owned subsidiary of MoveOff[YourRocker].org)

  18. 18.

    zzyzx

    December 2, 2005 at 8:06 am

    Remember to boycott Target because they don’t actually use the word Christmas in their fliers.

    Remember when it was the left that tried to punish people for using the wrong words?

  19. 19.

    Steve S

    December 2, 2005 at 8:30 am

    Personally I think this whole “Christmas” thing is a fad. In a few years, we’ll have completely forgotten about it, no longer be buying trees and gifts for the kids.

    and we’ll move on to something more important like Nikemas, the celebration of finely sculpted athletic footwear!

  20. 20.

    farmgirl

    December 2, 2005 at 8:42 am

    “Why don’t the store clerks just say “Merry Christmas” to the Christians?”

    And how will we identify these “Christians”? (It ain’t by their works, I can bet that.) How ’bout this: everyone who wants to be greeted with “Merry Christmas,” to the exclusion of all other holiday greetings, can sew a big yellow cross onto their clothes. If they don’t, they lose the right to bitch about it.

  21. 21.

    Jim Allen

    December 2, 2005 at 8:56 am

    Tim, I applaud your investigative journamalism.

    Now, you can secure your Nobel Peace Prize for Journamalism if you can als get a copy of the gay agenda! Failing that, maybe you can get a copy of the gay minutes, and we can extrapolate.

    Oh, and O’Reilly is an ass. Just saying.

  22. 22.

    Lines

    December 2, 2005 at 8:56 am

    Nothing is more funny on this thread than bains and Duncan. Even the “turning the corner” snark (which never gets old to me) just can’t compete with pure unadulterated supremecy and narcisism they have portrayed.

    Whats the best part of it? They are serious!

  23. 23.

    Tim F.

    December 2, 2005 at 9:06 am

    Duncan,

    Best holiday wishes to you as well.

    Yours,

    Tim F

  24. 24.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 9:16 am

    And once again, it’s the 5% fringe on either side who makes the noise and gets the coverage. I’m willing to bet that most non-Christians don’t give a royal shit if a Christmas tree is put up in the public square of their town. And I’m also willing to bet that most Christians don’t give a royal shit if a store clerk says “Season’s Greetings!” instead of “Merry Christmas!” But of course, we have a small percentage of people on either side who are easily offended, and the media leaps all over it, so it now looks like every non-Christian wants to ban the word “Christmas” and all Christian paraphernalia, and that every Christian is up in arms, nativity scenes at the ready, prepared to defend against the heathens.

    Ridiculous.

  25. 25.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 9:17 am

    I recognize that you are going for “humor,” but frankly you and your associates really would like to see Christmas eliminated as a nice kind of “time of the year.” Personally, I would be just as happy to see you dead.

    Now that is Christmas spirit. Warms the cockles of your heart, doesn’t it?

    Duncan, you just made Baby Jesus cry.

  26. 26.

    Ancient Purple

    December 2, 2005 at 9:28 am

    Now that is Christmas spirit. Warms the cockles of your heart, doesn’t it?

    Oh, great! Now Balloon Juice has people with hot cockles.

  27. 27.

    Pug

    December 2, 2005 at 9:32 am

    Don’t some of these “Christians” just make themselves look great this time of year?

    Ann Coulter: “Saying Merry Christmas to them is like saying fuck you”.

    Duncan: “Personally, I would be just as happy to see you dead”.

    Anyway, I predict Christmas will win this war. With the likes of the fighting O’Reillys and Fox News on its side, how can Christmas lose?

  28. 28.

    Pug

    December 2, 2005 at 9:35 am

    And once again, it’s the 5% fringe on either side who makes the noise and gets the coverage. I’m willing to bet that most non-Christians don’t give a royal shit if a Christmas tree is put up in the public square of their town. And I’m also willing to bet that most Christians don’t give a royal shit if a store clerk says “Season’s Greetings!” instead of “Merry Christmas!” But of course, we have a small percentage of people on either side who are easily offended, and the media leaps all over it, so it now looks like every non-Christian wants to ban the word “Christmas” and all Christian paraphernalia, and that every Christian is up in arms, nativity scenes at the ready, prepared to defend against the heathens.

    Ridiculous.

    And the rest of us can just quietly go about trying to enjoy the season. It gets hard to ignore the screamers, though.

  29. 29.

    Davebo

    December 2, 2005 at 9:42 am

    Solutions to O’Reilly’s Christmas Conspiracy.

    1. No more Santa’s or elves at the mall for one thing. Santa Claus, AKA Sinter Klaus, is a Dutch tradition. Sinter Klaus arriving by ship from Spain with not one but TWO muslim helpers? To a country with legalized drugs, prostitution, and euthanasia?? I don’t think so. What could be more unamerican.

    2. Only Nativity scenes and Crucifiction scenes in the Malls from now on. Cause nothing gets my AmEX hopping like a dead guy nailed to a cross or an extra mouth to feed with no ejaculation involved! Sales will boom I tell ya!

    3. Frosty the Snowman? Outta here. This is a holiday celebrating the birth of Christ and I seriously doubt he’d support the concept of inannimate balls of snow EVOLVING

  30. 30.

    Faux News

    December 2, 2005 at 9:47 am

    Again I must state that the official Christmas theme is:

    What Would Jesus Buy?

    WWJB

  31. 31.

    Cyrus

    December 2, 2005 at 9:57 am

    Krista Says:

    And once again, it’s the 5% fringe on either side who makes the noise and gets the coverage. I’m willing to bet that most non-Christians don’t give a royal shit if a Christmas tree is put up in the public square of their town.

    Depends. Just a Christmas tree and some lights, no, I wouldn’t be offended, probably wouldn’t even notice. A Christmas tree plus a menorah and whatever the appropriate Ramadan and Kwanzaa decorations are and more besides, well, it’s getting pretty elaborate and I wouldn’t actively support it, but I wouldn’t get all pissed off over it either.

    But if my town’s government puts up displays and decorations devoted entirely to Christmas going at it from explicitly religious angles while spending as much money or more as on the multicultural example I mentioned, yeah, I think I would get pissed. I’m not nuts enough to stand on principle on every damn issue, but a thousand-dollar crêche as the centerpiece of the town square, for example, would be ridiculous.

  32. 32.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    December 2, 2005 at 9:59 am

    And once again, it’s the 5% fringe on either side who makes the noise and gets the coverage.

    I’m curious Krista, what is your take on religious symbols–such as a Nativity scene, a jewish star, or an islamic moon–on public tax-payer funded property?

    So do you consider the people who speak out against this part of the 5% fringe?

  33. 33.

    Johno

    December 2, 2005 at 10:03 am

    Wow… Ann Coulter has given this godless secular humanist liberal Masshole who loves gays and recycling the greatest idea ever.

    Merry Christmas, Ann Coulter! Merry Christmas to everyone!

    And Merry Christmas your mom too!

  34. 34.

    Lines

    December 2, 2005 at 10:05 am

    Why does the government need to get involved in Christmas anyway? They screw up everything they touch, why do we want them touching the holidays? This is time for friends and family, not political pandering and bloviating over a wooden likeness of a white Jesus. Lets just encourage people to spend the holidays how and with who they want and forget about the details.

  35. 35.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 10:26 am

    I’m curious Krista, what is your take on religious symbols—such as a Nativity scene, a jewish star, or an islamic moon—on public tax-payer funded property?

    I’m not a fan of it, but I’m not going to get up in arms about it, either. To use Cyrus’ example, about a $1000 creche in the public square, I’d be irked if my tax dollars were used towards it, because I’d figure there were better things on which the money could have been spent. But, if it had been donated by some rich religious person…oh well. Like I said, I wouldn’t love it to bits, but I wouldn’t start a big campaign against it. And I don’t consider people who speak out about it to be part of that 5% fringe. It’s the people who get really worked up and start these massive campaigns. And it’s not even that I think those people are wrong — they totally have a right to their viewpoint, and I can sympathize with that viewpoint.

    My point, is that the media, as usual, has blown everything out of proportion, to the point where to the outside observer, it seems like all non-Christians want to ban Christmas, and all Christians are just about ready to fight a holy war. And all that does is create even more tension, and makes it harder for people to find a middle ground.

  36. 36.

    BIRDZILLA

    December 2, 2005 at 10:27 am

    I guess the only days we will get off of work if the atheists freaks get their way is EARTH DAY and HONOR A ATHEISTS IDIOT DAY

  37. 37.

    Steve S

    December 2, 2005 at 10:30 am

    Baby Jesus wants a new pair of Nike’s for Christmas!!!!

    I’m curious Krista, what is your take on religious symbols—such as a Nativity scene, a jewish star, or an islamic moon—on public tax-payer funded property?

    OH NO! Now the Flight 93 memorial too!?

  38. 38.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    December 2, 2005 at 10:34 am

    My point, is that the media, as usual, has blown everything out of proportion, to the point where to the outside observer, it seems like all non-Christians want to ban Christmas, and all Christians are just about ready to fight a holy war.

    You make a valid point but the fact of the matter is that all Christian Fundamentalists are ready to fight a holy war. Case in point, a good number of Christians freaked out over it being called a holiday tree, while people like myself–who believe the Constitution makes us a secular nation–don’t give two shits if they call it a Christmas tree. I just don’t want religious symbols on public property.

    And all that does is create even more tension, and makes it harder for people to find a middle ground.

    There is no middle ground when it comes to the government endorsing religion. Having a Christmas tree or a Jewish menorah is acceptable but having blantantly religious symbols, such as a nativity scene or a jewish star, is not.

  39. 39.

    ubernerd83

    December 2, 2005 at 10:57 am

    In terms of the presence of religious symbols on government property:

    Does it have a primarily secular purpose?
    Does it have a primarily secular effect?
    Does it avoid government entanglement with religion?

    Let’s see: no, no, and no. Apparently, they aren’t allowed. Hooray for the Lemon Test!

  40. 40.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 11:15 am

    There is no middle ground when it comes to the government endorsing religion. Having a Christmas tree or a Jewish menorah is acceptable but having blantantly religious symbols, such as a nativity scene or a jewish star, is not.

    Maybe I’m just not as worried about it because my government knows how to keep church and state separate. Whereas your government seems to be eroding that distinction on a daily basis.

    For the record, I do think that calling it a “holiday tree” is kind of silly. But I also think that getting all bent out of shape about a Christmas concert being re-named a “Holiday concert” is equally silly.

  41. 41.

    tzs

    December 2, 2005 at 11:26 am

    Especially considering the Xtians swiped the whole tree thing from the pagans. Forget which minor Greek deity was worshipped that way–Attis? Can look it up.

  42. 42.

    demimondian

    December 2, 2005 at 11:29 am

    Maybe I’m just not as worried about it because my government knows how to keep church and state separate. Whereas your government seems to be eroding that distinction on a daily basis.

    Krista, I love Canada. I did my first post doc in Toronto (before I got my doctorate. Don’t ask.) Take this commentary in that light.

    Do you know the old saying “When the elephant gets a cough, the mouse gets pneumonia?” You just lost a government over corruption of a scale beyond Iraq, remember. The Grits had to call a snap election — and it looks like no government is going to emerge from it.

    Don’t ignore the problems you’ve got. We’re facing a real constitutional crisis down here — but you guys are blindly marching down the path.

  43. 43.

    TallDave

    December 2, 2005 at 11:34 am

    It’s sort of amusing that the secularists want to apply “separation of Church and State” in a manner the founders would have considered a reductio ad absurdum refutation of the principle’s principal aim.

    Their intent wasn’t to prevent religious practice from being affirmed, but to prevent it from being denied. Now, in the name of a principle intended to prevent free religious practice from being denied, we’re denying governments at all levels the right to assist in the free practice of religion, on the grounds that any gov’t assistance in such practice must amount to discrimination against everyone who disagrees with whether that pratice should take place, ignoring the fact that the democratically elected officials doing so are reflecting the will of the people and that nothing they do is ever supported by 100% of the people. And then to add further insult to the original intent of the Founders, the phrase “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” gets wildly overinterpreted into “no gov’t official shall ever commit such an official act as might be construed as endorsing or practicing a religion.”

    This isn’t a war against Christmas, it’s a war against common sense.

  44. 44.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 11:36 am

    Oh we definitely have corruption. I’m not making light of how screwed up our government is. We basically have three choices: the Liberals (a bunch of corrupt Quebec lawyers, basically), the Conservatives (led by a scary, right-wing Bush wannabe), or the NDP (uber-Socialists who have all kinds of grand ideas but never tell us where the money for those ideas will come from.)

    Of course, the typical jaded Canadian view is that all politicians are crooks, so we tend to vote for the crooks that we know — at least until they piss us off enough to make a change.

    But it could be worse. At least Paul Martin doesn’t think that God is telling him what to do. :)

  45. 45.

    skip

    December 2, 2005 at 11:53 am

    Nearly every anti-Christmas zealot in my personal experience has been Jewish, and given the solid month of musical treacle, who can blame them?

    Muslims, however, who are roughly as numerous in the US, don’t seem to mind. Go figure.

  46. 46.

    demimondian

    December 2, 2005 at 12:08 pm

    At least Paul Martin doesn’t think that God is telling him what to do.

    Or, at least, being Canadian, he won’t admit it. :)

  47. 47.

    Otto Man

    December 2, 2005 at 12:11 pm

    the phrase “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” gets wildly overinterpreted into “no gov’t official shall ever commit such an official act as might be construed as endorsing or practicing a religion.”

    How about Article VI, “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”? That seems to suggest a desire to keep gov’t officials out of religion.

  48. 48.

    jcricket

    December 2, 2005 at 12:43 pm

    The latest comments from O’Reilly and Gibson show that there’s really no limit to what the RWNM will say. I started reading this blog during the Schiavo debacle, and the right-wing rhetoric has becoming increasingly disturbing as the public at large has turned against the WH administration and GOP policies.

    I’ve seen people claim that the left is the same, but that’s bullshit. Dave Weinart has done a good job exposing the false equivalency (in terms of power, effect, vitriol level, etc.) between the far left and far right. The worst on the left (ELF, ALF) are, by far, fringe figures. The RWNM, Randall Terry, etc. have far more power and influence, and are accepted by a far greater number of “mainstream conservatives”.

    More importantly, wingers like the ones I mentioned seem incredibly thin-skinned. Malkin and O’Reilly, in particular, can’t take any criticism without blowing a complete gasket. The good thing is that they also show no sense of proportion in their responses. So, the more legitimate criticism that piles up, the farther they go out on a limb, and the more quickly they will self-destruct. Savage is the classic example of this.

  49. 49.

    Dan

    December 2, 2005 at 12:59 pm

    Really, I don’t care one whit as to whether someone wishes me a “Merry Christmas,” “Happy Holidays,” “Happy Solstice,” or whatever.

    I have to care about the “war on Christmas,” however. The underlying message is very disturbing. For example, saying “Happy Holidays” covers a wide range of traditions, including Hanukka and Kwanzaa. The campaign to get everyone to say “Merry Christmas” seems to be about saying those traditions don’t matter.

    I also find abhorrent anything that logically leads to Jews, Muslims, and people of other faiths being required to say “Merry Christmas” as part of their jobs.

    (And skip, I’ll make a semi-educated guess that Muslims do care, but they’re not in a secure enough position in our society to feel comfortable with speaking openly.)

  50. 50.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    December 2, 2005 at 1:10 pm

    How many times do we really need to go over this?!

    The Constitution is a S E C U L A R document.

    On top of that, the philosophy for the Constitution came from the enlightenment–not the Bible–specifically Locke’s enlightenment philosophy. Locke strongly advocated secularism, and so did the founders since they strongly advocated Locke’s philosophy.

  51. 51.

    Krista

    December 2, 2005 at 1:14 pm

    Or, at least, being Canadian, he won’t admit it.

    That would be utter political suicide up here.

    This whole Christmas/holiday/festivus kerfuffle just reminds me (in my own disturbed, irreverent way) of Mister Garrison from South Park singing, “Merry Fucking Christmas.”

    Now THAT’s festive.

  52. 52.

    Cyrus

    December 2, 2005 at 1:27 pm

    Their intent wasn’t to prevent religious practice from being affirmed, but to prevent it from being denied… And then to add further insult to the original intent of the Founders, the phrase “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” gets wildly overinterpreted into “no gov’t official shall ever commit such an official act as might be construed as endorsing or practicing a religion.”

    Your interpretation seems… overwrought. But even so, if a gov’t official, in his/her official capacity, endorses or practices religion, how is that not establishment? I’m sure you can come up with lots of examples of endorsement/practice which seem like they should be acceptable, but if you actually think about them, you’ll probably find that most were either not in the person’s official capacity or the complaints were not upheld in court.

    Also, as for the founder’s original intent, you’re mistaken. Check out the Treaty of Tripoli.

    As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;

    I’m not claiming it has the force of law or a constitutional amendment, but it is obviously an indication of the founder’s original intent. You can argue that the First Amendment now only should say that religion cannot be denied, but get your facts straight first.

    Explain it to me, as if I were a third grader. If the US is explicitly not founded on the Christian religion (well, I guess it could have been founded on some other one, but curiously the anti-seperation crowd never talks about that), then how do you know that the founders didn’t want to prevent the government from affirming it? And if a religion has been endorsed, not just with words but with legislation and/or funding, how is that not establishment? How can you oppose establishment but support endorsement?

  53. 53.

    John Redworth

    December 2, 2005 at 3:29 pm

    While I hope that no one will slap the “cut and run” label on me, I want the immediate withdrawal of troops from the war on Christmas…

    I know that O’Reilly has said that the war on Christmas is the main focus for the overall war on religion in this country but we have been misled on the facts of who opposes the use of Christmas by people who are using it for their own personal agenda (Gibson is hawking his book or Coulter’s no-bid clause with FNC to blame everyone but herself)… There were no mass protests over the use of “happy holidays” rather than “merry Christmas” as promised… and our continued presence in this war on Christmas only emboldens the extremists on either side…

    We currently do not have a clear strategy or time table to work with… and unless Mr. O’Reilly stands in front of the people and explains our goals, we will not win the war on Christmas…

  54. 54.

    jack

    December 2, 2005 at 4:09 pm

    What no one seems to get–especially with things like Gibson’s blather is that no one really wants to make everyone say Merry Christmas–they just want people to be able to say Merry Christmas too–WITH all the others, not instead of them.

    The ‘push’ to replace ALL the holiday greetings with the bland, non-‘offensive'(as if well-wishes could be offensive) Happy Holidays is something that should concern everyone. After all, we are told that we should celebrate our diversities, the many cultures that combine to form what is America. Yet in this case, we are told that those diverse holidays and their greetings and symbols SHOULD be avoided. That it is better to be inclusive–by excluding everyone’s traditions and opting for a generic greeting that acknowleges NONE of our varied histories.

    Christians go crazy because, like it or not, at one time they had this season virtually to themselves. Chanukah, like most Jewish holidays wasn’t the lavish spectacle that Christmas was. And holidays like Eid and the Solstice didn’t figure big enough to be noticed. Kwanzaa didn’t exist before Karenga and so all the big traditional themes tend to revolve around Christmas. And now, all the themes are still there, but it’s put around that saying Marry Christmas–instead of a more generic greeting–is potentially offensive. So they feel that their particular holiday, Christmas, is ‘under attack’

    The Post Office’s actions, the actions of various schools and city councils only add to this.

    And they have a point.

    Why is ‘Merry Christmas’ or Happy Chanukah, or Happy Kwanzaa, Eid, Solstice or Yule offensive to ANYONE? Why can’t we say all the names, have whatever decorations and symbols ANY faith or ethnicity traditionally enjoys in this season, enjoy all the holidays distinctly? Why must we cover them up, mumble ‘Happy Holidays’ and hope that the person you’ve said it to doesn’t find some offense in that?

    This is supposed to be a happy time, why can’t we enjoy it instead of catering to the whims of people who will take offense at a hearfelt wish for their happiness?

    May the gods smile on you this Solstice, and may all your holidays be as happy and joyful as can be.

  55. 55.

    John Redworth

    December 2, 2005 at 5:00 pm

    Personally I have no problem with people saying Merry Christmas or mentioning any of the other holidays, but I do think that the number of people deeply offended either way is a very small minority, more so than either side wants to admit… This is really another non-issue in a political climate that is full of non-issues pushed out there by the attention whores who want to distract from the pressing issues of the land and those who want to make every issue a political one… I can’t wait until Hannity or O’Reilly starts a campaign that “Coke drinkers are conservatives and Pepsi drinkers are liberals…”

  56. 56.

    BARRASSO

    December 2, 2005 at 5:29 pm

    I think the war on xmas will be far too costly, we should just assassinate their leader Jesus.

  57. 57.

    The Disenfranchised Voter

    December 2, 2005 at 8:29 pm

    WHo are you kidding BARRASSO?

    Santa has been keeping Christmas going for years. Without him, I really doubt Christianity would be as prevalent as it still is today.

    Presents
    are the reason for the season now.

  58. 58.

    Vlad

    December 3, 2005 at 8:51 pm

    Big front-page article about the war on Christmas in the P-G this morning. It is to weep…

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Greg Prince’s Blog » Off his gourd says:
    December 2, 2005 at 1:49 am

    […] Tim F at Balloon Juice is giving Bill all the credit he deserves… […]

  2. Hiding in the Backwaters » Blog Archive » Happy Kwanukkahmas says:
    December 2, 2005 at 12:05 pm

    […] 2“demimondian”, blog comment, December 1, 2005, balloon-juice.com […]

Primary Sidebar

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Recent Comments

  • J R in WV on Monday Morning Open Thread: Murphy’s Rock (Mar 27, 2023 @ 6:48pm)
  • JustRuss on Self-Care Sickness Open Thread (Mar 27, 2023 @ 6:47pm)
  • Betsy on Self-Care Sickness Open Thread (Mar 27, 2023 @ 6:45pm)
  • Geminid on Proud to Be A Democrat: Alvin Bragg Is Not Here for the GOP’s Performative Outrage (Mar 27, 2023 @ 6:38pm)
  • Dr. Jakyll and Miss Deride on Cake Watch: Day 1 (Mar 27, 2023 @ 6:37pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!